I don't Adam & Eve it.

[Peter Morris]

http://www.randi.org/jr/2007-04/042707chop.html#i7

About Al Gore putting Adam & Eve into the ancestry of humans... Is it not possible that he was talking about the Y-chromosomal Adam and Mitochondrial Eve ?

 

[Overthinker]

I'd bet the election he wasn't: Gore is pandering to the core beliefs of too many Americans. By going out on a limb with this environmental stuff, he has already alienated people (who almost certainly wouldn't vote for him anyway of course, but would vote for a monkey in a suit if it ran under the Republican banner) and since the vast majority of Americans still apparently believe in Adam and Eve he is just saying "look, I might be talking about all this sciencey stuff, but see, it doesn't mean the Bible is wrong. You can trust me...." Whereas someone like Dawkins with his far more in-yer-face stance would not be received as well.

 

[dogbite666]

Al Gore's slide show is so full of holes anyway I took it with a pinch of salt before I saw this slide. He has lost all credability with me. He has basically hijacked the global warming band wagon and used it for his own political gains. I don't know who is more stupid - Al Gore or the people that suck up everything he says!

 

[BillyJoe]

http://www.randi.org/jr/2007-04/042707chop.html#i7

About Al Gore putting Adam & Eve into the ancestry of humans... Is it not possible that he was talking about the Y-chromosomal Adam and Mitochondrial Eve ?

Your own links seems to go against this interpretation.

http://www.randi.org/jr/2007-04/042707chop.html#i7

this "rise of humans" was God's creation of mankind — apparently 200,000 years ago. His graph then changed to include the caption "Adam & Eve" above this starting point.

Mitochondrial Eve

Mitochondrial Eve is...believed to have lived about 140,000 years ago

Y-chromosomal Adam

Y-chromosomal Adam probably lived between 60,000 and 90,000 years ago...

What were you thinking Peter.

 

[Zep]

What were you thinking Peter?

Better...

 

[ChristineR]

I thought it was humorous. In any case, one common (i.e. Roman Catholic) theory of Adam and Eve is that about 200,000 years ago a couple of erectus were born with the ability to comprehend good and evil and have abstract thoughts and self-consciousness and a conscience and all that good stuff. You don't even have to take the story literally to believe this, i.e. there was no actual garden where these two people lived. The garden is symbolic of the blissful state of purely instinctive thought, and so on.

 

[Peter Morris]

Your own links seems to go against this interpretation.

Hardly. You are assuming that the incident has been reported accurately, which is doubtful. We've only got one person's word that this happened at all. And here's a thought for you: eyewitness testimony is unreliable. People often don't understand what they see, fail to spot important points, or misremember what they saw.

I think it likely that the guy reporting it simply misunderstood what Gore was saying.

So, Gore showed a graph with the rise of the human race. The graph started 200,000 years ago. The words "Adam" and "Eve" appeared on the graph. Maybe they were in the correct places on the chart, and the guy simply didn't understand what was being said.

What were you thinking Peter.

I'm thinking of the tendancy of pseudo-skeptics to invent stories to fuel their hatred.

Hey, remember that time when Randi spewed out a load of vitriol against some politician for saying "we let our God down" and then a few weeks later had to apologise, because the man had actually said "we let our guard down."

I'm thinking it's probably the same sort of incident.

 

[NobbyNobbs]

Al Gore's slide show is so full of holes anyway I took it with a pinch of salt before I saw this slide. He has lost all credability with me. He has basically hijacked the global warming band wagon and used it for his own political gains. I don't know who is more stupid - Al Gore or the people that suck up everything he says!

What political gains? He's not running for any office that I know of.

 

[tracer]

In any case, one common (i.e. Roman Catholic) theory of Adam and Eve is that about 200,000 years ago a couple of erectus were born with the ability to comprehend good and evil and have abstract thoughts and self-consciousness and a conscience and all that good stuff.

You sure it was erectus, and not neanderthalensis?

 

[strathmeyer]

I thought it was humorous. In any case, one common (i.e. Roman Catholic) theory of Adam and Eve is that about 200,000 years ago a couple of erectus were born with the ability to comprehend good and evil and have abstract thoughts and self-consciousness and a conscience and all that good stuff. You don't even have to take the story literally to believe this, i.e. there was no actual garden where these two people lived. The garden is symbolic of the blissful state of purely instinctive thought, and so on.

