> But you appear to have a problem that would reject any and every scenario
> that might match the details of the account. If we can find a scenario
> that matches both the details and the science, why must we automatically
> say it is false. Tell me what detail my view violates. You may not like
> the timing of it, and there isn't verification of certain aspects of my
> thesis, but there is no falsification that I am aware of.
Your thesis, that the garden of Eden was in the Mediterranian basin, and that Noah's
flood occured when the Gibraltar dam broke 5 MYA is a very clever and plausable story
but it seems to me that the fossil evidence is working against it. The older the
hominids the smaller and more ape like they become. Ardipithecus ramidus is dated to
around 4.4 MYA and is apparently even more primitive anatomically than Lucy. To
equate these ape like creatures with the generations from Adam to Noah, with their
evident reasoning ability, is a stretch. Maybe your thesis is correct but I think the
evidence we have on hand is against it.