[AndyTheBear]

Had to look up the word "eisegesis" and at least the definition I stumbled upon indicates its pushing one's own ideas into the text instead of trying to figure out what the author was really saying.

However, I think a careful reading of the text indicates the author did not actually think that the flood covered the entire globe.

For example, note the following verses from Genesis 8:

5 The waters continued to recede until the tenth month, and on the first day of the tenth month the tops of the mountains became visible.

... 9 But the dove could find nowhere to perch because there was water over all the surface of the earth....

Seems a careful reading forces one to take "over all the surface of the earth" to at least not include the mountain tops in verse 5.

As I understand it the same Hebrew phrase for the whole surface of the Earth is used elsewhere in the Noah story for anything translated like the surface of the whole Earth. So I have to take it as an idiom for something like "pretty much everywhere". Certainly Noah would not have been able to sail the entire globe and verify Australia and Antarctica etc were covered.

[BipolarBob]

There’s no birds on Mt. Everest or K5. So the tallest mountains were too tall for birds but visible from the right angle.

[Tell It Right]

Agreed. There are other clues in the Noah story that make me lean regional over global. It says the ark settled on the Ararat mountains, which I believe are relatively low altitude. So if the flood waters made the tops of the mountains disappear, that's not a lot to make those mountains disappear. (A lot for Noah and his family to talk about the rest of their lives, no doubt. But not the high level of flood needed to top the Himalayas.)

Psalm 104:5-9 seems to also suggest against a global flood. Verse 5 sets the time reference to creation, verse 6 is creation "Day" 2's of water. Verses 7-8 seem to be a retelling of creation "Day" 3's land forming with mountains rising and valleys falling. Then verse 9 says that the boundaries of water were made so that the waters will not return to cover the earth. Now this is a Psalm, so we have to allow for a bit of poetic leeway. But it suggests to me once the creation events were completed that water would never cover the earth again. Which suggests the later Noah flood wasn't global.

Perhaps the best evidence for a regional flood is Genesis 7:22's use of the Hebrew word "haraba" for dry land. A word that doesn't have a definition for planet like other Hebrew words do. That's the scope of the flood where, as the verse says, "Everything on the dry land, all in whose nostrils was the breath and spirit of life, died." (AMP version) The choice of the Hebrew word "haraba" should probably best translated as "...on the region of land...".

[Pocketdoor]

I think you are pushing your own idea into the text.
...5 The waters continued to recede until the tenth month, and on the first day of the tenth month the tops of the mountains became visible.

... 9 But the dove could find nowhere to perch because there was water over all the surface of the earth....

It is very clear to me that the mountain tops were still submerged but you could see the tops just under the water if you looked over the side of the boat.
Its even stated in 9 again that the water covered everything.

“Seems a careful reading forces one to take “over all the surface of the earth” to at least not include the mountain tops in verse 5.” - You project that the MTs are sticking out of the water.

- Seems to me a MORE CAREFUL, CAREFUL reading should be done. - I have see plenty of submerged Rocks, Islands, while in my boat... I even hit a few too.