William Lane Craig: What Became of the Genetic Challenge to Adam and Eve?

[swamidass]

This article from WLC might be helpful to some of the Catholics here that hold to an ancient Adam and Eve. Craig’s position is essentially a variant of many Catholics’ position

What Became of the Genetic Challenge to Adam and Eve?

Does population genetics challenge a single-couple origin to humanity? In early 2017, Dr. Richard Buggs raised scientific concerns about Dennis Venema’s book, Adam and the Genome . His concerns were distinct and addition to concerns that Dr. Swamidass raised that year too. In late 2017, Dr. Venema responded at BioLogos, and a conversation grew. Together, several scientists did indeed find several fundamental mistakes with Dr. Venema’s argument against a single couple origin of humanity. Eventually, in 2020, even BioLogos began backing away from Venema’s scientific claims. In this article, Craig summarizes for a lay audience the science behind this shift. For technical readers, the forum thread for this article expounds and clarifies his summary with greater precision.

As a scientist, I am happy to answer any questions that arise about this.

 

[swamidass]

@buffalo, this is distinct my work in The Genealogical Adam and Eve, and I thought you might find it helpful.

 

[Freddy]

@buffalo, this is distinct my work in The Genealogical Adam and Eve, and I thought you might find it helpful.

Hey swamidass. I’m not sure if he’ll find it useful. He believes the planet to be a few thousand years old. The article talks about an original couple from a half a million years back.

 

[swamidass]

That article was written by WLC himself, so I’m sure he finds it useful. A revised version of this chapter is going into his new book on Adam and Eve. Craig does not believe that the planet is just a few thousand years .

 

[Freddy]

That article was written by WLC himself, so I’m sure he finds it useful. A revised version of this chapter is going into his new book on Adam and Eve. Craig does not believe that the planet is just a few thousand years .

It was @buffalo to whom I was referring. Perhaps you can put him straight on that for us.

 

[swamidass]

He believes the planet to be a few thousand years old. The article talks about an original couple from a half a million years back.

@buffalo, you don’t believe the earth is just a few thousand years old, do you? Rather you were entertaining the idea of Adam and Eve being a few thousand years ago.

 

[buffalo]

@buffalo, you don’t believe the earth is just a few thousand years old, do you? Rather you were entertaining the idea of Adam and Eve being a few thousand years ago.

@swamidass
Adam and Eve could be further back, even 100-200K ya.

 

[Freddy]

swamidass:

@buffalo, you don’t believe the earth is just a few thousand years old, do you? Rather you were entertaining the idea of Adam and Eve being a few thousand years ago.

@swamidass
Adam and Eve could be further back, even 100-200K ya.

The question related to the age of the planet. How old do you think it is?

 

[swamidass]

Clearly @buffalo thinks the planet is much older than a few thousand years.

 

[Freddy]

Clearly @buffalo thinks the planet is much older than a few thousand years.

The last and most accurate age was, from memory, ‘several thousand years’.

 

[rossum]

The last and most accurate age was, from memory, ‘several thousand years’.

IIRC it was something like: ‘more than 10,000 years but less than 100,000 years.’ He accepts C14 dates but not other longer term dating methods.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

The last and most accurate age was, from memory, ‘several thousand years’.

IIRC it was something like: ‘more than 10,000 years but less than 100,000 years.’ He accepts C14 dates but not other longer term dating methods.

So 200k is out. I wonder where we go from here…

I do keep saying that if you deny basic science then you end up tying yourself in knots trying to back up anything you claim when you need to use the same science to do so.