From: rokimoto557@gmail.com
On 1/13/2026 10:32 AM, John Harshman wrote:
> On 1/13/26 6:30 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>> On Mon, 12 Jan 2026 17:34:38 -0800, John Harshman
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 1/11/26 9:29 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 10 Jan 2026 11:45:26 -0600, DB Cates
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2026-01-10 11:34 a.m., John Harshman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>> But I really have no idea what
>>>>>> point Martin is trying to make. What, if anything, would a
>>>>>> putative Adam
>>>>>> and Eve, whether or not they were the only humans at the time,
>>>>>> have to
>>>>>> do with Y-Adam or mt-Eve?
>>>>>>
>>>>> Beats me.
>>>>
>>>> There are two points.
>>>>
>>>> The *immediate* one is that Harshman tried to make out that I was
>>>> claiming Y-Adam or mt-Eve are a couple. Although I told him that was
>>>> not the case several times in the past, I was prepared to put it down
>>>> to a memory lapse on his part but the more he has tried to wriggle out
>>>> of it, even after I clearly stated that it was not what I was saying,
>>>> the more it looks as if he was quite deliberate in what he claimed.
>>>>
>>>> The *underlying* point is that Harshman and others have tried in the
>>>> past to scornfully dismiss Christian belief in humans being descended
>>>> from one couple but we are in fact descended from many such couples.
>>>
>>> You understand that "one couple" is quite different from "many such
>>> couples", right? I would never scornfully dismiss the latter, and I
>>> suspect we would both scornfully dismiss the former.
>>>
>>> The question remains why you brought up Y-Adam and mt-Eve in the first
>>> place. Are you unwilling to say?
>>
>> Err ... it was because you asked me for examples from the book and
>> that was just one of them.
>>
>> Senior moment?
>
> I didn't ask for examples from the book. I asked for examples. But I see
> how you could have construed it that way. Can we agree that that example
> from the book is bogus? Are there in fact any true examples, from the
> book or otherwise, of scientists first resisting and then coming to
> accept a biblical or religious claim? Arguably the big bang is one, but
> are there any others. I suppose that if archaeologists are scientists,
> the existence of the Hittite Empire might be another. But are there more?
The Big Bang is not such an example. The Big Bang is not something that
would support Biblical creationism. Pagano was a modern geocentric
Biblical creationist and he could never accept the Big Bang. The YEC
scientific creationists use the Big Bang as a gap denial argument, but
the Big Bang is one of the science topics that the YEC have tried to
remove from their state science standards in multiple states, and they
succeeded in the effort in Kansas in 1999. The Big Bang does not
support Biblical creationism and many Biblical creationists cannot
accept that it ever happened. The Big Bang denial is just put up as
something that we cannot explain, but a lot of the creationists that use
that gap denial do not want to believe in the designer that fills that
gap, and they can't deal with the evidence we have that the Big Bang
happened. Pagano claimed that the Big Bang never happened. Our
evidence for the Big Bang is not consistent with a geocentric universe.
It may be our best example of a possible creation event, but it isn't a
creation event that would support the Biblical scenario.
Ron Okimoto
>
> And does the book have any more invalid claims of such cases, other than
> Adam and Eve?
>
>>>> Whether or not any of those couples would qualify as the source of the
>>>> Genesis Adam and Eve, is of course, a separate argument.
>>>
>>> Yes, and an argument I have never attempted with you. Incidentally, are
>>> you familiar with the genealogical Adam and Eve hypothesis?
>>
>
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
