It is hard to take seriously someone who can't understand the context of a passage.
Nicodemos brings up the issue of being born a second time physically.
The Lord doesn't correct him, but states that what is born of the flesh is physical, what is born of the spirit is spiritual.
Thus, the Lord explained what the water was referring to, the flesh, while the spiritual birth has to do with being 'born again'.
Water Baptism is nowhere in sight.
Water is a figure of spiritual baptism, as 'Pope' Peter explained in 1Pe.3:21 He explains that water is the form of it: they waited for the patience of God in the days of Noe, when the ark was a building: wherein a few, that is, eight souls, were saved by water. Whereunto baptism being of the like form, now saveth you also.
He explains Baptism is a figure and the water doesn't save anything, it only represents what already has been saved.
As for Noah and his family, none of them were 'baptized', those who died were baptized (immersed) by the flood, not Noah and his family, who never even got wet.
When he wanted to say "flesh", he said "flesh". Why all of a sudden "water" refer to "flesh"? This is absurd, especially for someone who professes that he gets his understanding form the scripture alone.
He explains Baptism is a figure and the water doesn't save anything, it only represents what already has been saved.
He says, again, "baptism being of the like [water] form, now saveth you also", in direct contradiction to your fantasies.