Have any Biblical literalists been to the American Southwest?

Perhaps I'm misreading that, but it seems to me that you are saying that the Biblical flood story is an eye witness account. That's a dubious claim. Traditionally, Genesis is presumed to be written by Moses, not by Noah. That would make it a hearsay account, not normally acceptable as evidence. Some (perhaps many) of the people who doubt biblical literalism also doubt whether Noah was even a real person.

I wasn't dismissing the Bible because it is hearsay. I was disputing your claim that you have eye witness evidence.As for the Genesis flood story -- I take that as a fable. That is not because it is hearsay. It is because it is so obviously a fable (as are the creation story and the tower of Babel story).Biblical literalism makes no sense to me. I can understand the idea that the Bible is inspired by God. But that wouldn't make it literally true. Many people would say that Billy Graham's sermons are inspired by God, but few would say that he was infallible. Some fundamentalists might even grant that the Pope is inspired by God, but they would vigorously deny papal infallibility. And why should we not say that C.S. Lewis's "Chronicles of Narnia" is inspired by God, even though it is clearly fiction.God gave us brains. We should use them. To swallow Biblical literalism is to dishonor God, by not using our brains as they were intended to be used.