It is reemphasized that the Flood koine is not primarily a method of locating the Ark, but a novel synthetic decipherment of (and independent test for) any potential world navel/omphalos cosmic landscape. Hence, all scientific controversy concerned directly with the Durupinar boat-shaped object, and its origin, is totally irrelevant to the new test result. Implied (if not stated) misrepresentations of my paper's claims are corrected, and the three objections raised are each shown to be deeply flawed. My colleague's underpinning assumptions regarding the epistemology of science are questioned (and her heavy reliance on one old-earth, local-flood geologist is noted as somewhat unwise). Finally, in the absence of any (let alone a compelling) alternative scientific explanation for the 'Flood koine pattern of cosmic landscape demarcation' being proffered, one previously published alternative is outlined—and then shown to be inferior. The 'Flood koine pattern of cosmic landscape demarcation' therefore still provides an imperative reason to focus research efforts upon site(s) which best satisfy its multiple criteria, especially the topographically 'saddle-seated' twin mound and 'white wall' of Yigityatagi in Turkey.