Stephen: <<No. That anthropology on "physical criteria" "cannot define where humanness begins" does not mean that "Adam could have been Homo Habilis or Australopithecine." Anthropology has no concept of "Adam." "Adam" is a *Biblical* term. And from the Biblical description of "Adam"
he as Homo sapiens.>>
How can that be if the terms are so vague ? What makes you think that the Bible's description precludes Adam from having been Homo Habilis or Austrlopithecine ?