The problem is, the physical evidence shows that there was no such singular major cataclysm.
Could such evidence exist? Certainly. For example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuruppak mentions that "At the end of the Uruk period [around 3100 BC] there was an archaeologically attested river flood in Shuruppak". This marks the end of the antediluvian rulers of the Sumerian King List. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumerian_King_List#Antediluvia... .) Therefore, there are physical remnants of a local flood from 5,000 years ago, which correspond to historical records. If there were a global flood then it too would leave physical traces.
Floods are not uncommon events. In some areas they occur yearly, in others they occur once a decade or one a generation. There are myths around the world which refer to the sun, to the moon, to storms, and to other natural events that were not singular in nature. Floods should fall in that local category.
You hypothesize that 'we all spoke the same language' before this event.
The Chinese flood myth concerns events that took place about 2200 BCE, and emphasizes how human efforts were able to mitigate its effects. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Flood_%28China%29 .) This is 1,000 years after the flood in Shuruppak.
We have written records of Egyptian, Sumerian, and Eblaite, dating from before 2300 BC. Indeed, the Early Dynastic Period of Egypt started about 1,000 years before the Chinese flood.
Therefore, the Chinese flood myth cannot be about an event which occurred when all humanity shared a common language.
Therefore it cannot be the case that all great flood myths refer to the same singular event at you describe. Which means we cannot look to the comment element - a large flood - in order to make an inference that there was a singular event. We would have to use other common elements, and there are no other world-wide common elements.
Oh I'm not arguing for Szukalskis' scientific correctness. I'm arguing for the sheer weird in his tales, and how it could be that someone might go so far with the subject on the basis of their own hubris, alone. Regardless, its equally intriguing ..
Could such evidence exist? Certainly. For example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuruppak mentions that "At the end of the Uruk period [around 3100 BC] there was an archaeologically attested river flood in Shuruppak". This marks the end of the antediluvian rulers of the Sumerian King List. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumerian_King_List#Antediluvia... .) Therefore, there are physical remnants of a local flood from 5,000 years ago, which correspond to historical records. If there were a global flood then it too would leave physical traces.
Floods are not uncommon events. In some areas they occur yearly, in others they occur once a decade or one a generation. There are myths around the world which refer to the sun, to the moon, to storms, and to other natural events that were not singular in nature. Floods should fall in that local category.
You hypothesize that 'we all spoke the same language' before this event.
The Chinese flood myth concerns events that took place about 2200 BCE, and emphasizes how human efforts were able to mitigate its effects. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Flood_%28China%29 .) This is 1,000 years after the flood in Shuruppak.
We have written records of Egyptian, Sumerian, and Eblaite, dating from before 2300 BC. Indeed, the Early Dynastic Period of Egypt started about 1,000 years before the Chinese flood.
Therefore, the Chinese flood myth cannot be about an event which occurred when all humanity shared a common language.
Therefore it cannot be the case that all great flood myths refer to the same singular event at you describe. Which means we cannot look to the comment element - a large flood - in order to make an inference that there was a singular event. We would have to use other common elements, and there are no other world-wide common elements.