I have been reading "origin of man" accounts, by historians, archeologists, anthropologists, and Nicholas Wade's interesting Before the Dawn: Recovering the Lost History of our Ancestors. Those I have been reading lately have been secularists. Almost every one of them picks a fight with the author of Genesis. You would think modern scientists with evidence from genetics, archeology, and anthropology accumulated over centuries on five continents would pound poor Moses, with his millennia-old myths, into the rubble.
But that isn't what happens. Instead, they take some shot at Moses. If they don't miss him entirely (by misreading, as happens), a few pages later they'll make some remark that shows Moses was actually on track, and ahead of the modern scholars they want to debunk.
This example is indirect. But here is how Wade praises Charles Darwin:
"Darwin, with his usual unerring insight, rejected the idea (that humans belong to separate species) in his 1871 book The Descent of Man, arguing that there was only one human species, though divided into subspecies or races."
But Darwin's "unerring insight" also led him in that book to dismissing female intelligence:
“ . . . man attaining a higher eminence in whatever he takes up than woman can attain—whether requiring deep thought, reason or imagination, or merely the use of the senses and hands.”
Darwin's ideas about mental differences among human races also seem erring to most people, in hindsight:
"Their mental characteristics are likewise very distinct; chiefly as it would appear in their emotional, but partly in their intellectual faculties."
Wade praises Darwin, and dismisses Moses (less rudely than some others). Yet Moses figured out that humans all belong to one species, and one genealogy, 3000 years before Darwin. And he didn't make the mistake of claiming that boys are smarter than girls, or Europeans than Africans.
Darwin was undoubtedly a great scientist. But when it comes to explaining human beings, Moses is still tough to beat.