This depends. From the way I see the historical and geologic data there is
no evidence of a huge flood which wiped out the Mesopotamian civilization.
There is no interruption of the civilization from 4000 BC on. There is no
geologic layer which represents the flood, and contrary to some claims, no
one has ever pointed to a river flood which did not leave a layer of
mud/sand all over its extent. If there was a large flood which wiped out
the Mesopotamian civilization, then you should see a large layer of mud/sand
which covers the entire region and separates two ages of civilization with
two different cultural traditions. This is not observed. Wooley's flood
stratum didn't even cover the entire city he was excavating. It was
probably an oxbow lake deposit and nothing more. (an oxbow lake is an
abandoned river meander which fills with shale.)
If the reputed landing place of the ark (Turkey) is inconsistent with the
direction of water flow in the Mesopotamian basin. The land slopes to the
south toward the Persian Gulf. That is the direction the water would flow
carrying the ark. The ark would be swept into the Persian Gulf in about a
week. Thus the Biblical account of the Ark's landing place would be wrong.
The only suggestion to avoid this difficulty that I had ever heard which
merited serious consideration was that the ark was pushed north against the
flow of water by poles. That is what the math is all about. 8 people can
not supply the requisite energy output.
Because of these reasons, I find the attempted harmonization of the Bible to
the Mesopotamian flood to be flawed. It is as unworkable as is the YEC
global flood; and the geologic stratum marking a flood of such a magnitude
should be clearly visible all over.
glenn
Foundation, Fall and Flood
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm