Look carefully at our conversation.
All I’m saying is that once you accept the truth of God’s existence according to the Bible, you cannot refute the story of Noah by using naturalistic arguments. This is because God acts outside the laws of nature.
I can’t logically accept other religious accounts, because they are contradicted by the one I have already accepted as true.
If you cannot derive your answer from this, then restate the question concisely and I’ll answer it for you.
You seem to be trying to establish a case for Biblical literalism by making the belief in the existence of God dependent on belief in the literal text of the Bible.
I understand your religious beliefs dictate that for you these questions are already answered and any further debate is neither needed nor wanted. What I don't understand is why it's necessary to try to disrupt the discussion and debate by people who don't subscribe to the same degree of literalism that you do and can discuss it based on the physical evidence.