Actually, Y-chromosome Adam is neither the most recent nor the least recent man with descendants living today. (Any currently living father would qualify as the former. The latter would actually have a good claim of being the first human.) Rather, he is the most recent common male ancestor of everyone alive today. That is, everyone can trace their ancestry back to him, but not to any man who lived later. (This is not true either. To be very precise, he is the last man to carry the common ancestor of all currently surviving human Y chromosomes. There may be a more recent common male ancestor whose Y chromosome is not carried by all living males. As an extreme example, it may be that the most recent common male ancestor had only daughters.)

The situation is the same with Mitochondrial Eve, who is the most recent woman to carry the common ancestor of all surviving human mitochondria.

I agree that chuwng is usually employed to denote circle; but apparently it was not used to denote the way soldiers camp. Isa. 29:3 uses they word that allegedly means sphere (duwr):

And I will camp against thee round about, and will lay siege against thee with a mount, and I will raise forts against thee.

Since the soldiers could not camp in the shape of a sphere around the city; we have to conclude that the bible is merely ambiguous on the subject. Some apologist suggest that the Hebrews didn't created a second word for it.

The Septuagint corroborates this argument. Many Jewish scholars (tradition says seventy of them) worked to produce the Septuagint in the 3rd century CE. These Jewish scholars knew Hebrew and Koine Greek, and they did their translation work in Alexandria, Egypt, which was heavily influenced by Greek ideas at the time, including the knowledge that the Earth had a spherical shape. In Koine Greek, gyro denotes circle, compass, disc, ring, and so on, while sphaìra denoted sphere, spheroid, or ball. The Jewish scholars—despite their knowledge of the shape of the Earth, and of the Hebrew scriptures, and of the Greek language—translated chuwg in Isaiah 40.22 as gyro, rather than sphaìra, which means that they knew the word referred to a two-dimensional shape, rather than a three-dimensional one.

Some people argue, mistakenly, that Hebrew did not have a separate word for sphere and we should consider chuwg as referring to both shapes. You did not rebut that argument, which I think would strengthen your case.

Which is the hebrew word for sphere?

With that said, I have a few comments about the article that I hope you will consider implementing.

(1) Typo. "This is the 'Y-chromosome Adam', who was not necessarily the first human being but merely the most recent one who has descendants living today." This should say least recent.

(2) Ecclesiastes 1.6. You can strengthen your argument by examining the immediately preceding verse. It says that the sun hastes to the place where it arose. The word used for haste, sha'aph, literally means to inhale eagerly has the connotaton of running or moving quickly because those activities often tire the one moving, causing them to inhale eagerly to regain their composure. This connotes a geocentric view of the solar system where the sun "runs" (thus inhales eagerly) around the Earth. This establishes that the author did not have a connection with divine knowledge when he wrote 1.5, which makes 1.6 guilty by association, so to speak.

(3) Ecclesiastes 1.7. Some use this verse to support the idea of divine foreknowledge pertaining to the recirculation of water. You can discredit their interpolation easily by showing that one can reach the same conclusion in less than 60 seconds. If the sea diminishes not, the water remains; if the sea swells not, no water gets added; if water is neither added nor removed, the water must simply move about; if the water simply moves about and the stream supplies water to the sea, then the sea must, in some way, supply water to the streams; therefore, a hydrologic cycle exists. You can also tie in your rebuttal to Ecclesiastes 1.5-6 as further corroboration.

(4) Isaiah 40.22. You can strengthen your rebuttal. You correctly distinguish between circle (chuwg) and sphere (duwr). Some people argue, mistakenly, that Hebrew did not have a separate word for sphere and we should consider chuwg as referring to both shapes. You did not rebut that argument, which I think would strengthen your case. Also, you did not distinguish between Earth as a planet and earth as the ground. The verse clearly references earth as the ground, and calls it circular like a disc. You can verify this by reading Isaiah 40.22 again. It says that God stretched the heavens like a tent for people to dwell in. Tents set boundaries, rather than provide a medium like air to exist in. This references the firmament, rather than the atmosphere. Job 37.18 calls the firmament as hard as a cast metal mirror. That would set boundaries, which makes it analogous to a tent. The atmosphere is disanalogous. Further, tents are designed to rest on flat surfaces. The notion of a spherical tent makes no sense. If you think of the earth as a flat disc, as Isaiah 40.22 describes it, then you can easily think of the firmament as touching down on the edge of the flat disc, like a tent.

(5) 2 Peter 3.10. A few people offer this verse as showing divine foreknowledge of nuclear processes because it refers to elements. A quick mention of the Platonic or Aristotlean notion of elements (earth, air, fire, water) should be enough to undermine this argument.

As I said, I hope you will consider altering the article in the ways I've mentioned.

Also, I have a slightly off-topic question, if you don't mind: is the Español translation work still occurring?

Thanks for listening :)