The Eric Metaxas Show - Joshua Swamidass

Episode Date: January 27, 2021

Joshua Swamidass introduces us to his fascinating discovery about the origins of human beings with ideas from "The Genealogical Adam and Eve: The Surprising Science of Universal Ancestry."

Hey, folks, welcome to hour two. How did that pass so quickly? Wow. In this hour, we're talking to our friend, our new friend, Josh Swamidas, brilliant scientist, medical doctor. And we need to have him on more often because we did the interview yesterday, and I was so impressed. So you'll hear that in a second. We'll probably going to be trying to do Socrates in the city events about once a week.

I think from Fridays from now on, usually, unless it's a big news day, we're going to do a Socrates in the city event, just because some of these conversations I've had have been so spectacular. And a lot of the folks who listen to this program, you're not aware of them. You can find them at SocratesintheCity.com, by the way, speaking of which.

Mark Halperin this Friday, Mark Helprin, the guy is brilliant. Mark Helprin, I want to say a lot of people wouldn't know him, but his writing, his fiction writing, he wrote a book called Winter's Tale, came out about 1980. It was a monster bestseller.

He wrote a book called Soldier of the Great War. This is probably the greatest novelist of our time. Think about that, folks. That's literally what I just said. If Updike were alive, he would still be the greatest novelist of our time. If Mailer were alive, he's definitely the greatest novelist of our time. Mark Helperin is, he's just that good. But we had him, I interviewed him at Socrates in the city.

He also, this is so humbling, Albin. I mean, people have no idea. Can I say it? Can I say it? He wrote a little blurb about your book, Fish Out of Water. My book, Fish Out of Water, a Search for the Meaning of Life. And let me tell you, it's a literary book. I'm proud of my writing.

But when you send a book like this to a writer like Mark Kelperin, it's a little scary. I'll be honest, because he is, you know, the finest writer that I know. and his response, trust me, ladies and gentlemen, I am as honored as you can be. What did he say? Actually, it's on the back of the book. I'm going to read this because I don't know.

Yeah, I think you should. I think you should. It's really terrific. This is his comment on my book, fish out of water. And I'm just telling you, this blows my mind. He says, in this portrait of metaxus as a young man,

deeply serious matters exist most comfortably with great wit and maximum humor. As enjoyable as it is to follow him from birth through the fog of his 20s and into the sunlight at their end, you will see that you have also painlessly embraced a wonderful complexity. Even the title represents multiple meanings

woven throughout the book that are, as in the solution to a mystery, unified and made clear at its end. I read it in the sunshine, which was entirely appropriate, Mark Halpern. The fact that somebody of his stature got what I was trying to do in the book and praised it that way, like, hey, I'm done, man. Can I just throw in real quick?

When I read it, it read kind of like a novel. It read almost like fiction because your description of the characters, the way you spun your stories in each chapter were, I know you like to do fiction and one day I'm sure you will, but this is a great start to your fiction writing career. I'm telling you, it's true. Now, of course, it's all true, just to be clear. Yes, I know, I know. There are things about some of the characters in the book.

People aren't going to believe it. I mean, again, it takes me from my birth, before my birth. I talk about my parents' stories and some of my family history and stuff. And then I get into my childhood and on and up through the Greek Orthodox. Transfiguration, the parochial school that I went to in Queens, which, let me tell you, there's some funny stuff in there. I don't think you're going to believe it. I'm going to read some of this stuff at some point. I got to read some of your group. I had a teacher, O'Kirios Osiambas, and he was, like, as old school as it gets.

Like, I don't think he realized he was in America, and that it was the 1970s. I think he thought it was the 40s and he was in Greece, because he would, like, beat us, like, smack us. And not me, only once when I was six. I had the temerity to ask whether I could go to the bathroom. But don't know pastomeros. And boom, he slapped me in the face and I cried. And it was really traumatic. But he didn't think like there's no other way for him to deal with students.

This was, you know, what he thought you do. And so after that, I, you know, never looked at him again. But he, I mean, he's a figure. When you get to that chapter, it's early in the book. But he's a character. He would, he would. He would spit. I'm not going to go into this.

