Well, you see, my good brother Jon, I tried 3 times to get to your Hump article, and I was told to try again later - - that the file was not currently available. So all I had to go on was your one sentence summation!
Let’s look at this ONE sentence summary. Let me put quotes around the part that is criticized for being wrong:
Answering criticism of Genealogical Adam “wrongly” makes “Genesis 2-3 a follow-on from Genesis 1”,
then you end the thought with: “whereas they are actually parallel accounts.” Whose “whereas” is that? Yours? Or the original criticism? If the latter, you don’t even need to bother with it, yes?
If the Grammar Police were here … would this last part be considered a dangling participle?
Why would you end your sentence with a “whereas”?
A simple declarative sentence would be:
answering the criticism of Genealogical Adam
that it “wrongly” makes “Genesis 2-3 a follow-on from Genesis 1”. [< Note the period. ]
This sentence would then end with your counter-opinion: “I show how the two creation stories make the most sense as 2 separate stories covering two different episodes of creation.”