I see an illogical trend here. That God preserved many lifeforms is a well-established fact; but if the methods aren't known with precision and detail, the evolutionists would have us abandon history altogether.

That's a mighty odd idea. Would we write off George Washington or Napoleon Bonaparte as fictional just because we don't have a record of every single word they ever spoke, including the gibberish they uttered while learning to speak? Of course not.

One cannot help but notice the double standard. Their antihistory provides no details at all about ancestral lifeforms.

For all anyone knows, God could have provided manna for the animals when they disembarked. We don't know when they came of the ark; it could be that Noah's family tended them for some time after the ark landed. If to found a "theory" upon ignorance is folly, how much moreso is it folly to abandon investigation on the grounds of ignorance? No investigation can even get off the ground with that approach! All investigations begin in a state of ignorance.

But consider the hypothesis presented: God was unable to preserve life. One need not consider it very long at all. The erroneous nature is self-evident, not to mention the testability issue.

"Aha!" they will exclaim. "You resort to 'God did it'". This is not a resort; this is what history says. We know God has done many things. It does not prevent one from investigating. Actions speak louder than words. Who here is against investigating, and who is in favour of investigating? Much can be learned from investigating the flood. But it's just as wrong as it can possibly be to call off the investigation altogether for the excuse that we don't know every detail.

Many things are overlooked by those who have an aversion to history. The flood we discuss was not some random event. God planned it. Those who have investigated have concluded that the world was a very different type of place before the flood; but one always meets the assumption that it was exactly as it is now. The assumption that the flood impacted every square inch of the world uniformly is also encountered. Of course we know that assumption is false, but time and again it turns up.

What cannot seem to turn up is anything approaching an excuse to abandon the history we have, or the proper means of investigating it. Anyone who has ever battled weeds knows how hard it is to exterminate plant life. Only domesticated varieties are delicate; the natural types come right back. All it takes for plants to survive the flood is for a seed or two to find a purchase in a crevice, or float, or even go dormant deep under ground for ages.

http://www.answers.com/topic/dormancy-1?cat=technology
http://www.shns.com/shns/g_index2.cfm?action=detail&pk=YARDSMART-HOME-05-15-06
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/826167.html

Not that those will help the unhelpable, but one tries...