You read it. You read about the unhallowed oysters. Okay, so I have to say, Albin, that we were talking about so many things, forgive me. Yesterday, speaking of Queens, New York, I drove to Queens with my daughter, and we met Katie, who works with us. And Rich Coleman has a bookstore in Queens, a big Christian book. store. And the Socrates and the city books are fulfilled through that bookstore. So I should say this. If you order a book, my new book through Socrates and the city, Socrates and city.com before the launch

date or even on the launch date, February 2nd, so it's a few days. You can get a signed copy. Now the book lists for 3299 at Amazon. It's 3299. You really can't get it cheaper than that. unless you go to Socrates and City, if you order the book at Socratesandcity.com, not only do you get the book for $25, but you get a signed book for $25. So I went there yesterday in the snow and signed, no joke, 1,500 books. Ouch. Can I tell you, it's hard to make the tendons in your right arm swell up. But after a thousand books, that's what begins to happen. I signed, I mean, I was like nonstop, nonstop machine, machine, machine.

And my signature is always legible. It's not like a scroll. Right. It's legible because I care. I want you to, you know, because I've seen signatures and books that it's just a scroll. It's obvious that whoever signed it like was in a rush and they don't care. I really care. So I make every single one legible and I sign the book.

I sign it on the title page. Usually I do these beautiful book plates, but I thought, hey, if I can go to Queens, I can sign the actual book. Yeah. So 1,500 books. But if you go to Socrates and the city.com, anytime before February 3rd, because the launch date is February 2nd, you can get the book signed for $25. Trust me, you will never get it signed, you know, unless you come to one of my events, I'm going to be speaking around the country quite a bit. But it's just hard.

And we thought, let's do that because the more you sell before the launch date, you know, the better for the book, the publishers. always tell you that. So we made a big effort. I signed them 1,500 yesterday. I got out of Twitter jail. So I'm back on Twitter. I want to say again to people, you need to get, you need to go to Rumble, which is because YouTube, we're still locked out of YouTube. Isn't that sweet that they locked me out? Because, you know, I'm preaching violence and, and Islamal fascism.

Oh, boy. And they really need to stop it. Stop it. They need to crack down. They need to crack down because the bile that comes from us. Oh, and the anti-Semitism. Have I mentioned that? Oh, just read my Bonhofer book. You'll see a load of anti-Semitism in that book. And now I'm against it, but oh, it's in the book. And so anyway, we're in a strange time. So before we go to our next guest, I want to remind you folks, Mike Lindell is the main sponsor of this show. He has been targeted so viciously. I mean, if you don't get... It's a... It's a... It's a pillow fight. It's a pillow fight. It's the pillow fight to end all pillow fights. But if you don't get angry at this, you're not paying attention. In the United States of America, when the government or cancel culture or big tech, when they come after you this way, ladies and gentlemen, this is despicable. You better get on the right side of this because they'll come for you. They've already come for me. This is fundamentally wrong. It is wrong. It's not my opinion. This is anti-American. It's ugly. So Mike Lendell, I want to say, Coles, Bed Bath and Beyond, H.E.B. Stores, Mayfair stores. I don't know who else. They have done an evil thing, okay? They're not going to stuff out of those stores. I think Costco is one of the good ones. So you can shop there. But don't shop at these other stores. Tell your friends, tell your friends, tell your friends, tell your friends not to shop at Bed Bath and Beyond or Coles or Mayfair or H.E.B. until they reverse their policies. I'm not kidding. Please don't. If you have to have to, have to buy his stuff, go to my store.com or my pillow.com online. Use our code Eric. That's a way of

supporting the show. They've come after me. We could use your help too. We got a prayer call tonight. Anyway, we'll be right back with a genuine guest. Stick around. Folks, welcome back. It's the Eric Mattaxas show. I've got a really extraordinary guest for this hour. His name is Dr. S. Joshua Swamidas. He is a physician. He is a scientist. He is a man of faith. He's spoken at Veritas Forum, all kinds of places. And he has a new book out.

I have to tell you, it's really extraordinary. Adam and Eve, the surprising science of universal ancestry. Josh Swamidas, Dr. Josh, Swami Das. Welcome to this program. Well, thanks for having me. Well, it's a joy to have you. I know the book came out about a year ago, the genealogical Adam and Eve, the surprising science of universal ancestry. Give us the 45-second version of what this book is about, because this is an amazing, amazing story. Well, you know, this is the book with many layers,