But these are the same people who think that Mary was a virgin even after she gave birth to Jesus's siblings...

 

[ChristineR]

You sure it was erectus, and not neanderthalensis?

All I can do is ask the scientists, and they think it was erectus.

 

[BillyJoe]

I thought it was humorous.

Yes, sorry Peter, I forgot to congratulate you on the title of your thread.
But now I'm wondering where you plagiarised it from

 

[BillyJoe]

Hardly. You are assuming that the incident has been reported accurately, which is doubtful. We've only got one person's word that this happened at all.

It's pretty clear that it happened.
The point is that your links do not support your take on it.
Unless you're trying to believe that he put Y chromosome Adam and Mitochondrial Eve at different spots on the graph.

And here's a thought for you: eyewitness testimony is unreliable. People often don't understand what they see, fail to spot important points, or misremember what they saw.

If that is the case, what would you say about NON eyewitness testimony?

I think it likely that the guy reporting it simply misunderstood what Gore was saying.

Well, you could be right, Peter.
One take is that Gore was having a little joke.

So, Gore showed a graph with the rise of the human race. The graph started 200,000 years ago. The words "Adam" and "Eve" appeared on the graph. Maybe they were in the correct places on the chart, and the guy simply didn't understand what was being said.

I think he understood better than you did.

I'm thinking of the tendancy of pseudo-skeptics to invent stories to fuel their hatred.

Or maybe he just missed the joke.

Hey, remember that time when Randi spewed out a load of vitriol against some politician for saying "we let our God down" and then a few weeks later had to apologise, because the man had actually said "we let our guard down."

That was embarrassing.

I'm thinking it's probably the same sort of incident.

But you don't feel any need to research the facts of the case so that you might reach a conclusion based on the evidence?

You're just going to assume that:
- The reporter is a pseudo-skeptic.
- The reporter has a hatred of Gore.
- The reporter invented a story about Gore to fuel his hatred of Gore.
- Gore placed Adam and Eve on separate spots on the graph.
- Gore intended Adam to represent Y chromosome Adam.
- Gore intended Eve to represent Mitochondrial Eve.
- Gore could not have been joking.
- Gore could not have been appeasing religionist.
etc

 

[Peter Morris]

It's pretty clear that it happened.

But not neccessarily the exact way it was described.

The point is that your links do not support your take on it.

Only if you assume that the original blog is accurately reported.

Unless you're trying to believe that he put Y chromosome Adam and Mitochondrial Eve at different spots on the graph.

Are you sure he didn't? Have you personally seen the slide in question?

If that is the case, what would you say about NON eyewitness testimony?

Yes, that would be EXPERT witness tesimony. Much more reliable, in most cases.

Well, you could be right, Peter.
One take is that Gore was having a little joke.

Yes, that is another possibility. Quite a likely one.

But you don't feel any need to research the facts of the case so that you might reach a conclusion based on the evidence?

You're just going to assume that:

No, I assume nothing. I just find it unlikely that Gore really made a serious claim that the human race is descended from Adam & Eve. I think it likely that he said something else.


- The reporter is a pseudo-skeptic. testified to by the creds-under-the-beds paranoia displayed. One mention of Adam & Eve and he starts seething with rage.

- The reporter has a hatred of Gore. I think that's quite plain. And that he liked Gore right up until his one mention of Adam & Eve.

- The reporter invented a story about Gore to fuel his hatred of Gore. No, he distorted a story about Gore to fuel his hatred of religion.

- Gore placed Adam and Eve on separate spots on the graph.
- Gore intended Adam to represent Y chromosome Adam.
- Gore intended Eve to represent Mitochondrial Eve.

I'm not assuming that. I think it's more likely than the story as given, but I'm not assuming it.


- Gore could not have been joking. No, I think that too is a highly likely idea.


- Gore could not have been appeasing religionist. Maybe he was. Do you have any evidence, or arer you just assuming? Personally, I don't assume the worst of people without evidence. I just find it highly unlikely that Gore put an actual Creationist claim into his lecture. Have you got any solid eveidence that he did?


