:bravo::worship:Mod note: Posts unnecessarily bring religion into this thread, where it is neither required nor wanted, have been and will be deleted.
:bravo::worship:Mod note: Posts unnecessarily bring religion into this thread, where it is neither required nor wanted, have been and will be deleted.
There's no physical evidence to prove this.Within our species, we all descended from Y-chromosomal Adam and Mitochondrial Eve. I understand evolution as a variation of a population, from this I'd think we all should have descended from several ancestors of our species, but how come we only descended from two? Why did only these 2 survive?
Are there other species with only one male and one female common ancestors too?
You think that the whole theory is not religious in origin?Mod note: Posts unnecessarily bring religion into this thread, where it is neither required nor wanted, have been and will be deleted.
The O.P. title may be; Mitochondrial Eve is not.You think that the whole theory is not religious in origin?
So you have the skeletal remains of this mysterious woman from whose bones a set of mtDNA can be lifted conforming exactly, in every detail and in perfect sequence to that predicted by the computer algorithm?The O.P. title may be; Mitochondrial Eve is not.
So you have the skeletal remains of this mysterious woman from whose bones a set of mtDNA can be lifted conforming exactly, in every detail and in perfect sequence to that predicted by the computer algorithm?
That's not what the investigators say. For example:There's no physical evidence to prove this.
That's not what they say:The mtDNA Eve hypothesis is based upon a prediction done with a computer algorithm built around the observable behavior of mitochondrial DNA.
By contrast they say:It assumes that mtDNA behaves in a manner that is perfectly predictable over thousands of years and that we have infallible knowledge of the mechanism of mtDNA inheritance and how it alters across species boundaries (when one species is 'transforming' into another).
What does "exact date" have to do with anything? Given that there are studies that gather best evidence, how is the finding relegated to "alleged phenomena" instead of "best answer"?All these things are open to question and are why they can't put an exact date on this alleged phenomena.
You mean science is propping up genetics? Or what?As soon as scientific theories start propping up the status quo alarm bells should start ringing.
“
Originally Posted by wellwisher
Not too long ago, it was taboo for different races to interbreed even though both had the same DNA and could breed.
”
There has never been any such time, for the human species overall.
All assertions that confuse human genetics with sociological races are hopelessly screwed up anyway.
After reading the above paper I think I was unfair in remarking that they (other animules) would have needed a #2 pencil (to give their demographics ). There was a statement that rodent lineage has been traced back 100-200 generations, something like that.Are there other species with only one male and one female common ancestors too?
So that's a no then?No, but you're close.
I have her Mitochondria. Which is even better.
I don't know how much you remember from High School Biology class...
But Mitochondria have their own DNA, circular, like a plasmid; have their own ribosomes and they make their own proteins.
Called the power plant of the animal cell, the animal cell and the mitochondria work in unison to survive and function.
But it's that they have DNA that is where Mitochondrial eve comes in.
And you can see, a living cell, within our cells, with it's own DNA is much more accessible and viable than a bag o' bones.
I'm anticipating your next question deals with Genetics and how to trace lineage using DNA...
Hi GeoffP.
I'm wanting to flush out the underlying objection. These folks don't seem to me to be overstating anything. In fact, I was impressed that they came up with what seems to be a feasible calibration method. I thought they were being balanced when they talked about applying physical evidence within the "modeling framework". Obviously modeling is required. They even go into some depth about all the models for mtDNA mutation profiles and how they addressed that. My thrust here is to find out if there's something newer to discount this, if that was recidivist's reason for discounting it.
You are of course right. It's algorithm based. But from what I gather, it's a very smart model. And with over 2k mtDNA samples to start with, it may have been one of the better sourced models than any of its kind way back in 2009 when they published.
"As an evolutionary geneticist, to me this seemed patently obvious – given a single origin of life from which all living things on this planet are descended, then it has to be the case that the variation in any gene traces back to a single ancestor at some point in the past."
- Mark Stoneking (one of the original researchers of mtDNA Eve).
Humans are remarkably alike, once we get past our seven or so genes that influence skin pigmentation and 100 or so genes that help model the shapes of our faces, noses, eyes out of 20,000+ total. I tell my students they should all celebrate black history month, since they are all Africans genetically.