but I'll give you the lead line, which I think is surprising for a lot of people. It turns out that entirely consistent with the genetic evidence, entirely consistent with everything that we know from mainstream science. So this isn't something that's, that's something out there, you know, that most scientists want to agree with. I would say most scientists actually agree with it. It turns out entirely consistent with that. Adam and Eve could have been real people in a real past. Ancestors of us all de novo created from the dust and a rib, as recently as just 6,000 years ago. And they would be ancestors of everyone. That's what our best science tells us. The only way that really the mainstream evolutionary account really presses on the story is

by suggesting that outside the garden, you know, where maybe Cain found his wife, or maybe where the Nuffulam were, that out there that God had made another group of people in a different way. And that's something that people have wondered about for a very, very long time. It's been one of the great mysteries of Genesis. What's going on? I mean, we're talking about crazy stuff right up front. This is one of those things everyone has questions about this. Anyone who has all the answers is obviously confused, because there's no way you can have all

answers on this. You can say, I believe what the Bible says, but then when somebody says, okay, what does it say? It's not really clear. In other words, it says some things and it leaves a lot of other things out. So you are a medical doctor and a scientist. You've looked into this from a genealogical point of view. What is your background that led you into this? Well, I'm a Christian, right? And I'm a scientist. God called me to science, but I've always been, but I've always been a Christian. I've been committed to scripture, and I've really cared to understand how sacred

and natural history entwine. And for a long time, there's attention there, and it didn't really make sense. And eventually it clicked when you actually look at and read scripture for what it actually says. And you really understand the science here. By the way, I want to really emphasize, even though it sounds like creation science,

what I just said, it's not. It's something that even atheist biologists have endorsed and leading population geneticists. It's just how to do with just a misunderstanding people had about what the evidence actually showed. And it turns out that, you know, that just kind of resolves a conflict. I just don't see any conflict anymore.

And that's exciting. I mean, some of your people. Well, this is, you know, for people who are not up on this stuff, which is, which is most of us, let's kind of break down what we're talking about. The Bible says that God created Adam and Eve as the first human beings. Well, it doesn't actually say human beings in Genesis, right? What does it say? It says it's often translated into mankind, but the word is just Adam.

And our concept of human is an important, real concept, but it is different than how they understood the term. I mean, they didn't have the term human back then, right? Well, the term is the man, right? Adam, Adam, out of the mud, out of the earth. Exactly. So it's a, you know, at one point it was a neologism, right? This is a word and an invented word for this thing. So the question becomes, what do you say to folks about hominids that existed 50,000 years ago?

Do we say that there were no hominids? What were they? Who were Neanderthal? I mean, this gets into this big, crazy, super controversial stuff. So break it down for us to some extent. in an important way is it matters. It's approaching this grand question of what it means to be human, right? And what we find out is that when we look from the scientific evidence, it really does look like there is these non-homomusapian ancestors of ours in the past. And it looks like

there was homo sapiens that go back at least, you know, around 200,000 years or so that are equally human as us in really important ways. But the real question comes down to is that really what scripture is talking about. When I look through Genesis, I don't see any mention of Neanderthals. And that's okay. You know, maybe God may be. made them in the image of God, but scripture doesn't actually tell us one way or the other, and I'm okay with that. It's telling us the part of the story that we really need to know right now for us. That's really relevant to us, you know, and how we got here. What, again, this is, this is, you know, there are a lot of folks listening to this program

that are not familiar with what the Bible says. There are a lot of people listening to this program who are extremely familiar with what it says and who have already taken some position on this. I really don't because I see it as so. complicated and fascinating. When you talk, for example, about the, you know, 40,000-year-old cave paintings in front, who made those? Were they people that were they people? Did they proceed Adam and Eve who created them? You know, this is, these are the questions. And that's why I'm so excited to talk to you. Yeah, well, you're right. So first of all, there really is evidence that there's these, like, you know, there's this cave art that goes back actually pretty far into the past.

If Adam and Eve were really recent, and I don't know when they, I mean, science doesn't tell us when they lived. We know that they could have been recent, but they could have been more ancient. So depending on how you think about it, maybe they were before those people, and that's possible. Or maybe they were more recent than they were people that lived before Adam and Eve. We don't really know. Well, but if they were people, you and I would say God created them. Absolutely. So who were they?

Where did they come from? unless you believe that we evolved from apes, which is that gets into and more controversy. Where did these hominids come from? You're right. You're getting to, we are getting to the controversial part. And, you know, it looks to me,

when I look at the evidence as a Christian that really affirms scripture and takes it as God's inerent and infallible word, and I trust scripture more than science, okay? When I look at scripture, it doesn't seem like there's any contradiction with the idea that God created the people outside of the garden, through a providentially governed process, a common descent.

