I think either a fast flood or a slow flood could be the basis for a flood myth but the area covered by the black sea is too small. I would assume people were living apart from the black sea and the survivors of a flood wouldn't be able to pass off a world wide flood myth to people who were not the subject of the flood. We conclude the same thing but for different reasons. Even the Noah story wouldn't rule out a flood that rose over several months time.
As for any possibility that the bible is the 'unerring word of god' -- I just don't see any chance that it can be. That, to me, is completely impossible, based upon the evidence.,
Besides the description of miracles which are by definition impossible. I wouldn't rule out something (in the bible or in life) because I thought it was impossible. Even if I did there is the risk that I might conclude that a passage in the bible isn't possible when in fact it is.
It might be just me, but before I attempt to interpret something I try my hardest to identify my preconceptions and then put aside as many preconceived notions as I can. (Maybe its just my training for interpreting income tax law.)
Let me attempt an analogy again with you about how I see the bible passages as well as how I see reality. I liken it to the experience of looking at a light through a prism. The same light will look like different colors depending on the angle even though the source light is the same. If you see green and I see red we are both accurate in our descriptions. I am not wrong and neither are you but neither of us see the true light. In this case I would have to accept that what we both see are true and further that what each of us see is incomplete in describing the true nature of the light.
So it is with interpreting the bible passages. Althought their are many variations to interpreting the biblical text, in general what the literalist see's and what the allegorical reader sees are both true but incomplete by themselves.
Except, as the article mentions, I think it likely that the flooding of the region took thousands of years. So it isn't likely that the event was considered a 'flood' by anyone, in my estimation.
And re: the bible -- certainly one 'pre-conception' I operate on is that no single written work in history is 100% accurate. No work of man can possibly be 100% accurate. I have gained that 'pre-conception' thru hard experience. There have been, and continue to be, soooooo many people claiming to be the instrument of 'god'!
The suggestion that the bible was the direct words from some invisible, all-powerful being is completely, totally unfounded in any factual ground, to me. Show me some evidence, some reason to believe. Because absent any evidence, it's just a myth.
Consider, there are many, many writings by men thru history that claim to be the inerrant work of god -- the Koran, the Morman writings, heck there have been so many -- I consider the claim to be right up there with the claim 'I was abducted by aliens'.
Do you likewise take the writings of these other religions with the same 'open mind', I wonder?