Tell me what YOU think. Please arrange the possibilities in order, from most likely to least likely, in your opinion. Feel free to add any other possibilities that you think of, which I may have missed.

- Gore talked about his own creationist beliefs. The blogger reported it accurately.

- Gore talked about Y-chromosome Adam & mitochondrial Eve. The Blogger misunderstood.

- Gore made a joke about other people's creationist beliefs. The Blogger misunderstood.

- Gore never mentioned Adam & Eve at all. The blogger either misunderstood, or imagined it, or just plain lied.

 

[BillyJoe]

Hey, Peter, it's your thread.

You are not one of those thread starters we often see around here who try to chase off every poster to go and do their research for them are you?

 

[Peter Morris]

No, I'm asking you to express an opinion.

 

[BillyJoe]

I have an opinion, which I am not going to divulge, based on searches that I have undertaken, which I am not going to link to. Because you can do your own searches...which you should have done before offering your opinion. I haven't been able to find out if Gore even knows about Y chromosome Adam and Mitochondrial Eve, but maybe you could contact him and find out, seeing as it's your suggestion.

 

[Nova Land]

"Br0k3nglass", the blogger who is quoted in Randi's commentary, attended a presentation of Gore's slide show and wrote a lengthy blog entry about a slide in the show. The speculations he makes in the blog entry (about what Al Gore intended when he added that slide) seem rather tenuous to me.

As others in this thread have probably pointed out, Al Gore is the logical person to talk with in order to clear up the question of what he did and didn't intend by the use of Adam and Eve on the slide. I don't know if Gore has commented on this matter, and am not up for e-mailing him in the hope of getting a direct response.

Here, however, is a link to a blog entry by James Hrynyshyn -- one of the 1,000 people who trained to present the slide show -- from his site Island of Doubt:

I'm one of Gore's army of 1,000 slide show presenters. I've shown the offending slide, in which the phrase "Rise of Humans" on a graph of human population growth (near the vertex at 160,000 years ago) fades out to be replaced by "Adam and Eve." As anyone who's attended one of my presentations, and likely any of the other 6,000 similar events across the country and abroad would know, this is simply a joke.

During our training, Gore explicitly suggested the device will provide some needed humor in what is mostly a rather dark presentation. And he was right. It does exactly that.

That seems to be a clear statement of what this person recalls Gore saying.

It's possible, of course, that this person is misremembering or misrepresenting what occurred in the training he underwent. A glance at his site, and a few other entries there, inclines me to believe this is a reasonably reliable person -- but even reasonably reliable people make mistakes.

If Hrynyshyn is correct, then the other people who were trained to do the presentation should have substantially the same recollection as he has: that Gore explained in the training that this is a joke intended to lighten a heavy presentation.

I don't personally know any of the other presenters, so am not able to go beyond presenting Hrynyshyn's account. But it makes sense to me that Hrynyshyn is correct in his recollection and br0k3nglass is incorrect in his speculations.

The people who volunteered to be trained to present the slide show came from a pool of people who are activists concerned with climate change. I would expect a great many of these people to be concerned about science; I would not expect many to be ardent creationists. If Gore had said what Hrynyshyn attributes to him, I would expect relatively little comment. If, on the other hand, Gore had given a significantly different reason for the inclusion of that slide, such as the kind of things br0k3nglass speculates, I would expect a great deal of comment on sites such as DailyKos or other places where activists such as these might be expected to post.

The fact that none of the people trained to do the presentation seems to have had the kind of adverse reaction that br0k3nglass did strongly suggests to me that his bad reaction to the slide was the result of his own misunderstanding.

Care should often be taken when attempting to use humor, because it is easily misunderstood. This looks like a good example.

 

[BillyJoe]

The pussy cat has been fed.

 

[Peter Morris]

The pussy cat has been fed.

I'm unfamiliar with that expression. What does it mean?


But based on comments, it seems as though Gore was making a joke. I can accept that given the evidence, which seems reliable on the face of it. Thank you foe the information, Nova Land.

I was correct to doubt the blogger's version of events. Though my speculation as to Gore's true meaning was incorrect.