That doesn't mean he wasn't involved. It doesn't mean it was entirely random or that he wasn't necessary. It just means that it was a process of common descent. That would mean when we look at the evidence, it makes sense of that. You know, as a person who studies genomes, it really looks like we share common ancestors of the great apes. And maybe we do. And if that's true, it just means that there's two stories that are both true.

There's a story of the people outside the garden who are created by a providentially governed evolutionary process and the people inside the garden who end up mixing and becoming all of us. Well, so just to get to the non-controversial part, I mean, it's still controversial, but your book suggests, or it makes the case, really, doesn't just suggest, that we have a male and female common ancestors, that we have, that we can through, you know, that we can, through, through the science that you do, we can say that that is true. Or are you just postulating it?

Let me explain a little more because it's probably confusing. We're probably trying to put together things you've heard about genetics. Right. And I only say that this genetic stuff, I'm not actually challenging. That's why a lot of atheist biologists have really endorsed what I said, because I'm actually showing, I'm not saying that that's false. The key distinction, one of the key distinctions to hit on is that genetic ancestry is not the same as genealogical ancestry. So genetic ancestry has to do with pieces of DNA that get inherited from parents to children all the way down.

And, yeah, our ancestors can be our genetic ancestors. So, for example, my parents, each gene, about 50% of their genome. So they're 50% by genetic ancestors. But genealot of the ancestry is a little different. So it's more, it's not about pieces of DNA. It's something that we just learned about, you know, about 100 years ago. It's about something that we've thought about in an ordinary way, an ordinary understanding of ancestry, which has to do with who are, you know, who parents are and who offspring are.

So my parents are also my genealogical ancestors, 100%, not just 50%, but 100%. And if you go back another generation to my grandparents, they're 25% my genetic ancestors, but 100% my genealogical ancestors. You go back another generation, it's, you know, one eighth, right? And then one 16th, one 32nd. So you can see really quickly the amount that my ancestors are my genetic ancestors really starts to really drop. And it turns out that this is pretty crazy. It's surprising. Most biologists haven't thought through this yet, though it's really well established and published in literature. In just about

300 years, the vast majority of our ancestors give us no DNA. In that sense, their genetic ghosts. They leave no mark in our genomes that ever existed. I mean, they're real. We physically descended from them, but they are just not visible in our genomes. How many generations back? that's about about 15 to 20 so it's about 300 it's about 300 so in other words you're saying that the genetic information gets diluted to the point where it becomes practically immaterial when you go back that's what that means is that yeah we still do have like a mitochondrial eve you know a few hundred thousand years in the past we still have a mitochondrial white go to a break when you bring up the term mitochondrial eve i realize i need to have a cup of coffee

We'll be right back. Welcome back. I'm talking to Dr. Joshua Sw, the book he's written that we're talking about is called the genealogical Adam and Eve, the surprising science of universal ancestry. Okay, Dr. Swamidas. Swamidas, what's that, Jewish? Indian. Oh, really? Yeah.

Yeah, I think I knew that. You are a doctor. You're a scientist. And you're talking about the genealogical roots that we all have. And so what is the, I mean, you've said this earlier, but let's underscore it. What is the point that you make in this book? What is the news here? Yeah. So I told you, there's many layers to the book. We talked a little bit about some of it. I talked a little more about the science. But this is what the fundamental fact is. It turns out that there's been some very stick. difficult, complicated arguments and fights for a very long time. It turns out that a better understanding of science shows that maybe there really wasn't a conflict at all. For a long time, the reasons why people rejected evolution were that they really felt like it was in direct contradiction what scripture taught. And maybe it's not.

Maybe you could take an extremely literal view of Genesis and it's not actually in conflict with evolution. That's just really good news. Okay, but how is that the case? I'm not, I'm not understanding how that's the case. What is it that, uh, that you're saying scientifically, uh, that, that should be good news to people who take the Bible, uh, as the word of God? Here's the thing. So the way how most people read Genesis is that it's talking about a relatively recent couple in the past from whom we all descend and that were de novo created, that were created,

you know, from the dust, especially created in a rib, right? Okay. So the Bible says, that a couple was created not much more than 6,000 years ago, extremely recently, and that you're saying that scientifically, it is entirely possible that every human being who has ever existed has descended from that couple. That's scientifically not problematic. With what it does tell us, though, is it does tell us there's been for a long time. You go back thousands of years, even Jewish interpretation and Christian interpretation, and people have wondered, you know, with that story being true, they've had a question mark about what's going on outside the garden.

