Lively debate is encouraged in Judaism. It sharpens both parties. Heck, half the Talmud are recordations of debates.
If I haven’t had you stomp off from your computer in a huff at least once, I’m not a very good Jew.
So argue on. Call me names, even.
I’m certainly no Rabbi deserving of respect. Yes, I did grow up observant and am observant. Yes, I did marry into an Hasidic family. But I’m primarily just an Israeli who flew an F-16 and dropped bombs on people that deserved it. Shot down a crappy Soviet aircraft, even. Now I teach others to do the same.
Regarding the point at issue:
I can’t say I am persuaded re: a “local” flood (that being, an area about 1/2 the size of the continental USA), but I am not going to say such ideas are wrong.
The most persuasive item, to me, is that such a flood is agreed to have occurred by a broad spectrum of hard scientists, in the very area that was the cradle of mankind and in a timeframe that certainly makes sense.
There are layers to the Torah, only the shallowest of which we have come to understand. Revelation of what is within comes from many routes: prayer, study, conflict, debate, simple passage of time, and, yes, sometimes even science.
And, importantly, the concept of a “local” flood is not new. Josephus, while no theologian and not what I would call a loyal Jew, was a pretty good reporter of events. He discussed the conflicting opinions on this very issue back in his day.
I'm going to try to post an old book review from The Jewish Press about this very subject (it's over four months old but very apropos to what we're discussing). I'll ping you to it. I could just post the link here, but I'd like everyone to see it.