Quote
Quote
Upon discovery of the note there is no simply "true" hypothesis. The existence of the note is a fact, and for those present it's pretty well beyond dispute.
There is one truth, and the note is part of that truth. The object is to discover what the truth is, and not to make the evidence fit any preset story.
Do tell... You seem inconsistent, if I may understate things.
Quote
Quote
Having a valid alternative is a good enough reason to reject premature conclusions which are not the result of verification and reconciliation.
And the only source for verification and reconciliation with reality is the objective evidence of reality.

You seem to think there is something special about history, but it is just as prone to error as any other form of information known to man, and there are many instances where history was wrong.
What's special about history? It's not that history is perfect; there are several pitfalls. History is the science by which all the others are known. If history is not valid, none of the knowledge of other types which it brings to us are valid either. It sets the boundary on certainty.

For instance, you cannot be confident that a given observation was made if you doubt the report. Same goes for experiments, discoveries, and everything else. So it's pretty important to get history right.
Quote
Quote
Um, well, actually worldwide sedimentary deposits are pretty consistent with a worldwide flood if you think about it.
The sedimentary deposits are very consistent with the areas in question being underwater for decades to hundreds of years at a time. Multiple layers with evidence of mature life that is 20, 30 40 years old piled up layer upon layer upon layer. The cliffs of Dover are hundreds of feet thick. Sediment layers on Mt. Everest include brachiopods that grow on slender delicate stalks, with shell size based on age of the organism, again in an environment that was mature marine growth of several decades at any point in those layers, and the layers again cover layers that cover layers. Last time I checked that does not fit your mythology. Care to explain how a 20 year old organism is evidence for a biblical flood?
If you have evidence which cannot be reconciled with established history, you're welcome to present it. I don't think this is the case with the famous White Cliffs of Dover.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/search/?q=cliffs+of+Dover&search=Go indicates there's been considerable discussion, and there are things to be learned from them indeed. http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v8/i1/chalk.asp was probably the best link in the first group. Looks like there are two historic hypotheses which account for chalk, etc. Maybe there are more alternatives yet to be discovered. I cannot choose between them myself just yet. I think we need more evidence.
Quote
Quote
It is valid to conclude that there is one truth. It is not valid to assume it can be discovered in all cases. We don't possess evidence of every event which has ever taken place. If we did, we could approach omniscience.
Correct, so anything that has not been validated in any way as true, such as the mythology that there was a biblical flood, should be held with extreme skepticism. Likewise any claim for a young earth.
The story of the flood has been verified in several ways. You might browse this thread if you have some time. Although I intended it to be about history in general, most of the discussion has tended toward the flood. Certainly on-topic, but a little narrower in scope than what I imagined.
Quote
I trust you agree. Or do you employ the logical fallacy of special pleading?
I have no need of special pleading fallacies. You are the one insisting we accept your interpretation as fact, and turning right around and saying "The object is to discover what the truth is, and not to make the evidence fit any preset story." I don't know whether you intend special pleading, appealing to authority, lying, or and admixture of these. I don't think you've made up your mind just yet.

Quote
And the only source for verification and reconciliation with reality is the objective evidence of reality.
I should point out that this has the potential to result in error when researching history. Testimony is the primary means by which we learn history, and although the existence of the testimony is a matter of objective evidence, the testimony itself is often subjective and unclear. The testimony of actions always carries far more weight than the testimony of words, and is usually pretty clear.

Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth

"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case
http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm

"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson

"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson