>"The molecular clock doesn't care when the island was isolated or for how long" The rest of what you wrote is interesting (or will be once I get some sources

>"The molecular clock doesn't care when the island was isolated or for how long" The rest of what you wrote is interesting (or will be once I get some sources for your claims), but you start out with this one that blatantly disagrees with what was written in your own source. In your source it says that molecular clock depends on the assumption the island was isolated for 12,000 years. It would be great if you could: 1) Focus on that one point to clear up why you disagree with your own source, do this without writing about anything else. I am stuck on that issue right now. 2) Bring some links when referring to evidence, so I can tell what has made you believe the things you say. I am getting the sense you are well informed but not quite skeptical enough (perhaps current grad student?). The devil is in the details, as I have seen with the "isolated" island and molecular clock interdependence.