To think that the third human on this planet came from "other than" the first two is faulty logic, requiring bazaar tales and yarns of imagination.. You know, like evolving from Monkeys or some other mammal.. Grunting cave men operating on the level of a inner city rapper is creative fantasy but totally unproven, they were probably much smarter... Humans can ape monkeys and monkeys can ape humans but monkeys cannot be humans..
To think a population close to 7 billion people was raised from a seeding population of just two, you need to be on something, to be able to take into account the genetic degradation from that massive inbreeding. Try it on a smaller scale with dogs. You will see how quickly inbreeding brings about grotesque genetic conditions.
Next, we can discuss Adam's 900-year "existence".
You know, like evolving from Monkeys or some other mammal... Humans can ape monkeys and monkeys can ape humans but monkeys cannot be humans...
Humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor.
I recall that years ago a very accomplished mathematician on the forum (pro-evolution by the way) was explaining to other evolutionists in an abiogenesis debate that a single instance of non-life to life would not be sufficient. In essence he claimed that mathematically speaking, the phenomenon would have to be unique in time and widespread.
I recall thinking the reply was odd because it disputed the notion of a common ancestor, a major claim of evolution theory.
betty boop might recall the thread - she and I were engaged in many of the abiogenesis v biogenesis debates.