From the results of early DNA studies in the late 1980s and early ’90s, scientists argued that anatomically modern humans evolved in Africa, and then expanded into Asia, Oceania, and Europe, beginning about 60,000 years ago. The idea was that modern humans colonized the rest of the world in a succession of small founding groups–each one a tiny sampling of the total modern human gene pool. These small, isolated groups settled new territory and replaced the archaic humans that lived there. As a result, humans in different parts of the world today have their own distinctive DNA signature, consisting of the genetic quirks of their ancestors who first settled the area, as well as the genetic adaptations to the local environment that evolved later.
This view of human history, called the “serial founder effect model,” has big implications for our understanding of how we came to be who we are. Most importantly, under this model, genetic differences between geographically separated human populations reflect deep branchings in the human family tree, branches that go back tens of thousands of years. It also declares that people have evolutionary adaptations that are matched to their geographical area, such as lighter skin in Asians and Europeans or high altitude tolerance among Andeans and Tibetans. With a few exceptions, such as the genetic mixing after Europeans colonized the Americas, our geography reflects our deep ancestry.
Well, it’s time to scrap this picture of human history…
h/t Kevin B
The migration out of Africa did indeed happen, but it happened in waves. 800,000 yrs ago approx. Neanderthals migrated from Africa and spread out over Europe and Asia. 700,000 yrs later, after many ice ages and other geographical isolators, another version migrated from Africa called humans. They met with and mingled with the Neanderthals and even bred with them. The Neanderthals were never wiped out, they were assimilated into the collective. Every human upon this planet now has traces of the same Neanderthal DNA, save for the people of Africa. There is very little evidence of Neanderthal DNA in most African cultures. In recent research, the previous ideas of Neanderthals being grunting cavemen and nothing more has been proven to be false. The Neanderthals have been found to have been painters, craftsmen, hunters and had a crude spoken language. They had amazing immune systems and were much hardier than the migrating humans. They had adapted very well to the environment and may well have been the ones to assist the new migrating humans who were unprepared for their new world. Exciting stuff.
Who are you going to believe?
Genesis2:7 “And the lord God formed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life., and man became a living soul”
LOL, all speculation extrapolated from a tooth or small piece of bone.
http://scienceagainstevolution.info/v18i12f.htm
I thought National Geographic had settled this with the Genographic project. They stated emphatically that the ‘serial founder effect model’ was the final word on the topic.
Case closed.
thump thump thump
blue, did you know that TIME has not yet been proven to exist. Time may just be an imaginary thing, just like your genesis nonsense!!!
Science is never settled.
It is widely accepted that Neanderthal was a very well adapted to cold weather. His body was better adapted for using thrusting weapons, than modern humans, but was ill suited for throwing weapons while Cro Magnon was. Both indications of natural selection influenced by tools/technology. So far nothing contradicts that.
Cro Magnon is firmly accepted as a warm weather race, probably dark skinned, with an upper body well suited to throwing weapons.
Fossil remains and DNA indicate that Neanderthal had a high incidence of red hair and was light skinned.
The logical result, seldom mentioned, is that pale skinned, blond/red headed Europeans have probably inherited this trait from Neanderthal.
Then there is that stubborn rejection of Solutrean folk in North America prior to Asians migrating through Beringia.
Then there was that near global mega-lithic period followed by a world wide fad of pyramid building…..
Archaeology has traced the development of skis/snow-shoes in Scandinavia spreading slowly east into North America. This technology opened up the cold interiors of the continents to human occupation.
Yeah well, Alfred Wengener was ridiculed for his continental drift theory.
In the fullness of time we shall find other matters to reject, accept and/or debate.
Or like yours, NME666. How about we just say that the science isn’t settled? And as French physicist and philosopher of science Bernard d’Espagnat famously opined…..
“There must exist, beyond mere appearances … a ‘veiled reality’ that science does not describe but only glimpses uncertainly. In turn, contrary to those who claim that matter is the only reality, the possibility that other means, including spirituality, may also provide a window on ultimate reality cannot be ruled out, even by cogent scientific arguments.”
It’s always entertaining to see those who have themselves so invested in theories that shape their view of existence start to scramble when their views are challenged.
And I have to say that so much is unknown that you seem to be so sure of your own position. Weird.
We need to speak with Justin Trudeau,the space between his ears aside, he has mentioned time and space as if he has some conception of the phenomenon.
TIME exists. I saw a copy of it at my doctor’s office just like week.
