This should have gone to the list
> -----Original Message-----
> From: glenn morton [mailto:glenn.morton@btinternet.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 6:51 PM
> To: bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com
> Subject: RE: Adam never met Eve
>
>
> David wrote:
>
> > In addition to the fundamental flaw of overlooking the possiblity
> > of multiple bottlenecks in one lineage (the Adam/Noah effect
> > noted in one post), the dating techniques are far from precise. I
> > believe the error range on the "Eve" dates makes them uncertain
> > between 0 and a few million years, for example, if all sources of
> > error are taken into consideration. Many molecular clock studies
> > use only one calibration point, if any (some just cite a rate
> > from another study), making the results statistically meaningless.
> >
>
> Everyone is missing the point of this, which is that there is no
> way the Biblical Adam and Eve could have been within the past
> 150,000 years. One doesn't have to get into the details of
> coalescence theory to know that simple fact. The genetical data
> does not support a recent pair origin for the human race at
> approximately the same time.
>
> glenn
>
> see http://www.flash.net/~mortongr/dmd.htm
> for lots of creation/evolution information
>
> >
glenn
see http://www.flash.net/~mortongr/dmd.htm
for lots of creation/evolution information
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 02 2000 - 01:32:05 EST