How about you OTWO,
How do you know if something is true or not? And remember, the answer isn't what some people think.
I am just a high school dropout with a G.E.D.. I think I am intelligent, but I recognize that I have to rely on the experts and view what they say with skepticism. I need overwhelming evidence of something now to accept it, but the possibilities are intriguing and we are free to look at them. Because I cannot be an expert in so many different areas like science, literature, archaeology, I rely on the experts to critically analyze things for me and for things to be widely accepted by people in those fields and I particularly like when the complete picture is offered so that things have "the ring of truth" to them.
There is overwhelming evidence that more primitive humans (or near-humans) existed way more than 6000 years ago, that they spread out from Africa, that their success over animals was their ability to work together, continually hunt in the middle of the day and tire large animals (that could easily kill one of them or get away) until the animal was brought down. There is speculation that their intelligence caused them to feel a need to answer the questions of how and why they existed before they were able to accurately answer those questions. These speculations are still based on sketchy information, but I am free to speculate along with the experts until better evidence comes along.
There is overwhelming evidence that a worldwide flood did not happen and that it could not be physically possible for any animals to survive due to the atmospheric pressures that it would cause (let alone all the other problems in the Noah story). There is overwhelming evidence that tectonic plates exist and that they would not behave in such a way as to be pushed up and down to form oceans and mountains because a heavy load of water fell upon them all at once.
Even if I am swayed by science and you disagree with evidence that is widely accepted, (hey, I was swayed by WTS, so I keep that option in mind), I would still need overwhelming evidence that a flood actually occurred and that man is barely over 6000 years old and that anything in the books of Genesis and Exodus and the like is true. Instead of finding evidence for such, archaeology is finding that evidence points to no exodus, no 12-tribe Kingdom of significant size brought about in the way the Bible says, and is finding more and more evidence confirming evolution instead of creation. The science of rejecting the Bible may offer some theories that turn out to be wrong from time to time as further evidence comes out, but we still have nothing really supporting the Bible's version of things. (I know you will disagree with that, but you asked me.)
I would automatically assume anything that WTS says is false until proven otherwise and I similarly laugh at the stuff that the likes of Perry digs up. As an amateur magician, you should know that it is easy to distract those that are not in on the secret and keep them baffled, but once you know the tricks of fooling people, they kick themselves for not being able to figure out the trick. I love how you make a dig at everyone reading here by saying "And remember, the answer isn't what some people think." You set yourself up as knowing better than anyone who disagrees with you.
I called you out recently, Perry and found you ducking. I may not know everything, but I am not afraid to openly look at it. While I reject the Bible as God's work, I am not afraid of being wrong. It's just that nothing has come out that indicates a reason to change my mind on that. Oh, there will always be the occasional ancient brick wall or pottery shard that seems to fit the explanation of the Bible, and someone will run with that like a magician runs with a claim of actual "magic" but I will wait for the experts in those fields to take a look at it.