In your first link, the paleontologist describes a 20,000 year old frozen mammoth. No flood evidence there.
Your second link describes a mammoth that had eaten before dying of a fall into a fissure in the "ice" (or permafrost), and then freezing. The discoverers thought it had probably suffocated under the earth that fell with it.
quote:
"Before I arrived at the site, Herz had partially dug away the hill of earth
round the body, and so both the forefeet and the hind feet were exposed.
These lay under the body so that it rested on them. When one looked at the
body one had the impression that it must have suddenly fallen into an
unexpected fissure in the ice, which it probably came across in its
wanderings, and which may have been covered with a layer of plant-bearing
mould. After its fall the unlucky animal must have tried to get out of its
hopeless position, for the right forefoot was doubled up and the left
stretched forward as if it had struggled to rise. But its strength had
apparently not been up to it, for when we dug it out still farther we found
that in its fall it had not only broken several bones, but had been almost
completely buried by the falls of earth which tumbled in on it, so that it
had suffocated.
"Its death must have occurred very quickly after its fall, for we found
half-chewed food still in its mouth, between the back teeth and on its
tongue, which was in good preservation. The food consisted of leaves and
grasses, some of the later carrying seeds. We could tell from these that
the mammoth must have come to its miserable end in the autumn."
- E. W. Pfizenmayer
Siberian Man and Mammoth
Definitely no flood evidence there. Quite the opposite, as the discoverer finds good evidence of the cause of death. The animal fell while grazing.
Is this the sort of stuff that starts creationist memes?
Edited by bluegenes, : No reason given.