An intelligent person can fill in the gaps in the flood story with the supernatural.
Not as a defense attorney wanting to convince others and not believing the story himself. He must know his client is innocent in-spite of seeming proof against him.
is it the stubborn denial of those you can?
Without solid evidence to stand on, Bible faith is impossible. Take for example Jesus’s miracles and I don’t mean lightning striking twice in the same spot. I mean hundreds or thousands of times to the point of being a fact to the mind of the observer, for example the Apostles. Therefore, Bible faith in Jesus’s words. Given the truth of that evidence and faced with other evidence that seems to challenge or contradict Jesus words doesn’t debunk the truth of Jesus’s words in the minds of the witnesses of the supernatural proof. It does put into question their interpretation of what Jesus meant. But given solid evidence that challenges the truth of Jesus’s words (or of the Bible) a witness would have a dilemma in understanding or believing the challenging evidence such as what you mention. But he wouldn’t stop being convinced in the Bible and mentally he couldn’t dismiss the truth of the challenging evidence. Faced with this dilemma, a witness would choose to believe God’s word because it is supernatural over the natural.
However, the evidence you show is actually interpretation and conclusion of evidence. It is not enough to naturally falsify the flood story. It is not a measurement.
From a believer non witness point of view, the Bible records the flood and the Bible claims to be inspired both OT and NT Bible writers validate the flood and so did Jesus. Therefore, the flood is a Bible truth that can’t be interpreted any other way. The latest JW commentary doesn’t attempt to falsify “scientific” evidence challenging the flood. The focus is that it must be true because God’s word says it is.