The story of Noah's Ark is factual.

A historical event in the ancient world is usually found in documents or the oral tales of a culture. The Story of Noah's Ark is found in Genesis in the Old Testament (OT) of the Bible. In this debate, we will primarily discuss Genesis 5:32-8:13. The problem with proving any ancient historical event is that documentation, especially before the Roman era, is usually minimal. Oft, archaeologists have to use physical evidence to prove an event. However, in the story of Noah, we have both documentation and physical evidence. In a historical event on a document, generally speaking, you start off giving the story the benefit of the doubt. This is what we will do with the Genesis account. There are two general ways to disprove a document's authenticity:1. Internal Contradiction2. External Contrary EvidenceInternal Contradiction is a bit like this: "And God said, take three of each kind on the ark." and later: "Noah brought two of each kind into the ark as God commanded." (Neither of those are actual verses by the way.)The External Contrary Evidence could be, in the the context of this debate, everything from fossils to rock layers to the water cycle.Now that we have the starting context, let's look at the Great Flood:Physical Evidence of the Flood.:Let me take a moment to say something:Science does not speak. Scientists do. That is why two scientists can look at any piece of evidence and come to vastly different conclusions.Let me state something else:Generally speaking in the proving or discussion of a historical event, the burden of proof is shared by both parties. This is not the same as a science debate. So in order to win, one must not disprove or prove, only give reasonable doubt. My specific BoP for this debate is that Con can supply no evidence against the narrative of Noah's Ark.In light of that, here are my three main contentions:1. The Book of GenesisThe Book of Genesis speaks of Noah's Ark and has no internal contradictions in this text, nor does it have outside evidence disproving it. Unless my opponent can supply either, this document can stand is valid evidence, albeit not nearly strong enough for the full support of the BoP. One must disprove the text to disprove the story entirely.2. Rock LayersAgain, Science does not speak. Scientists do. Because of that, I will use that as evidence for The Flood. First of all, these layers, as evidenced in the Grand Canyon, are uniform under ground, with limestone in one layer and silt in another. This shows excellently the catastrophe the Flood was. First, the areas the Flood hit would have torn up the entire rock layer and redeposited it somewhere else. As this happened over a period of, say, forty days. You would have one rock layer torn up and deposited elsewhere over and over. Creating areas such as the Grand Canyon.One perfect modern example of this would be the miniature Mt. St. Helens canyon created in only a few days, yet is a close model to the Grand Canyon. Rock layer laid on rock layer. This happened over a period of only a few days! That shows how catastrophe can create rock layers quickly that appear to be millions of years old.3. FossilsFirst off, marine fossils can be found at altitudes far above where oceans can be. The only way this could have been possible is through a large catastrophe that shaped the mountain and washed the dead animals onto it, trapping them and creating what we have today.Secondly, some animals can be found fossilized while eating or in other poses that suggest a quick burial. This happened a lot, with fossils being found around the world with the same attributes. There was also one fossils of a snake from coiled around a dinosaur baby! This suggests a rapid burial where the creatures were with no time to run or hide. A flash flood.I await my opponent's response.Sources: http://www.answersingenesis.org...http://www.icr.org...http://www.answersingenesis.org...http://www.wired.com...