The next thing to look at in terms of “The Flood” is the Missoula Mt. Glacier Lake. They have a web site If that could happen here, the same could have happened to Noah. Noah may have set atop a glacier lake and the depiction in the Bible fits that scenario.
Having lived in Oregon and having looked around in Oregon, Washington, Idaho and Montana, I'm familiar with the landscape and the geologic accounts of such a glacial lake breaking open and flooding the area. That's very interesting to go around there and see some of these things...
Glacial Lake Missoula and the Missoula floods
The impact from Glacial Lake Missoula and the Missoula floods can be seen in parts of Montana, Idaho, Washington, and Oregon. Testifying to the cataclysm are the ancient shorelines, ripple marks, scoured lakes, dry channels, falls, and flood debris that are still visible after nearly 12,000 years. Without seeing this evidence it is hard to imagine the enormity of the geologic event.
Also at Wikipedia...
The other item would place Adam in the Med Sea, south of Turkey and west of Syria.. This means the Genesis is a very old oral history dating back into the ice age period.
Well..., this is how the Bible would be considered by me and by other well-known and prominent Evangelicals in Christianity.
The following Evangelical statement called "The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy" would address that issue, as far as Genesis is concerned and as far as the flood is concerned (and any other accounts given in the Bible, along with the histories given).
A quick read on it would be to go down the list of "Affirmations" and "Denials" to get an overview.
And so..., the accounts go back to the Garden of Eden, and of course, before the Flood. Adam lived to within a generation of Noah, so that anyone living at that time could have easily spoken to Adam, almost all the way through (up to) the time of Noah. And Noah lived, after the Flood, to the time after Abraham was born and had lived quite a while. So it would have been easy for Abraham (if he ever had wanted to, or maybe did) speak to Noah and get direct information from Noah.
So, these "accounts" are "almost" -- firsthand -- going back to Adam, having very little separation with subsequent generations, in regards to the people actually knowing this information, firsthand and for themselves.
The thing that people should know is if they go a literal interpretation, they have Archbishop James Usshers doctrine. That puts the total birth of the earth at 4004 B.C.
The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy would answer that one, pretty clearly, by what it "affirms" and "denies" in its series of statement that spell out the Biblical doctrine.
And so, stating it another way, because something is a "Biblical doctrine" does not separate it from the "reality of the world" we live in today or in the past or any account of the histories or what happened, as stated by the Bible.
It's pretty clear that those floods, in the Northwest, happened after the world-wide flood of Genesis, and because of the drastic changes in the environment that it brought about. We won't see those kinds of conditions again, as was brought about by the world-wide flood, as it's clearly stated in the Bible that this "kind and type" of judgment from God will never happen again. That's a promise given by the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, in the Bible, to us.