Changes

:::Actually, when you think about who needs to provide the burden of proof on this matter those who believe that there was a flood need to provide the proof.  Those who do not believe that there was a flood only has to be shown proof that there was a flood.  To discredit evidence on the basis that there was a flood and therefore the evidence is not valid due to the impossibility of existence because of the flood leads to forming the research around the idea instead of forming the idea around the observations.  This is contrary to impartial research.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 15:47, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Actually, when you think about who needs to provide the burden of proof on this matter those who believe that there was a flood need to provide the proof.  Those who do not believe that there was a flood only has to be shown proof that there was a flood.  To discredit evidence on the basis that there was a flood and therefore the evidence is not valid due to the impossibility of existence because of the flood leads to forming the research around the idea instead of forming the idea around the observations.  This is contrary to impartial research.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 15:47, 17 April 2007 (EDT)