Time exists because man invented it. Time is relative,for sure,but we determined how long it takes to be a second,a minute,an hour, etc. Barring outside influences it takes the same period for the earth to complete an orbit around the sun which we decided to name a year. Time is a way for humans to track our activities,such as the 4 min. mile,60 mph, Hiroshima was 69 yr. ago, etc.
It must be a philosophical or theoretical physics thing that questions this. Keep it simple, there are better things to worry about.
Why would I believe a document stitched together by a group of cleric-politicians at the Nicene Council?
We have to rethink time and space.
So now it is unsettled which is the oldest profession—traveling salesmen?
The DNA trail suggests a degree of gene mixing between populations. This is hardly a blockbuster. The current best theory in the archeology of human DNA will keep revising. This development is somewhat like quantum physics refining Newtownian physics. For me, still, the most amazing adaptation is the one for adult lactose tolerance, which seems to have arisen independently in Eurasian populations (Bulgarians, Mongols, Massai). Or perhaps it was a neolithic milkman whose spread the gene.
It is an easy out to dismiss simple answers to what one perceives to be a complex question.
Wise men are usually in doubt and fools always dam sure of themselves!
Be thankful …they combed thru thousands of documents for you so you wouldn’t have to.
Those documents are still around btw…check them out.
“Who are you going to believe?
Genesis2:7 “And the lord God formed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life., and man became a living soul””
I will believe what the evidence shows me. My mind is a logical one, and faith is the opposite of logic. Faith is belief in the absence of proof, well son I need proof!
The fossil record is overwhelming, and no Noahs mythical flood didn’t create it.
Alan, Noah’s flood may not be entirely mythical. There is good evidence that the Black Sea was a previously a smaller freshwater lake and that there was an earthquake that sent the Mediterranean Sea flooding into the lake, greatly expanding it and converting into a saltwater sea. There is all sorts of archeological evidence of former settlements on the shore of the primordial freshwater lake that are now on the floor of the Black Sea.
“I will believe what the evidence shows me”. And so I presume you will change your beliefs as evidence changes?
Your contention that faith is the opposite of logic is simply you saying so, but other than that the comment carries no weight.
The fossil record (as it currently exists) is hardly overwhelming and nowhere near complete and is just waiting to collapse with one new discovery at any time.
Even Darwin conceded that the fossil record was the weakest part of his theory.
Because they were smarter than contemporary politicians.
Alan. Where is the great delta of the Colorado river?
Why would you believe ANY document put out by allegedly reputable scientists?
Genesis is more philosophical than scientific. Even Saint Augustine knew that.
Moving onto the science of the matter….
Just as the AGW scam was pushed without evidence, so was the fossil record.
Allan I see proof everyday…the human body is an amazing piece of science…absolutes are what make us tick. I am reminded daily that the human heart alone is very specific in form and performance. Without one simple element (Oxygen, or potassium, or sodium or calcium) the tiniest heart muscle cell will not function.
It could not have ‘evolved’ over time to perform so specifically.
Science proves creation.
Geez, we’re restless b*ggers!
All too often the capabilities of the prehistoric are underestimated. When it comes to domestication of
plants and animals, the major steps were all taken in prehistoric times, for instance.
They were still politicians, and they edited Bluetech’s “thousands of documents” for political purposes. God had nothing to do with it.
It’s the socialist making stuff up again. We can only guess what this will lead to … Perhap that negros are superior beings … Well we already know that … Perhaps that caucasians are freaks of nature and need to be gotten rid of …. No wait … Jews aren’t really human … Etc. Don’t underestimate the evil these gentile thugs are up to.
You have proof?
Or are you struggling with who you are going to believe?
Darwin and gang were the Al Gore and Suzuki of the day.
Approximately 8000 years ago during the Holocene optimum, the earth was much warmer than today for almost 1000 years. Glacial remnants from the last ice age which had persisted in mountains melted significantly and evidence of widespread flooding is found in all parts of the globe. Nearly all ancient people’s legends have a tale of the Great Flood.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/11/17/climate-and-human-civilization-over-the-last-18000-years/
This map shows human migration based on DNA evidence
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dymaxion_map#mediaviewer/File:Map-of-human-migrations.jpg
And Athanasius and his crew were the equivalent of the Mafia. Or the KGB, take your pick.
‘Time,is what keeps everything from happening at once.’ Ray Cummings – 1922
bluetech – perhaps if you put the Genesis quote in simpler terms they’d understand. If you give a concept like that to a near stone aged tribe, they’ll simplify it to what we read in Genesis.
