Page 209 - Flipping book The Adam Paradox Hypothesis - Second Edition.pdf

The Ādam Paradox Hypothesis 186
In short:
APH:
“If the library suddenly got lots of new edits in the brain chapters at
the same time, that’s expected.
” (~70–85% chance)
Gradualism:
“Those edits should be scattered randomly across all the books
and timelines.
” (<10% chance)
Relevant Studies
Recent genomic and epigenetic studies (Glinsky, 2020; Sun et al., 2023)
demonstrate that many human-specific regulatory changes are fixed across all
living humans yet absent in Neanderthals and Denisovans. This implies that
their fixation coincided with the small bottleneck population that later expanded
~70kya. The Adam Paradox Hypothesis therefore estimates a 70–85%
likelihood that genome-wide scans will reveal clustering of these changes within
the ignition window — a pattern gradualist models would predict at <10%
likelihood.
Glinsky (2020) – Fixed Human-Specific Neuro-Regulatory Mutations
Argument: This study catalogs tens of thousands of human-specific
regulatory single-nucleotide changes (SNCs) that are fixed in humans but
absent in Neanderthals/Denisovans.
Many of these are linked to brain development, synaptic function, and
cognition.
Relevance to 70kya: If they are fixed in all modern humans but absent in
archaics, the fixation event must have happened after the human–
Neanderthal split (~500–600kya) and before the global dispersal of modern
humans (~60–70kya).
Probability tie-in: This makes it plausible (70–85% likelihood under APH)
that a large portion of these mutations clustered in the ignition window,
because that’s when fixation across a small population could occur.