The glacial lake dam breech this week near us has been tracked by a remote camera. I have looked at the sequence for 2 days. But each time a new feature shows through. It would be very easy to make a single-line description that would miss more than it disclosed.
I mention this to say that the importance of the animation versions of the Genesis cataclysm is that we are trying to do the reverse of what the time-lapse shows in completed form: we have certain outcomes and we are trying to provide visually what it would take hydro- and geo-logically to produce that. Which is the question, of course. It is not that you start with an (archaic?) line in Genesis, or at least a 'flattened' one, and dismiss it outright like a salty Thomas Paine essay because the thing can't happen as stated. It's the other way around or else the NT and the resurrection is trash, because the same people on the apostolic authority of the resurrection, validated the cataclysm event.
Most of the time, there is a partly-disintegrated quality to most ancient accounts of events like this. For ex., In a Pacific NW account of a world flood, there is a skilled warrior whose archery skills included being able to 'weave a boat together in the sky from his arrows.' Of course you can laugh derisively, but there is a point to this, which they could only express in known language and idioms. Why are such references all around the world, with their various fadings, but always marking the same pieces of the Genesis account? They may miss more than they disclose, because visual language is the most difficult to write and preserve.
