Ofcourse mathematically you can go from a single breeding pair to 7 billion in less than 2000 years if each fertile woman of breeding age (especially at the start!) had 8 or more kids each. (Based on death rates and average female fertility rates etc over that time.)

But numerous studies showing of generations of intense inscestious relationships (say the first 5 generations or so) would lead to crippling dna defects that would of doomed the entire human race to die out in the first 100 years or so.

I do not get creationist/absolutionist: they say they do not want to think that a chimp is our distant distant relative, but they have no problem with with a grandparent going back a mere 300 generations, (instead of potentially millions of generations for a chimp relative,) to have been the result of a sister and a brother, and then had more babies (with at best!) a first cousin, which in turn had babies (at best!) with a 2nd cousin as their lineage.

Creationist basically say: I would rather my lineage to come from my uncle also being my father, my aunt also being my mother. Rather than: a million generations ago a chimp carries a common ancestral pool as I do where neither the chimp nor the human was even recognizable as a chimp or a human, (that evolved later over thousands/millions of generations.)

Perhaps not surprisingly most family trees depicting adam and eve do not show adam and eve's kids paring off to have new kids. Instead saying stuff like "begot" and saying the family on average lived for ~900 years.

These absolutist probably do what they do best and not think much about it. Even if they try to say they have a big problem with chimps and bonobos etc are our very distant cousins separated by millions of generations.