In summary and with hindsight, I can only say that this thread was a train wreck. We didn't get statements as to what the KJV says, but we got a whole lot of what people thought it meant.
The point of this thread was to pin down some facts about the KJV flood so that the thread on geological evidence for the flood had something to work with, i.e., here's how the flood is described so what evidence would that leave behind? Half of the thread was taken up by single land mass arguments, which was down to interpretation rather than what the KJV says, or any text for that matter and the rest was taken up quibbling about whether wild animals were included on the ark.
Are we any further forward in understanding what ICANT claims biblical support for in terms of the flood? I'd say we were, slightly. We can now start looking at the evidence for rapid and catastrophic plate tectonics which would have released enough heat to broil Noah and his floating menagerie, not to menion the vast amounts of superheated water from "the fountains of the deep".
While this thread failed to pin down a time frame for the flood, it seems that ICANT will stick out his neck in another thread and accept a date of 4000 - 10,000 years ago. That may also give us something to work with.
Overall, this thread has gone the way of most other threads - the one thing that sticks out a mile is the inability of creationists to tell the difference between what the text says and what they think it means.
™ Version 4.2
