The Noahs ark and why it didn't happen

[Aractus]

It wasn't a ship, it was an ark.

Is there any meaningful distinction?

Of course there is, a ship is designed to travel places. An ark is simply designed to float.

That didn't actually answer the question of how 2 of every terrestrial, avian and semi-aquatic species fitted onto the ark.

He only collected animals from the region where he lived (modern day Turkey).

Well it was an ark, over dry land that was flooded with (fresh) rainwater, so I'd say they didn't need to store any water.

Even if that was scientifically accurate (which I don't know that it is) you conveniently missed the part about the food.

Well how many species of animal are in Turkey? I'm sure they're not all as fussy eaters as Koalas (if you find an injured Koala and put it into captivity, you have to go out and collect leaves from a dozen or so different Eucalyptus trees to find out which tree it will eat from).

Humans have had at least two identified bottlenecks.

And did one of these bottlenecks occur when the supposed flood happened? And even if it did, that means nothing as you would see a bottleneck in every species not just our own.

A second ago you said there were no genetic bottlenecks. We don't know if the flood happened 10,000 years ago, 50,000 years ago or 200,000 years ago so it's a moot point.

Noah built an ark, the region got flooded, the ark floated for 40 days, and when the waters started to run back into the rivers/ocean the ark came to rest on one of the mountains along the Armenian Highlands. There are at least 2 or 3 different areas (natural basins) where this could have happened, and at least one place that has been shown to have flooded to the extent necessary (ie no more visible land from your ark).