Two Hump Posts on Genealogical Adam

@jongarvey

Before I post at your newest article… I thought I would get a clarification and/or a confirmation.

You mention @swamidass just once, like so:

“I’ll leave to one side the work of Swamidass, Buggs et al., which shows a single couple bottleneck in deep time to be possible under population genetics after all, because Venema is having none of it, on the grounds of lack of a probable natural cause for it.”

This brief mention leaves me in the lurch on two questions:

  1. Wouldn’t this article be exactly where you would clarify (or expound upon) Swamidass’ scenario where even when there is an Evolved population PLUS a de novo creation of 2 more, the net effect is that all humanity is eventually co-opted under the Adam/Eve “Mormon Plan” (i.e. when you get enough descendants you are awarded your own planet!)?

  2. Why did you make your description of the Buggs discussion so vague? Any one engaged in the Creationism vs. Evolution dispute - - but do not have an immediate awareness of exactly what was discussed, would immediately leap to the conclusion that Dr. Swamidass and Dr. Buggs had agreed there was “positive evidence” for a One-Pair Bottleneck, and within a REASONABLE time frame! But this would, in fact, be the opposite of what happened. There was no positive evidence, only the absence of negative evidence. And I don’t think anyone would think a “possible bottleneck 700,000 years ago” is helpful to anyone.

As witnesses to the important discussion, I think we should go to extra lengths to make sure the discussion is not distorted or misunderstood. Thoughts?