Page 235 - Flipping book The Adam Paradox Hypothesis - Second Edition.pdf

The Ādam Paradox Hypothesis 212
Part VII — Objections and Alternatives
Chapter 22
Gradualism Can Do It All
Gradualism explains anatomy and tools but fails synchrony.
Part VII — Objections and Alternatives
Opening Essay: Why Strong Theories Welcome Tough Fights
A serious hypothesis earns its place by surviving rivals. Part VII exists to do
exactly that. We take the strongest alternative explanations for humanity
’s
symbolic ignition and ask, calmly and rigorously: Which model best fits the totality of
evidence with the fewest ad-hoc moves? Where APH (Adam Paradox Hypothesis)
loses, we will say so; where it wins, it will be because it explains more, more
cleanly, and more testably—not because we avoided the hard questions.
What Counts as a Good Explanation (Our Adjudication Criteria)
To keep this fair—and readable—we will use the same yardstick for every
model:
1. Explanatory Breadth
Does the model account for all three independent streams of evidence—
genomes, archaeology, and demography—rather than excelling in one and
hand-waving the others?
2. Shape-of-Change Test (slope vs. step)
In plain terms: does the model expect a gentle slope of symbolic traces or a
step change (long plateau, then a jump)? We’ll judge fit to the observed
pattern without burying you in equations.
3. Synchrony Test
Can the model make sense of tight temporal clustering—symbols,
regulatory changes, and population expansion arriving in the same window
—without leaning on post-hoc “coincidence” or “missing data” claims?