They've wondered about what's going outside the garden. And so what we find out from science is that maybe that's true about what Scripture is saying. But science seems to be telling us this story through genetics and archaeology and all the things, I mean, some of the things you even cited, that there was a humanity, a different humanity than Scripture talks about, that stretches back, that God created a different, way outside the garden. It is challenging.

What's up? It is a challenging concept because it does get, I mean, I think it's always important for us to lay out that this stuff is crazy. You know, there's anybody who says like, I've got it all figured out. Here's what it is. No, no, you don't. The Bible says what it says, and I take the Bible as the word of God. I do personally. But it does not break down the detail.

tales, for example, who were the Nephilim, who are touched on in the scripture. It doesn't say who they are. It doesn't talk about who are the Anakim, who are these giants in the land. There's all kinds of stuff there that it's there. And I believe it, because I believe that this is the divinely inspired word of God. But it doesn't mean that it breaks. There's not a footnote. There's not a divinely inspired footnote or commentary. that I can go to that lays out, oh, here's who the Nephilim are. Here's who the people that, you know, when Kane and Abel and Seth, there, there seem to be other people around. How do Kane and Abel find wives? You know, these are the questions that people have asked forever. And what you're talking about doesn't really give us answers on that, but it helps us in a way navigate through some of the questions.

Well, what it does show, so it doesn't, it doesn't resolve all the debates because it shows. shows that science doesn't really tell us as much as we think it does. For a long time, people thought that science just ruled out a large number of scenarios. Now, this just shows that there's a large number of scenarios that could work. Now, I don't know which one is the right one, because you're right. I don't think scripture tells us exactly either, but we know that a lot of things that people thought were in conflict just aren't anymore. We know they're not. Well, the idea that Adam and Eve were, you know, literal human beings, that that there was a couple from whom we're all descended.

The headline, I guess, really, from your book is that, yes, that's entirely, that's entirely possible from a scientific point of view. Yeah, there's no reason to throw that out. 2004 in Nature, which is a leading publication. And it's been, it's stood the test of time. I mean, it's been, it's been really uncontested for the last 16 years. And if scientists find is, is there anything about this that's troubling to the scientific community or to do?

the atheist-scientistic community? That's a great question. My experience has been is that atheist scientists, I mean, atheists, period, you know, the random ones you meet on social media, sometimes they're not very happy with it. But atheist scientists have found to be very,

you know, to have a lot of integrity, actually. And a few of them, for example, Nathan Lentz is an atheist. He's actually gone public endorsing the book. He blurbed the back of the book, explained why he thought it was good science. He said it was surprising, but he checked it out. And I was right.

I mean, another scientist is a secular scientist. He's Jewish, but he hasn't really been public about his faith, is Alan Templeton, who's a leading population geneticist. Another one who publicly endorsed the book is Stephen Matheson as well. These are all scientists that looked at it and say, oh, this is actually true. Now, what you talk about in the book, how is that different from the article in nature in 2004? And in other words, what is the new news here? Yeah, so the article in 2004 just shows that for present day, so everyone alive today, really seems that we have common ancestors maybe as recently as just 2,000 years ago.

So what we did is actually just take that analysis and, you know, see how that applied in the past. So how does that apply, for example, for everyone alive, everyone to the ends of the earth, as Jesus talked about during this mention. Hold on. Unfortunately, we're going to another break. This is deep stuff, folks. Don't go away. We'll be right back. Folks, welcome back to Eric Dek's show. I'm talking to the author of The Genealogical Adam and Eve, the surprising science of universal ancestry. Okay, Dr. Joshua Swami Das, let's continue the conversation. I do think a lot of people are confused because this is, there's so much here.

It's really not, it's not simple. You're making the case that, yes, in fact, we may well have all descended from a couple, called Adam and Eve 6,000 years ago, whom God created, as you put it, de novo. But you're not ruling out the existence of other human creatures, humanoid creatures existing long before 6,000 years ago. So that is, I think, what does confuse people. Is this akin to God making a people for himself? In other words, when God says to Abraham, I'm going to make a people.

There are all these other people out there, but I'm going to work with you. Is that, is there a parallel? You have some great theological instincts, Eric. Well, people don't realize. I'm brilliant. It turns out that that's how a lot of theologians, so the book's been out for a year. It also went through a lot of internal processes. I mean, over 100 scholars commented on the book.

