Yes, but only within a very small range. The amount of change that is required for Evolution is of a much greater magnitude, especially when simultaneous change must occur to be functional. I can breed dogs but it will always be a dog. That minor variations accumulated over millions of years is the cause of new forms of life is mere speculation. It might be true but is unprovable through empirical science.
It is testable and therefore is empirical science. For example a human skeleton found in the cambrian would falsify the explaination that humans arose through minor variations over millions of years.
Someone who believes in the Great Flood must, of necessity, believe that some forms of life exist today that did not exist then. There are simply too many forms of life today for them all to have fit into a wooden boat of the dimensions given.
However, a certain degree of evolution (e.g. saying that certain varieties of cat share a common ancestor even though they can't interbreed) would make the Ark story somewhat sensible: if one wants to populate a planet with a variety of life, one need not start with every imaginable variation but may instead start with a smaller "basis" from which other forms might be derived.
BTW, one thing historical scientists in many earth-centered fields (and nearly all human-centered ones) need to recognize is that some people and cultures over the years have deliberately tried to alter apparent history. Any honest scientist needs to be mindful of such possibilities--not only the possibility of 'fake history' being generated in modern times, but also the possibility of fake history having been generated in ancient times.