Page 113 - Flipping book The Adam Paradox Hypothesis - Second Edition.pdf

The Ādam Paradox Hypothesis
Table 9.5 — Positive Signatures of Divine Engineering (APH)
90
Key signatures of the Adam Paradox Hypothesis: cognitive surplus, genomic preparation, and threshold
timing, each supported by converging lines of evidence.
Conclusion: Clay Refined, Spirit Breathed
The threshold paradox remains one of the most striking enigmas in the study of
human origins. Fossils demonstrate that anatomically modern humans existed
long before symbolic culture became permanent. Genes such as FOXP2,
SRGAP2C, and the HARs reveal that the architecture of cognition was in place.
Archaeological sites like Qafzeh and Blombos testify that the capacity to
symbolize flickered intermittently. Yet for more than 100,000 years, the silence
persisted. Then, around 70,000 years ago, symbols erupted irreversibly and
spread across the globe.
The evolutionary convergence model seeks to explain this paradox by invoking
multiple interacting factors: anatomy, regulatory fine-tuning, demography,
climate, gene–culture feedback, and visibility bias. But its genetic candidates are
mistimed, committing the post hoc fallacy. Its dismissal of early symbols as
“fragile” is ad hoc reasoning. Its demographic emphasis confuses persistence
with origin. Its climate argument commits the error of correlation without
causation. Its perishability claim is unfalsifiable. Its synchrony depends on
retrospective determinism. And its insistence on gradualism collapses against
the archaeological evidence of a saltation. Even d’Errico and Stringer (2011)
concede that the evidence points not to slow accretion but to “a rapid
reconfiguration.
”