And a lot of them were theologians. Several of them came back saying, you know, the right way that I'm thinking about this is that this is God creating sacred humanity or covenantal humanity. that spreads across the earth. Now, one confused objection to this is maybe this will support racism because maybe we don't, but the thing about it is that we all descend from Adam and Eve. So we're all part of that sacred or covenantal humanity that's fallen. So it's not, it can't really be used to justify racism.

So we can take that off the table. And if we see that, it's really, really is, it starts to parallel really closely the story of, you know, how God calls Abraham. And he has this special relationship with him. But in this case, maybe God really did create them. them de novo. And like I said, remember, they'd be genetic ghosts. So we don't really have evidence one way or another. And we really trust scripture saying that they, that they were created de novo. Maybe they were. That doesn't rule out, though. The idea that God breathes his spirit into them

before the fall. I mean, this is where it gets complicated because then the question is, what exactly is the fall? What happens? I've always gotten the impression that Adam and Eve existed on some level outside of time in eternity with God. And that we fell into time, into brokenness, into sin. And it's a completely new world outside of the garden. So obviously, we can't learn this from genetic science. Well, once again, I think your theological instincts are really good here, Eric. Oh, no, no, they are.

People don't realize. I'm a genius. People, I try to explain it about people, people blow it off. Go ahead, go ahead. Well, I think, I think this really brings us. to really deep and important questions that have driven theology for 2,000 years. And in this way, we have an opportunity to exit this big morass, this ugly conflict about evolution, and enter back into this long conversation of theology to think about things that have deep relevance right now.

We talk about the fall. I think it's really important. I mean, it's a core doctrine in Christianity is to recognize that the world as we find it is not the way how God intended it. It's broken. And we inherit a world that doesn't quite work. right. And that gives us this hope that for something better, both better in heaven, but also better here. And that's a core thing. And, you know, when you start to take, you know, what's possible and start to align up with the theology, it starts to seem much more salient. When you look at the timeline of how most of we've understood scripture very recent of Adam and Eve, it starts to really correspond really closely, actually, surprisingly, with how scientists see the rise of civilization.

It turns out that, like, you know, less than 10,000 years ago is when civilization arises for no clear reason why it arises then. It's incredibly violent when it starts, and it spreads, you know, quickly from the Middle East across the globe. And if you look at the themes in Genesis, it really seems to be talking about technology, the advance of technology and the advance of civilization. It really raises questions about, you know, what are the connections between the civilization as we find it, society as we find it, and in the fall. And, you know, I think that's a place where a lot of theological. are recovering what people have thought about in the past and seeing new ways to really think about that in a way that now brings theology back into a real conversation as an equal partner with good science.

What about Bigfoot? Bigfoot. Well, that's a conspiracy theory. Okay. But look, hey, Neanderthals are real. And it's a question. Are they an image of God? What do you think?

Neanderthals are real. Promagnan are real. this is where, you know, I get lost pretty quickly, and I hope most of my audience also gets lost. We're talking about things that are very difficult. There's a guy named Jack Quazo. He's passed the way. He had a theory that Neanderthal were human beings that had lived past four or five hundred years as Scripture says we did before the flood, and that that's why that their skulls and so on and so forth looked different because they continued to aid. I'm aware of that theory.

That's, I mean, one of the most fascinating things. He gave me a tour of the National History Museum, National History Museum, sorry, here in New York City. And I was just absolutely fascinated. I didn't know what to make of it, but he wrote a number of books. Well, what do you know about that theory since we're just off on that? I mean, since I got it. Yeah, I mean, it's a really interesting theory.

You know, a lot of people have looked at it. You know, my assessment, I don't think it checks out. I think there's some really good evidence that actually Neanderthals tend to live and die really young. Part of it is, you know, we've seen actually a large number of Neanderthal children. I mean, that doesn't really fit that theory. We shouldn't be able to see Neanderthal children if that's the case. I haven't seen any lately, but I'm just saying. I mean, the very first Neanderthal skull discovered was of a child.

So, I mean, that does that doesn't fit. I meant in my neighborhood. Oh, yeah, sure. So you, what is the name of your organization? We've just got a minute here in this segment. What is the name of the organization? Because you do as a scholar, as a scientist and a medical doctor, seek to bridge the faith community and the community of science.

