Harv,
I don't know why we didn't get along before;
maybe we can argue again some time.
Your answers to Sam, like Fast Eddy's, are
not a slam at spirit or meaning of life.
There's no clue for me why Sam wants to insist
on a version that depends more on leaps of faith
than evidence.

Sam represents himself not as following the scientific method. Rather, he feels that he
and his select group are not accountable to
science.
Creationism seems to spring out of books that were Oral History 'til
about 900 BC or later. Genesis wasn't even written until almost all of it had supposedly passed into antiquity, even if the world WERE
as young as they say. I would not mind if it were...but apparently, it is not young.
Because what Sam is doing here is not science,
there is no way to make progress. Science would yield to an honestly better point. Sam just always denies anyone has made better points.
Unlike evolution, which would not collapse if
little parts were found wrong, Sam apparently feels his Creationism cannot yield on any point.
Mike