I suppose you could be one of those people who, like me, really enjoy writing even if only for its own sake—which I certainly think is fine!—but a lot of text could have been spared with the slightest change in the answer to my question. I had asked if you believe the flood of Noah was global in scale. You could have answered, "Personally? No. But this calculation was on behalf of those who do."
Instead, you dismissed the whataboutism (which was not even relevant to the discussion we were having) and asserted that a global flood requires some repopulating efforts. Well, sure, but how does that answer my question? It didn't, at least not clearly or obviously. Hence my confusion and second attempt. I really wish that you had instead answered, "I don't, no. But others do and so I came up with this solution for their benefit." I can understand and respect that kind of love for the brethren.
For those brethren, at least. For me, maybe not as much. I don't know what you meant by that comment about mocking or disrespecting someone for believing young-earth creationism but you were definitely talking to me, thus it felt aimed at me—even though I did not say anything that mocked or disrespected young-earth creationists (whom I have a history of respecting, loving, and defending). And then, taking no responsibility for your own answers, you also imply that I have been arguing in bad faith (and all because I had not understood your answer). [1] So, yeah, not as much love being shown for this brother, anyway. And why is that? I could not even guess at a reason. If I said something hurtful or offensive to you that warranted such treatment, I wouldn't mind an opportunity to apologize for it.
-----
[1] You said to Larnievc, "It assumes it was worldwide—something I myself generally do not believe—but posters had to belabor a point which comes off as not arguing in good faith."
