Page 91 - Flipping book The Adam Paradox Hypothesis - Second Edition.pdf

The Ādam Paradox Hypothesis 68
The visual infographic:
Blue dashed line = what the background-waiting model would predict: a long, gradual gradient of
artifact complexity.
Red solid line = what the archaeological record actually shows: a long flat silence, followed by a
sudden threshold jump ~70kya.
Falsifier Statement
The evolutionary convergence model—the idea that symbolic cognition arose
through unguided, coincidental alignment of multiple genetic switches—fails on
two independent grounds.
1.Mathematics: The probability of synchrony among even three loci within
realistic windows is vanishingly small (~0.006%), and for ten or more loci it
collapses effectively to zero. Allowing mutations to “
wait in the
background” merely stretches the timeline to 0.6–1.7 million years, which
predicts a gradual cultural gradient never observed.
2.Archaeology: The record shows the opposite of gradualism: a long silence
despite anatomically modern brains, followed by a sudden symbolic
explosion ~70,000 years ago.
Taken together, these falsify the evolutionary convergence hypothesis. It is not
merely unlikely—it is mathematically and empirically impossible. The
Adam Paradox Hypothesis, by contrast, explains both the timing and the
abruptness of the symbolic threshold.