What is the name? Just to another layer of the book, you know, I think one thing that has really become, you know, clear to me is that I think there's just a real need for Christians who are scientists and even non-Christians that are trustworthy that are scientists. to be in the public engaging the public square, including the church. And, you know, we didn't really fit the way how other organizations were approaching it. So I ended up launching peaceful science. You can find us at peacefulscience.org. Join our mailing list and come follow the conversation as we consider what needs to be human.

Peacefulscience.org. That's right. Peaceful science.org. Folks, this is a fascinating conversation. We're going to be right back for a final. segment with Dr. Joshua Swamidas. It's the Eric Mataxis show. Go to our website, Ericmetaxis.com. Or Metaxistalk.com. We'll be right back. Folks, as the Eric Mataxis show, I'm talking to Dr. Joshua Swamidas,

who's in St. Louis, who's written a book on the genealogical Adam and Eve. Totally fascinating. We could go anywhere with this. My friend John Rankin, who just passed away, we would talk about this. I've talked to Dr. Hugh Ross about this. He's in California. I just love, you know, just shooting the rapids, so to speak, and wondering openly about someone who understands it, about what we can make of what we know thus far.

So you're not somebody that I guess you would identify with the Biologos crowd. You believe in? No, actually, this is, you know, I'm not really comfortable. with their science or their theology. So then you're more on an intelligent discovery institute? No. No, I mean, I told you that we kind of find ourselves in the no man's land between the trenches. There's a lot of people that have really been advocating in particular positions.

That's not really what we're doing. We just want to give an honest and trustworthy account. But you don't get the idea that, I mean, this has nothing to do with the Adam. but you don't get the idea that like in the Cambrian explosion, that that looks like God's hand, that we can't really explain how 550 million years ago. Suddenly you get all of these different body types. And I mean, look, you know, as a Christian who looks at this,

it's stunning. Everything I look at looks like it's God's hand. Yeah, I think the Cambrian explosion looks like God's hand. Now, the issue is, and this is what distinguishes me a bit from ID, is that when I look at the scientific details, I don't think there's a very strong scientific case to me for that. but when I see that, I think it's still beautiful. It's completely the correct, you know, inference to say God did it because he did do it.

That's a correct. What you're saying is you don't see. It doesn't mean it actually. To prove it. But well, look, I mean, at this point, you get beyond science. You know, you have some information. You look at it. And when somebody says the science wouldn't lead me to say God was involved, well, science can't lead you to God.

Because science leads you to a dead end and then you're on your own. You've got to go off-roading for a bit. I agree. I think you get to the limits of science and you've got to go beyond. Well, that's the point. You've got to make a judgment call. And so when you look at something like the Cambrian explosion, common sense tells you that this didn't happen through random mutations over time.

Does it not? Well, the thing about it, though, is that you're right. Common sense tells you one thing. But we find out over and over again from science. This is why I love science. This is what drew me to it. This is what got me hooked. I found out that my common sense understanding was just wrong.

I put out the world as I found it ended up being far more surprising than I expected. And so science just ends up kind of overturning our instincts all the time. That's just what it does. And when I've looked at the details, there's just, yeah, you're right. It is really surprising. But you start looking at it. You know, the story seems more plausible, but that's not an argument. But you don't believe.

But you don't believe. Or that he wasn't necessary. Maybe he wasn't necessary. Right. And you also don't believe in so-called abiogenesis that, you know, the prebiata just ended up creating cells over time. I mean, that seems to me the most preposterous concept. And I'm just fascinated that they seem to cling to the idea that know what happens.

I was talking to Hugh Ross about this recently. You know, I've worked a lot with him. So I think there's some really puzzling things about this. First of all, I'll say this. I'll say that no one in science knows how the first cell was made. No one knows. That's an understatement. Secondly, I mean, it's not really clear.

you know, if we will ever find out. And third, you know, it's very reasonable to look at that evidence and walk away and say, walk away and say outside of science, you know, maybe God did it. That being said, I think there are some puzzles here. First of all, I think Origins of Life research has shown that it's more plausible than I think most Christians admit. It's still not solving it all. We're going to have to get you involved in a conversation with James Tour. Oh, he's a good friend of mine. I'd love to talk to him. Yeah, he's a friend. He's a friend. obviously would disagree on this stuff. We're out of time. Josh, Swamidas, wonderful finally to get to meet you. We will continue this conversation as soon as possible.

Thank you.