I find that hard to believe- 2000 years, maybe on a theoretical level it could happen- assuming everyone lived long enough to procreate. I have done detailed dna testing and I have very few matches- a 3-4 marker mismatch would be about 2000 years- most of my hits are more on the order of over 5000 years, based on Ydna rates of change.
Mitochondrial Eve for dummies
by bohm 29 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Goshawk
If memory serves that 50--70 thousand years ago would be in line with a huge volcanic eruption of Toba of Indonesia.
-
Gerard
BULL SHIT. Scientific evidence indicates that mitochondria may be of bacterial origin. The mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is provided at conception from the mother's ovum, not from the sperm cell, therefore the mtDNA is of female ancestry.
If some researcher coinded the word "Eve" it was not in the biblical context of 'creation' but as a statement of it being solely of female ancestry in humans. Comprende?
-
hooberus
Fourth, The reason scientists care about this is that one can use these observation together with statistics and genetics to get an idea about how man evolved. What we find is that the ME lived about 200'000 years ago, . . .
The problem with this is that such estimates generally are calculated based on the assumption of evolution to begin with- hence they are not independant evidence against the biblical timeline. They usually start with the assumption of human and chip common ancesty, and then based on this (as well as other evo assumptions) they generate an "age estimate", which internet evolutionists use as "evidence" against the Bible's account.
-
hooberus
From another thread here, on how evolutionists calculate such dates:
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/friends/46578/6/DNA-and-Mans-origin
To estimate the time when the most recent ancestral sequence common to the Neandertal and modern human mtDNA sequences existed, we used an estimated divergence date between humans and chimpanzees of 4–5 million years ago and corrected the observed sequence differences for multiple substitutions at the same nucleotide site. This yielded a date of 550,000 to 690,000 years before present for the divergence of the Neandertal mtDNA and contemporary human mtDNAs. When the age of the modern human mtDNA ancestor is estimated using the same procedure, a date of 120,000 to 150,000 years is obtained, in agreement with previous estimates. Although these dates rely on the calibration point of the chimpanzee-human divergence and have errors of unknown magnitude associated with them, they indicate that the age of the common ancestor of the Neandertal sequence and modern human sequences is about four times greater than that of the common ancestor of modern human mtDNAs.39
-
cameo-d
In human genetics, Haplogroup V is a human mitochondrial DNA.
Velda (name meaning "renowned ruler") is the originator of this mtDNA haplogroup V. It is believed to have originated approx. 12,000 years ago, possibly in Iberia.
------------------------------------
quote:
After collecting thousands of DNA samples from across Europe, Sykes fit the sequences into a scheme to show their evolutionary relationship to one another. He found seven clusters (haplogroups or clades) that frame the population of Europe. Six of the seven were older than ten thousand years. Historians had previously believed that agriculturalists overwhelmed the last of the hunter-gatherers on the European landscape after the last Ice Age. But the mitochondrial DNA showed otherwise. It provided evidence that most of Europe is populated by people whose ancestors endured the last Ice Age.
----------------------------
-
bohm
hooberus: Read the wikipedia page and some additional material. Which assumptions are you not happy with? That mutations occur? That mutations may be passed on from mother to daughter? That we did not assume a periode of rapid, unexplainable, mutation right after noahs ark? I am curious.
-
bohm
hooberus: Just to specify. I simply dont see what common ancestery has to do with the mithocondrial eve. Can you elaborate on this?
-
hooberus
hooberus: Just to specify. I simply dont see what common ancestery has to do with the mithocondrial eve. Can you elaborate on this?
The assumption of common ancestry (of humans and chimps) is frequently used by evolutionists as a baseline factor in their calculations for estimating mtDNA mutation rates. There are numerous other assumptions as well, however if you study my previous post and links you will find documention on this.
-
Midget-Sasquatch
hooberus
Using the human-chimp divergence and the amount of genetic differences between them isn't the only way to get an estimate for the mit DNA mutation rate. I'm not sure if you know this or are just ignoring data that doesn't completely side with your own view.
You can freely read an early paper that also spoke about Mit Eve. Nature325, 31 - 36 (1 January 1987) .
Another way they calculated an average mutation rate for mitochondrial dna was by looking at the genetic data of people (like the Aborigines of Australia) whose ancestors migrated to an area at reasonably well known points in time. So even if we put the human-chimp divergence point method aside, they can get an estimate for the rate.
Lets assume the rate from this method is faster (even ten times faster). It would still mean humans have been here longer than the 6,000 or 7,000 years believed by creationists who adhere to a literal reading of Genesis.