I think the burden is on you to support your criticisms with good science, which I don’t think you have done. There is no reason why any author needs to deal with criticisms that lack scientific backing.
Overall, Venema’s comparison of a 2 person bottleneck and Geocentrism is dead on. Both have been equally invalidated by evidence in every scientific sense.[quote=“RichardBuggs, post:197, topic:37039”]
Your book chapter places a burden of evidence very heavily upon yourself, especially as you claim such a high level of certainty about your view.
That burden has been met. Venema has given at least 3 independent lines of evidence that all support a large historic population for humans over the last 200,000, at a minimum.[quote=“RichardBuggs, post:197, topic:37039”]
I have an inkling that perhaps your very high level of certainty in the case you are making is because you may perhaps be misinterpreting the data at quite a fundamental level, and by digging down to primary data I may be able to identify where you are going wrong - if you are.
What you are insinuating is that the entire scientific community is misinterpreting the data, and you have yet to bring anything forward which brings those interpretations into question.