When SW has dealt with that, he can address the gazillion problems and contradictions with the Noah story.
Like what Noah and his family ate when they got off the ark, in a stinking disease vector of a wasteland with every human being, plant, tree and animal dead and rotting.
He could also tell us how all the millions of species of saved animals, even those that can't fly or swim, got to their correct habitats after getting out of that packed-to-the-gills methane-filled dark, smelly, noisy, but delightful Carnival cruise.
The story reads that Noah didn't leave the Ark until after a dove returned with a plant leaf.
This suggests that plant life had regrown. We don't know the extent but evidently there was enough
for salads for all.
The story does not require two of each "species". Though if it did, there are 14 plus definitions for "species".
It reads "Kinds" which means they were "parents" of those that followed. How few "Kinds" are needed, God only knows.
If animals are put in warm, black-out conditions, many of them will hibernate. If that happened, it would explain why
conditions on the Ark required little food or cleaning.
The story reads that God brought the animals to Noah. ALL of the story tells that the events were guided by God and
not subject to the conditions of "Mother Nature." So any "natural" impediments to the story are contrived.
God picked each pair of animals needed and brought them to Noah. God could also lead them back to their habitats
without a full explanation being needed for the story. The story could have included the process of feeding each
animal and how the people cleaned up after each different animal twice a day. But not all details help the story along.
The story of the Ark is a great
example of how most questions can be answered by re-reading the story.