Firstly, I think biblically it is very clear that Adam and Eve are treated as real, historical people. Genesis 1-5, Jesus’ teachings (Matthew 19:4-6), and Paul’s interpretation of Christ’s life, death, and resurrection (Acts 17:26; Romans 5:12-19; 1 Corinthians 15:21-22, 45-49) all rest on the historicity of Adam and Eve. Further, the Hebrew word “yatsar” in Genesis 2:7 describes Adam’s creation from the Earth’s dust, meaning “to shape and mold.” In Genesis 2:22, the verb “banah” (meaning “to build, to repair”) describes Eve’s creation from Adam’s side, implying reworking a piece of Adam. Both passages show God’s direct and intimate involvement in their creation. Secondly, there are two current scientific models that allow for Adam and Eve while meeting the biblical criteria and not conflicting with current scientific data. One is the bottleneck hypothesis (Adam and Eve were a part of homo Heidelbergensis ~700,000 years ago; due to transspecies variation, they dropped to a population of 2). This bottleneck is theoretically and mathematically possible, and does work with current genetic diversity. The second is the geological hypothesis (Adam and Eve were not genetic, but genealogical ancestors). This hypothesis is not actually based on genetics, and is therefore not under the scrutiny of genetic data. Take your pick; either way, Adam and Eve are biblically and scientifically not in conflict if considered as real, historical people from a finite point in time.

I would agree with you that the theological narrative of Adam and Eve is indeed very powerful, but assuming it is a “myth” is exactly that; an assumption. I have exact biblical reasons why Adam and Eve should be considered historical individuals based off the biblical texts themselves. You are simply asserting what you believe to be true. I thought it was clear when presenting my two models, but neither of them contradicts the evolutionary timeline in any capacity. You’d have to raise specific challenges as to why evolution challenges those models; which you haven’t. While I agree that there is no current bottleneck that is agreed upon within the genetic data that suggests two sole progenitors, there are numerous papers that show an extreme bottleneck in population size down to 1,280, meaning that science is not unaccustomed to extreme dips in population in the past, which is exactly why a bottleneck of just two is possible. This genetic refutation still does not address the genealogical model. Physical remains are hard to come by, period. We still do not believe to know the entire evolutionary lineage of Homo sapiens sapiens. I would agree, but I’m not convinced that, even if Genesis shows literary signs of myth, Adam and Eve were mythological or allegorical. As you seem to still make assertions but not actually address specific data points I am offering.