“Advanced life could not develop until after several generations of stars and supernovae had produced enough heavy elements to support it. Only once sufficient quantities of this stardust were available could sentient life begin.” Think that the Israelites got the order of creation right by accident? I don’t have enough faith to think that they could.
Speculation and assumption…hmmm…just like the theory of AGW.
Nope, I don’t have enough faith to believe in CAGW either. Some things are just too unlikely to occur by chance.
I am curious though, which part of what I said do you think is speculation? Is it the need for heavier elements to support brain chemistry, or is it whether the amazing balance between the fundamental forces that allows for life in the first place happened by chance?
“Science proves creation.”
Then explain vestigial organs. There is no proof to your statement. This only started in the 80s when religious nutjobs wanted to push creationism into schools. Hence “intelligent design”.
Saying “oh it’s too complicated for me to understand, so it must be created” is weak.
Heh, you’re arguing against yourself, vestigial organs aren’t evidence that DNA gains new information, they are evidence that DNA loses information.
Devolution, rather than evolution.
These are the sorts of arguments over beliefs that start wars.
It’s the “My God is better then your God” syndrome.
I’ve got to disagree with you about this one John. People being people is what starts wars. There are good folks and evil folks within all churches just as there are good folks and evil folks who are agnostic and atheist. If someone who is extremely vain and selfish becomes leader of a group, look for trouble to come from it regardless of the original nature of the group.
Yes…dweebs like Sir Isaac Newton and his contemporary’s were so easily influenced by those ’80’s people…
Oh, wait…what ’80’s’ were you referring to?
The wars of the 20th century took more lives than were lost in all of human history and none of them were religious wars. They were geo-political and the issues were either nationalism or the clash of humanism’s most poisonous forms, communism and socialism. Those who suffered the most then and now were Jews and Christians, but none of those wars were the result of a “My God is better than your God” syndrome.
I am certainly no apologist for tyrannical idealism, whether in the form of communism, socialism or otherwise. Nonetheless, one has to compare apples to apples. It is more meaningful to compare percentage of populations killed by war. Further, one has to make some meaningful comparison of the killing technologies and rates of travel. The American Civil War, for example, had massive casualties because of advances in gun technology during the war, creating a mismatch of tactics resulting in high casualty slaughter.
None of this is to take a position whether the 30 years war was or was not worse than the Cold War, or the Inquisition was or was not worse than the internal purges in the Stalin’s Soviet Union or Mao’s China. My only point is that raw numbers are misleading.
The issue of religion and war is topical lately because as Mark Steyn and others have noted (before the Ukraine war), all of the wars in the world involved Muslim countries.
Adaptation is not evolution. All that humans are is already in our genes. Its the environment, with diet & other external forces that set off these genes. To more viably live in said environments. WE don’t really have a clue how extended mass immigration was in ancient times. But we know modern patterns which are wide spread today or even in Roman times.
“The fossil record (as it currently exists) is hardly overwhelming and nowhere near complete and is just waiting to collapse with one new discovery at any time.”
That makes it falsifiable and thus scientific. All science is by definition is falsifiable. Scientific theory never reaches the state of absolute fact; it ever subject to testing against observation. In contrast,religious belief is not falsifiable. Intelligent design / creationism is not falsifiable and thus is not science. Evolution is a crude model and a work in progress attempting to explain the complexity of life on Earth. So a fossil discovery that did not fit the current theory would not be disastrous, it would be scientifically exciting and stimulating.
Did you even read my post, or the one I was replying to?
John Galt said, These are the sorts of arguments over beliefs that start wars. It’s the “My God is better then your God” syndrome.
To which I replied…
The wars of the 20th century took more lives than were lost in all of human history and none of them were religious wars. They were geo-political and the issues were either nationalism or the clash of humanism’s most poisonous forms, communism and socialism. Those who suffered the most then and now were Jews and Christians, but none of those wars were the result of a “My God is better than your God” syndrome.
If you would like to respond to my post, which referenced the wars of the 20th century (we are now in the 21st century) please give it a go. Don’t expect me to chase after ‘percentages of populations’ or ‘mismatches in tactics’ or anything Mark Steyn said that does not apply to John Galt’s post or my reply.
With all due respect, of course…
It is interesting to note that the Inuit(Thule), unquestionably warlike, denoted their elites as “hunters”.
The more socially organized (civilized?) plains tribes denoted their elites as “warriors”.
War, as opposed to simple raids, can be associated with the rise of agriculture and “civilization”…like organized religion.
Much like any view/opinion of the distant past, this is speculation.