From: rokimoto557@gmail.com   
      
   On 1/15/2026 9:27 PM, John Harshman wrote:   
   > On 1/15/26 1:25 AM, Martin Harran wrote:   
   >> On Tue, 13 Jan 2026 08:32:10 -0800, John Harshman   
   >>  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> On 1/13/26 6:30 AM, Martin Harran wrote:   
   >>   
   >> […]   
   >>   
   >>>>> 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.   
   >>   
   >> And *you* criticise *me* for lack of clarity in what I write, LOL.   
   >>   
   >>> Can we agree that that example   
   >>> from the book is bogus?   
   >>   
   >> No   
   >   
   > That's unfortunate.   
   >   
   >>> 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?   
   >>>   
   >>> And does the book have any more invalid claims of such cases, other than   
   >>> Adam and Eve?   
   >>   
   >> Your a priori dismissal of claims as invalid, before they are even   
   >> expressed, shows the futility of trying to have a rational discussion   
   >> with you.   
   >   
   > You sure stomp off in a huff frequently, and that does get in the way.   
   > Is it truly Christian to be so prickly?   
   >   
   > OK, so does the book have any more claims of such cases, valid or   
   > otherwise?   
   >   
   > To remind you, this was my original request: "I would be interested to   
   > know what these many other biblical and religious explanations are that   
   > science ended up having to agree with. Nothing immediately comes to mind."   
   >   
   > Adam and Eve, or "descent from a single couple" is not such an   
   > explanation, both because "a single couple" is not consistent with   
   > science unless you destroy the meaning of the phrase and because descent   
   > of the current population from couples living at much earlier times has   
   > never been in doubt, and even coalescence has been uncontroversial ever   
   > since anyone thought of it.   
   >   
   > So what else is there, whether it's in the book or not?   
   >   
   >   
   The examples do not exist.  The claim is as empty as Bill's claim that   
   he knew some real ID scientists that had the real ID science, but he   
   could never name any of them.  For some reason Harran can't accept the   
   100% failure rate for god did it explanations.  The only examples left   
   standing are the ones that we can't tell if some god did anything or   
   not.  If this were not true the ID perps and scientific creationists   
   that came before them would have been trumpeting the successes instead   
   of wallowing in the gap denial.   
      
   The garden of eden mythology (second chapter of Genesis) had likely   
   already failed before Christianity existed.  The two creation accounts   
   are inconsistent and cannot both be taken literally.  The accommodation   
   seems to have always been that the second creation story applied only to   
   the garden of eden.  This has always meant that Adam and Eve did not   
   have to be among the humans created on the 6th day of creation, and   
   could have been created separately in the garden, but people like Harran   
   still believe that they were the humans first created on the 6th day.   
   The first creation story does not claim that the first humans were Adam   
   and Eve, just that males and females were created like with all the   
   other land animals.  He needs to think that Adam and Eve were the first   
   humans.  There are no such god-did-it examples supported by real   
   science.  The earth is not flat nor young, the universe is not   
   geocentric, there is no firmament above the earth, the creation did not   
   occur as described by the Bible even if you take the days as period of   
   time, there was no global flood, all extant humans are not derived from   
   8 people that survived on the Ark only a few thousand years ago, and we   
   do not have evidence that those 8 people were derived from Adam and Eve   
   in just 10 generation.  The scientific creationists and ID perps came up   
   empty, with no science supporting their Biblical beliefs.   
      
   Ron Okimoto   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)