Hehe. I would think you would have inferred that I don't even have the slightest notion.
Ok, so we are bagging physical astronomy, as well. I suppose geology is next in your sights. What are we going to be left with after your grand sweepup--taxidermy and homeopathy?
So...your big evidence here--which you distinguish from a "story" is that someone told someone who told someone who told someone...?
Well, yes. It is a historical narrative maintained with unusual care.
Then I guess I can rest my case at this point.
The fossil record also seems to agree with a world covered by forty days worth of heavy precipitation.
Say it long enough, and loud enough, and before long, 10% of the world will swear that the sun shines black. Kindly take up my challenge and explain the hydrological principles by which a 40 day flood lays down the colorado plateau and cuts the grand canyon through it.
Why confine things to the Grand Canyon? Get back to me when you figure out...................
I thought not.
figure out what percentage of the earth's surface that has been mined for evidence related to the geological column. (Hint: it's really, really small.) For my part I will predict that, if/when it's mined completely, the evidence will fit in nicely with a worldwide flood that began approximately 7,150 years, 6 months, 3 days, 2 hours, 20 minutes, 18 seconds ago, give or take 40 days
Aha, but when you make up a totally nonsensical story that conflicts with where the fraction of evidence that is available is pointing, why, that's airtight induction.
This is such errant total nonsense that even most creationists twinge and duck when someone like you comes along. No matter what fraction of the available evidence the Grand Canyon represents, there is no possible way for a flood to carve it, short of God coming down and tending to it personally with a sluce hose the size of Mercury, and army of trained rock-polishing angels.
You could if your theory had so much as a hint of recollection on the part of humankind, let alone the capcity for direct observation. As it stands, you don't even have a case.