Did the Flood really happen?

Only in confined flumes, which are nothing like the unconfined mass of water you propose. Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

Water was water.Gravity was gravity.We know all about water and gravity. The alleged fludde was water under the action of gravity.

Flood legends reflect the facts that people tend to live near water and local floods happen. There's no reason to think all those legends describe one flood.

Alas, measurements of how fast water moves in rocks or lithifying sediments show the opposite. The pores through which the water must move are squashed down to being infinitesimal and water just cannot move through them quickly.You are also forgetting that lithification involves chemical reactions which are not noticeably sped up by pressure.Your second paragraph is all argument from your personal and ignorance-based incredulity. We work with evidence.

People live near water.Which floods.And would appear as a global flood to people with no idea of the extent of the Earth.

Lots of local floods require escape by boat. My point exactly. Water covering everything around them is several orders of magnitude short of water covering everything.

Really? Show us a citation. Water is essentially incompressible, so any gas would be compressed to essentially zero volume until there was only water that doesn't change volume. Except for any edges exposed to the atmosphere (very rare) the pressure would be almost perfectly hydrostatic (acting equally in all directions -- see Newton's second law). The hydrostatic component of stress does not move the water. The non-hydrostatic component does move the water, very slowly, through pores so small that the frictio of the water against the solid wall is significant, resisting the motion. It moves somewhere between a few yards per day and and an inch per century, depending on lots of factors... although lithifying rocks tend toward the slower end because of the very small pore sizes.

Wow. Jesus deposed the Father? That's unusual Christian theology.

Also the Southern Ocean gives us a good idea of how an uninterrupted ring of water acts.

Calling mainstream science absurd is not evidence against mainstream science or for your view.That whole message boils down to "I think mainstream science is wrong". Not convincing.

That's why the criticism. Try presenting data, evidence, and reasoning.

You've never tried.

You think calling something absurd with no reasoning why is presenting facts?

Still no facts, evidence, or reasoning.

Faith has often confirmed that her interpretation of the Bible is infallible.What say you, Faith? Could your interpretation of the Bible be false?