- Rebecca Cain (another original researcher)
You and I have different sources. Mine says no such thing, just that they figured out how to calibrate the data.He's actually based his entire theory on a belief, without any physical evidence of the creature he is claiming exists.
Quite unbelievable.Humans are remarkably alike, once we get past our seven or so genes that influence skin pigmentation and 100 or so genes that help model the shapes of our faces, noses, eyes out of 20,000+ total. I tell my students they should all celebrate black history month, since they are all Africans genetically.
- Rebecca Cain
I think they're seeing what they want to see, as one can find any pattern in the clouds if one looks for it. It's how the mind deals with fear, especially that of differences in a society obsessed with sweeping them under the carpet and eventually eradicating them.You think mtDNA is not evidence of anything, that whatever geneticists have to say about it should be buried under a rock and forgotten?
You mean where I asked for physical evidence? Shouldn't you have assumed I'm actually a scientist? Oh no, wait, you've clearly invested more in this subject than simple scientific curiosity. So much sensitivity on an issue which in any other area of science would have simply been a routine matter of bring forward the empirical evidence to support the hypothesis. In this case there doesn't seem to be any.What's to believe. Talk about evidence. I assume from your remark you are not a pure black African.
Wow, we've already moved on to deciding who is and isn't human. I guess you, as a white liberal, are in a position to do that?In that case you can have your DNA tested to see if you carry the full 3% Neanderthal genome as well. You're not only descended from Africans, you aren't even 100% human (Homo sapiens sapiens).
Oh dear, not only have you smashed all records for breaking Godwin's Law, you've exposed the emotional roots of your position. The need for revenge is palpable.That's right: the only 100% humans on Earth are all black. Hitler was right, there was a pure race, he just had the wrong one in mind.
It seems that it is you that is not happy, hence the emotionally laden arguments to compensate for a nature in which you feel you've been unfairly treated.Is that your gripe? You're not happy with your own DNA? In that case, trying to bury the evidence won't reconfigure your chemistry.
Ok so all of the geneticists are wrong because you say so. Any other part of the library you want burned?I think they're seeing what they want to see, as one can find any pattern in the clouds if one looks for it. It's how the mind deals with fear, especially that of differences in a society obsessed with sweeping them under the carpet and eventually eradicating them.
Had you said something scientific, sure.You mean where I asked for physical evidence? Shouldn't you have assumed I'm actually a scientist?
I took a moment to read the study, only because I was interested to hear what new evidence you'd found against it. And you?Oh no, wait, you've clearly invested more in this subject than simple scientific curiosity.
You would have to reference the actual work that was done to address the actual empirical evidence that was used, at which time you would notice that what they actually said was not what you say they said.So much sensitivity on an issue which in any other area of science would have simply been a routine matter of bring forward the empirical evidence to support the hypothesis.
Reading, you mean. You aren't reading the studies.In this case there doesn't seem to be any.
Wasn't my choice. Blame it on love. Inter-species, that is. (Sub species actually). Wait, I assumed too much, that your scientific curiosity kept you pinned to the news as this story was making headlines.Wow, we've already moved on to deciding who is and isn't human.
You're the one who played the ancestry card. I'm in a position to read, so I did. None of what you said correlated with what the authors* said.I guess you, as a white liberal, are in a position to do that?
Hitler is synonymous with all things pathological, particularly the Holocaust. The Devil is an emblem of religious mythology exported from Persia sometime after the conquest of Alexander ~300 BCE and before the Jewish uprising against Rome ~70 AD.Let me guess, in your mind Hitler is synonymous with the Devil?
There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
You appear to have deteriorated from your notion of "races" refusing to interbreed, to claiming that the nations of last century Europe did not interbreed.wellwisher said:If you look at the modern European Union, this was not always the case. Say fifty years ago there was much more nationalism. Although these human cultures could physically interbreed, due to human DNA, the mind would override natural instinct, since the long term implications for the parents and offspring of interbreeding would not be favorable, even if the inner ape find pleasure in the short term.