But Dr. Thomkins And Dr. Jeanson say…
I was contacted with some questions about this article by two AIG scientists: Genetics Confirms the Recent, Supernatural Creation of Adam and Eve | Answers in Genesis This article claims that mitochondrial DNA disproves evolution. This is false, and I’ll explain why, but I want to point out what this so fundamentally correct about this article first.
Perhaps the authors most insightful comment is this.
Both sides may claim that the data fits their view, but claiming that the data support a view to the exclusion of the other is very challenging.
They are exactly correct. As we covered already (and Drs. T and J also explain), theistic evolutionists and evolutionary creationists have unfairly dismissed single couple bottlenecks at times by using a cartoon version of the theory: assuming Adam and Eve were homozygous clones. The fact that such a strawman theory is disproven does not reall tell us anything about the plausibility of the actual theories being put forward.
As is pathologically standard in the origins debate, almost everyone (there are exceptions) builds arguments by misrepresenting the otherside. TE / EC authors comically misrepresent YECS, but the same happens the other way too. The second half of this article claims to disprove evolution by comically misrepresenting the theory and the evidence too.
True to form, Drs. J and T go on to present evidence against evolution, making some gross errors as they do so. I’m including the figure below, but also linking here (http://www.phylotree.org/) to relevant data.
