pre-history

Submitted by Mohammed Waza Khiddif Id'ullah (Australia), May 20, 2015 at 00:50

"...should be understood as having been a very, very long process; with other living things, including the Neanderthals et al, having evolved along the way. That's why I mentioned "Adam's race" instead of "mankind"; so there would be no confusion. We know Adam's lineage and approximate dates, from Bible chronologies: He lived about 6000 years BP..."

Way too simplistic for me. The conclusion you have to come to based on this logic is that full-blood Australian aboriginals for example - are not descended from 'Adam's race' - since it can be proved beyond doubt they first arrived in Australia at least 50,000 years BP. Neanderthals had art, reverence for departed relatives and were not all that disimilar to us. So much so that some of your ancestors were Neanderthal.

As far as the 'Great Flood' goes - I think the flooding of the Black Sea basin by water from the Mediterranean in neolithic times is a distinct possiblity.

"If you look at a map of the spread of those two "J" haplogroups, you will see that they correspond to the dispersal of the nations as described in Genesis 10:"

What about the people who have the R1b marker, for example the Celts living in central and western Europe? Or the Sami? Or the Finno-ugric tribes from the latai mountains who later went westwards - all of these long before 4,000BC?

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".