There are many things from history that aren't deeply specific. That doesn't mean they aren't factual.
Thus our questions.
If things in history are not understood there is a process of inquiry that takes place, we are merely applying that process to the Ark/Gilagamesh story.
All observable evidence from a geological stand point, if the date for the Flood was within the last 10,000 years, indicate that there was no global flood. Further more, if creation of ALL species takes place at a single moment in time then that would have to be one HUGE Ark, unless you define "kind" as say
vertebrates. Then you can reduce the size of the Ark perhaps, and after the flood evolution from vertebrates takes place and the story starts to make sense. However, there is the enormous problem of Noah being human before vetebrates evolve.
I think the point of the OP is to expose the Ark story as nothing more than a folkloric tale. If we broke down each individual aspect of the story (i.e. Time line, geological dating, size of the Ark) we could see the problems with it.
"All great truths begin as blasphemies"
"I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks
"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky