How would they be wrong?
In my decades-long study of both nature and human history, I find that there is almost always a FIRST in anything.
How could there not be a first? The hard part is identifying who that first would be … but certainly it is no epistemological chore to assume that there was a first - - unless, you have evidence otherwise.
@Roy,
I guess you failed “Introduction Comprehension to Genesis”?
What is it that “the man” is practicing in the Garden of Eden?
Who was the first person to speak French? Who did they speak it with? 
There didn’t appear to be any communication between the Americas and Asia/Europe. Agriculture emerged independently on both continents. While it may have happened first in Asia, it still happened on its own in the Americas (e.g. maize and potatoes).
So how does your scenario deal with independent emergence of agriculture?
I’d like to go on record that this “tag-team” of criticisms are not just tar babies thrown at me, but at the GAE in general.
We have one person who doesn’t recognize Adam as a farmer… maybe two.
We have another who thinks the GAE should be founded on a more atheist viewpoint.
And I suppose I could name a few more singularities…
But I guess I am to expect this treatment, when I point out where the Atheist faction is making unfair demands on GAE.
Let the games continue…
It is trivially obvious that @John_Harshman is right here. There’s no need for curiousity.
There are ants that practice there own form of agriculture.
Before answering, I will remind you that this is based on the presumptions of at least some YECs, right?
YECs offer a variety of forms of communication - - for example, a new idea to me is the idea of Siberian peoples walking on the northern ice formations to get to the Americas… and anywhere else.
For example, the Inuit, via its multi-lingual Council, claim multi-national status!
" Governance[edit]
Inuit Circumpolar Conference members
The Inuit Circumpolar Council is a United Nations-recognized non-governmental organization (NGO), which defines its constituency as Canada’s Inuit and Inuvialuit, Greenland’s Kalaallit Inuit, Alaska’s Inupiat and Yup’ik, and Russia’s Siberian Yupik,[140] despite the last two neither speaking an Inuit dialect[10] or considering themselves “Inuit”. Nonetheless, it has come together with other circumpolar cultural and political groups to promote the Inuit and other northern people in their fight against ecological problems such as climate change which disproportionately affects the Inuit population."
And there are others who think straying boats traveling in either the Atlantic or the Pacific existed.
My job is not to contradict every idea that a YEC may have, but to help them find options that make reconciliation of their Adam/Eve beliefs with Evolution possible.
Do you disagree?
Your claim can’t be more broadly interpreted than the inverse of your claim.
No, because I know what John means, and I agree with him.
I’d approve more if you attempted to investigate the evidence instead of making unsubstantiated claims about it.
Do you really think John was criticizing my posting because I intentionally didn’t include the ants in my discussion of the rise of farming?
@Roy,
Then how would YOU interpret Harshman’s claim?
I intentionally embraced a very wide and flexible set of parameters. Now it seems that you think there are no parameters for the inverse. If there are none, than John has no case to pursue… and neither do you.
Gardening. Perhaps forestry. Do you think the Garden of Eden was a wheat field?
@John_Harshman criticized your posts because you are treating “the rise of farming” as a precise event, whereas it is extremely vague and ill-defined. My comment about ants merely illustrates that problem.
I think we would need to see evidence of this communication. We would also need to understand how agriculture was not more widespread in the Americas. It seems much more likely, in my estimation, that agriculture was stumbled upon independently when people came into contact with viable cultivars. Was it agriculturalists who made barley, or did barley make humans into agriculturalists?
@Roy,
OH! “Gardening” … so rose bushes and a nice row of petunias? Aren’t you getting a smidge silly?
Who do you mean “we”?
This, again, is your reflex maneuver, to force a Christian to “PROVE TO YOUR LIKING” any point of religion they may be discussing.
But that’s not the point of the GAE scenarios. I certainly don’t care whether a former-YEC has adopted Evolution because of the “first farmer” logic, or because he thinks there really is a Tower of Babel.
Your diversions work with less experienced correspondents. They don’t work on me. Perhaps you could start up your own thread?
There is a difference between the Biblical speculation of a specific event … and what the natural record (from geology to archaeology) shows as the general area of origin.
In most cases, there HAS to be a first. I don’t know where that would be. But it is a logical a priori position, unless there is evidence SHOWING simultaneous emergence in multiple distant geographies.
Short of that, my presumption of “first” is sound.
No, that’d be you. I’m just realising that you aren’t prepared to discuss or investigate the evidence you keep referring to, so aren’t worth taking seriously.
@Roy,
If you are going to dismiss Gardening as NOT being agriculture, I can put you on mute too.
As much as this has been great fun, I do have a few errands to run. So continue on with the silliness… eventually I’ll be back at the screen, looking for a quiet acceptance that if there is no “First”, that there must be MULTIPLE FIRST ORIGINS. And that even this is irrelevant if no YECs are inclined to think the latter is the best position.
Feel free to do whatever it takes to retain your ignorance.
Perhaps while you’re running your errands you might consider the idea that there can be a first origin yet still be multiple independent origins.
If it is a faith based theological position, that’s fine. Just say so. As I have said all along, GAE is about theology and not about science.