Except that it's physically impossible to build a wooden boat that big that is also seaworthy. - unless magic.
It's not that much longer than the Wyoming and all the ark had to do was not sink - it didn't need to navigate anywhere. I don't think YECs use this argument but Genesis 4:22 says an early man made tools out of bronze and iron...
edit: I mean not sink with very severe weather conditions.
It's almost twice as long at the waterline, which is the relevant measure when considering hogging and sagging. And the Wyoming had a hundred and eighty diagonal iron cross bracings, without which she would have been destroyed in even very light seas. No suitable material for such construction existed in the Bronze Age, and even as late as the Roman Imperial period, the cost of that amount of iron would have been unthinkable.
There's an absolute limit of Length at the Water Line (LWL) for wooden ships of about 350ft, and the Wyoming was very close to that limit. She required constant pumping, even in ideal weather conditions, and foundered in heavy seas after less than fifteen years of service.
A structure doesn't need to be "much" beyond its limits in order to fail. To suggest that you could almost double the LWL of the Wyoming, in an unreinforced ship (or even equal that LWL without reinforcement) is nonsensical. To dismiss such an increase in LWL as "not much" serves only to demonstrate ignorance of the structural engineering principles that apply to wooden ships.
There's a reason why nobody's ever floated a replica of Noah's Ark, without either scaling it down dramatically, or cheating by using a steel or iron hull with a wooden superstructure. That reason isn't lack of inspiration, funding, or will. Many attempts have been made, and all have failed. Because it's impossible. Science tells us this, but we needn't trust those godless physicists, structural engineers and naval architects; We can try it for ourselves and prove them wrong by doing.
Yet Ken Ham in Kentucky, and the Kwok brothers in Hong Kong, built their replicas on land, (in Ham's case, mostly from reinforced concrete).
Johan Huibers built his on a platform of 25 steel barges.
All the other attempts to replicate the Ark have been at significantly reduced scale, and are mostly land based.
Given the powerful message that would be sent by proving the structural engineers and naval architects wrong, both as a propaganda boon for YECs, and as an opportunity to advance our understanding of the structural behaviour of wooden ships and other wooden structures (the ability to safely build much larger wooden structures than are currently believed to be possible would be hugely profitable), it's simply not credible to assert that it CAN be done, or even MIGHT BE possible, without first explaining why not one person has ever ACTUALLY done it.
Why did Huibers bother with his 25 LASH barges, if there was any possibility that he could have floated a replica made entirely from wood? Was he deliberately trying to look shifty and/or incompetent?