Quote
Quote
Quote
A story can be based upon fantasy, fact, or any mixture of the two. Without investigating, one will never find out.
Seems fair. What line of investigation do you suggest? Literary? Archeological? Geological?

Obviously these "histories" are known about, so what makes you think they haven't been investigated beyond just gathering the stories?

Discover, verify, reconcile. Somewhat has indeed been done. Here is one example. And here is another. I have also found a better argument for giving attention to this history than I could quickly cobble together myself.

I would not restrict the investigation of history to these examples, but they are rightfully part of the reconciliation process, and may serve to verify some things also.
Ok, so there are lots of examples of flood stories. They align in some ways and don't in others. The amount of alignment with the Biblical account varies across a broad spectrum from very closely aligned (Gilgamesh...) to barely discernible (A god caused it to flood....).

For the purposes of this particular idea that narrative history trumps geological evidence, which history is the true history? What do you have that supports your choice, beyond the fact that your favorite book is telling that particular story?

A faith that connot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets. -- Arthur C. Clarke