You cite Buggs in order to oppose Venema's argument that the genetic evidence rules out the idea that the entire human population descended from Adam and Eve as the first human pair. But the human pair to which Buggs refers is not the first human pair in the way Adam and Eve have traditionally been understood theologically, and the criticism of Venema which Buggs makes does not support the idea that the entire human population descended from an Adam and Eve who were created de novo rather than being descended from a previous population.
It would appear that you are reading more into my language than is there. My title, which I think is what you are angry about, is Does Science Rule Out a First Human Pair? Buggs explicitly argues that a single breeding pair can retain most of its heterozygosity as long as the population it founded expands rapidly. In other words a first pair is possible.
By 'first human pair' I meant the first pair to be fully human, coming from a bottleneck of two, which is what Buggs said could not be ruled out. A bottleneck of two can happen at least three ways I can think of: by a sudden reduction in population size from a pre-existing population because of isolation or who knows how, by de novo creation, or by the sudden imparting of a different character to two individuals. Buggs suggests the first is a possibility. I did not contradict him or misrepresent him, despite what you may think. I think you have read into my words what was not there.
However it happened, that party of two would be the first human pair. When did it happen? The answer depends on what weight you give to various pieces of evidence. Chris Falter favors a recent date because of scripture and archeological evidence, apparently. I favor an earlier date, earlier even than you perhaps, Jon, at the time of the appearance of Homo erectus, because of anatomy and genetics (common ancestry with Neanderthals and Denisovans). Where did it happen? Africa as far as I know. There are arguments against this time frame, I know. But it gives plenty of time for the minor allele frequencies to recover, if there was a bottleneck of two.
It's late. I am tired of trying to defend myself. You, for your part, should take me at my word. If you can't accord that respect to me, I suggest rereading the posting guidelines.