Evidence v Belief:The Story Of The Great Flood


One of the most frequent misunderstandings of the nature of scientific research by academics is the view that mistaken opinions among leaders are the result of inadequate evidence, that such views are corrected when adequate evidence becomes available – thus proving the feasibility and adaptability of science. There is, of course, obvious truth in this. But what frequently happens is that on the basis of both inade- quate evidence and faulty reasoning, false conclusions are published and repeated until hallowed by habit. This should not be so easily and erro- neously excused among the leaders in any field of investigation. (Norman Totten)¹ The quickest way to make an enemy is to tell someone that they are wrong. (Mark Twain) If there are no transitional forms found in the fossil record then my theory is false. 

(Charles Darwin)

To do this, it will follow the evidence to wherever it leads. In that process, we will examine the evidence for a real Atlantis which could sur- prise many, and generate discomfort. We will also explore whether the cause of its demise also spawned the Great Flood and a Mass Extinction Event during the course of the human experience. Our exploration will ad- dress many elements of prehistory and ascertain whether the signal event of our past was an Asteroid Impact Event. In doing so, we may explode many misconceptions in favor of the actual evidence. Hopefully this work will end up near the truth, which is whatever it is, regardless of how close- ly held many people cling to beliefs, whether academic or religious, to the contrary. At least, it may help get us closer to whatever the truth really is. Evidence v Belief . One of the greatest impediments to getting at the truth of a matter occurs when people start with a belief and try to force the evidence to fit that belief. Because the belief is sacrosanct, such people will declare that the evidence which conflicts with their belief is invalid; or attempt to change the evidence to be something other than what it is; or simply ig- nore it, pretending that it is nonexistent and thus unable to refute their be- lief. They will even attack the messengers with name calling and insults. Many would confine this phenomenon to religious belief but it is at least as prevalent among academic scholars. Often, professors stake their career on a particular theory. When evidence arises which explodes their long held but disproved belief, they will attack the new evidence and its purveyors. If they have sufficient clout then they can even destroy the career of the person who represents the threat to their belief. Even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, they will cling to their be- lief until they are dead. Their fear is that to admit they were wrong all along could cost them their own career, or at least render their career irrelevant. Sometimes, the deaths of those who champion an invalid and obsolete theory are the only way to expunge it from academia in favor of one which actually fits the evidence. (Ref: Atlantis, the Great Flood and the Asteroid )


About Author

Comments are closed.