Continuing the discussion from Lents at USA Today: Scientific Possibility for 'Adam and Eve':
I read the comments by the atheists and pastafarians. Don’t see much confusion nor too harsh of criticism. Most see GAE as an unfalsifiable story made up by @Swamidass to allow indoctrinated YEC Christians a way to preserve Genesis as a series unobserved and undetectable miracles just like the suppose-it virgin birth. Since @swamidass is accepting of all the actual human origins science, aDNA, human migration, archaeology, geology, that science has so far discovered, GAE shouldn’t be a concern for atheists, agnostics, pastafarians, Catholics, non-YEC Christians and anyone who doesn’t take Genesis as literal history. To most people, Genesis is ancient mythology. If someone gets meaning and purpose from the stories of Genesis on their own there is nothing wrong with that.
II think they are confused with comments like this:
That pretending a religious myth has anything to do with scientific reality is insane and damaging to science.
Worlds biggest air quotes, right there. “scientist” Riiiight…
And so on, . Though I’m not to worried about it. One says he passed it on to Coyne. Jerry’s response will be interesting.
I actually agree that pretending a religious myth has anything to do with scientific reality is insane and is damaging to science.
But I don’t think @swamidass is insane nor damaging to science. @swamidass intentions are well known and admirable. He remains a scientist and a tenured professor at a secular institution just like Francis Collins remains an outstanding NIH Director.
If Jerry understands what you are trying to accomplish, I think that he will be kind towards you. I do think that you need to state that GAE isn’t to get anywhere near a public school. Because if anyone takes GAE near a public school, FFRF will be all over it.
I think atheists need to be vigilant that some nutcase Christian Nationalist don’t take GAE as a way to insert Genesis as “not proven false” into the culture war. I am looking forward to Ken Ham and AiG’s response. AIG already has Noah and his three sons repopulating the world. If Ham takes your GAE idea and applies it to Noah as in Genealogical Noah (GN), it will be another mess that might increase Ark Encounter attendance.
I guess I’ll have to make a new Reddit account. Don’t want to pollute my video game and TV show gossip with serious discourse about interesting intellectual topics.
I’ll try to make a comment when I have a chance.
I don’t think that the GAE should be taught public schools. It would be really cool if the distinction between genetic and genealogical ancestry was, in fact, taught.
And in homeschooling? The GAE might be the best way to get good science there.
Agree that both genetics and genealogy should be part of science, history, and sociology classes. Every high school student should learn about Neanderthals, Denosivans, and the great human accomplishments of Homo Erectus. And then they should do their own genealogy and their own DNA to see what each tells them about who they are and where they came from. Once each student has done this, the whole class will realize that they are all Nth cousins, all of the same human race, their genes are 99.99% with subtle differences that can affect their health, and that their genealogy though different, doesn’t matter in living their lives today.
The value is what opponents say is DO THEY bring important attention to the book?? otherwise its just a bunch of WE THINK RELIGION IS NOT TRUE.
All these things always are, as the singers sing, ANOTHER BRICK IN THE WALL, to unevidenced evolutionists jazz. Error can’t take the attrition of truth and so the attrition of investigation.
Thanks, yeah, I went in and made some comments also.
We had a long exchange about it. He was kind but he’s not happy about this. I’m a little concerned because it’s not clear to me that he understands just how narrow the claim really is. I sent him the references to the science behind the identical ancestors point and Josh’s earlier article laying out the science in the claim. I’m hoping that he’s reading carefully before sounding off about this. I’m certain he won’t support what either of us are doing, but I hope that he’s fair.
When he does write about it, who do you think should respond and how?
Depends on the content. If he presents your claim wrong, I think you and I both should go into the comments to clarify. If he’s mostly just grousing about the cozying up of religions and science, I think it’s best to just leave it alone. He dug his heels in on that a long time ago. I don’t think this will be on atheists’ radar for very long, so probably best to just leave it be.
Oh boy, he’s tweeting. Not sure if he’ll do a blog post, but the tweets are not very nice. Sigh. Oh well, we knew this could happen. I’m not planning to say much for now. Besides not seeing any value in a shouting match on Twitter (I did try to carefully explain by email), Sundays are family time.
Yes, no rush.
Seems like his tweets are based off of Graham Coop’s tweets. I don’t know Coop personally, but he is by all accounts an expert on this sort of thing. Might be worth inviting him here (or offline dialogue)?
Yes, Graham’s tweets are perfectly appropriate (and much kinder) and actually, I wish Jerry would read them more carefully. Graham is basically saying that the GAE is an attempt to wedge A&E into the data regarding universal ancestry, which is pretty much right on.
Excellent comments, “zezemind” made a few salient points as well. I chipped in a couple of small ones.
Can you explain Nathan? I was surprised to read this. Is it that A&E are potentially legitimized that is the problem?