Hi alan-
Right on. did you catch the matrix of flood legends in the article. They took a probably not-so random sampling of 14 flood legends and compared them across 10 different metrics (stuff like "Lengend includes a boat", "legend includes divine warning", "legend includes lots of water, etc"). So, they had a 14 x 10 element matrix. If the legend had the metric element, it got an "X", if not it was blank.
Not that many "X's" in the matrix. WT analyzed across rows (how many metrics did each legend have). But, the more interesting would have been vertical analysis of the columns.
The ONLY THING they virtually all agreed on were a lot of people died and that divine warning was given. Considering these are fairy tales from ancient, superstitious aboriginal cultures, the second item is meaningless.
None of the other ten metrics (boat involved, god pissed at wickedness, sacrifice offered, etc.) had more than 2/3 of flood legends agreeing, while most were 1/3 - 1/2.
Considering most of the metrics were things common to most aboriginal, ancient stories in general, and that the WT made the criteria for filling in the matrix elements (no source was cited, so I assume some brainiac in writing did it), you would think the matrix would have been fuller.
uncy