Kof2hu's 22 species corresponding to Genesis thread

Hi, Kofh2u.I am having a very hard time piecing together your ideas. Let me provide a bit of an appraisal. Here is a graphic that outlines the genealogy from Genesis 4 and 5. As you can see, there are two basic lines from Adam (Cain and Seth). So, if this genealogy refers to the evolution of hominid species, then we should expect to see the same pattern in the hominin fossil record.And this is your graphic, that overlays biblical names on the various hominids.The problem is that the fossil "family tree" doesn't at all match the pattern in the genealogical trees from Genesis. For example, Ar. ramidus, which you have equated with Cain, has no descendants on that fossil tree. You instead present all the descendants of Cain as descendants of Seth. Au. afarensis (Enoch) is depicted as the "father" of Au. africanus (Enos), Au. garhi (Mahalaleel) and P. aethiopicus (Cainan). That's not consistent with the genealogy presented in Genesis: Enoch is on the Cain line, and the others are a three-generation father-son series on the Seth line.So, in order to make the two sources fit, you have to assume that either the fossil phylogeny or the biblical genealogy is wrong. You're trying to argue that the two sources to match, when they don't appear to actually match.