The evidence you (Glenn) cite for support does not really support
your theory because other experts cite it to support a DIFFERENT
theory.
To which I respond, "Huh?"
It seems to me that the artifacts Glenn describes are evidence for
"a greater degree of humanity, earlier than previously thought."
That matches Glenn's predictions. It ALSO matches "emergent
humanity" --- a concept which Glenn rejects for hermeneutical,
not anthropological, reasons. Just because most experts favor
the latter doesn't mean that Glenn can't also use it to support
his theory.
Hope I haven't misread this too badly.
Loren Haarsma