) came into existence, approximately: http://www.reasons.org/articles/when-di ... -adam-live
Hi phillip,Scientists refer to the mitochondrial sequence ancestral for all humanity as mitochondrial Eve. (Again, I argue that mitochondrial Eve is indeed the biblical Eve.) As of 2005, some of the initial studies indicated that mitochondrial Eve traced her origin to between 150,000 and 250,000 years ago (see Who Was Adam?). One of the most comprehensive studies compared the entire mitochondrial genome from 53 people around the world and estimated the date for mitochondrial Eve at 171,000 ± 50,000 years ago.
Knowing more about what evolution teaches does not make it true.Without any evidence that life can evolve this technical evolution talk does nothing for you really.It has never and will never be demonstrated life evolves and so it is like believing the alien conspiracy theories,bigfoot,etc except science teaches it as the truth accepted by most every scientist and everything is looked at from an evolution perspective.It is not true medicines have been produced because life evolves,the truth is medicines have been produced because life can adapt like viruses and bacteria which never evolves.neo-x wrote:The mitochondrial article is horribly wrong.
take this for example:Hi phillip,Scientists refer to the mitochondrial sequence ancestral for all humanity as mitochondrial Eve. (Again, I argue that mitochondrial Eve is indeed the biblical Eve.) As of 2005, some of the initial studies indicated that mitochondrial Eve traced her origin to between 150,000 and 250,000 years ago (see Who Was Adam?). One of the most comprehensive studies compared the entire mitochondrial genome from 53 people around the world and estimated the date for mitochondrial Eve at 171,000 ± 50,000 years ago.
Mito eve was as shifting title, it was not a single individual. so much for science at reasons.org.
the para alone:
1. fails to mention that scientists also don't refer to a single individual when referring to mito eve.
2. Mito eve, can't be biblical eve, since we have multiple mito DNA lineages in modern humans. We have more unique DNA signatures than two people. In simple words, humans have more than two unique DNA going through them, so we do know, it wasn't a couple.
Philip wrote:From Reasons.org, these are some good posts questioning and revealing some of the critical problems inherent in the typical evolutionary scenarios touted for lineage of modern humans:
http://www.reasons.org/articles/from-wh ... art-1-of-2
http://www.reasons.org/articles/from-wh ... art-2-of-2
http://www.reasons.org/articles/the-lea ... bipedalism
And according to mitochondrial DNA and Y chromosomal DNA studies, the FIRST humans (Adam & Eve
Yes, Neo, quite aware.Phillip, are of aware of the fact that Mito Adam and Eve are honorary titles and do not mean a fixed person but rather shifting titles across various MCRAs in generations?
Ok, thanks.Philip wrote:Yes, Neo, quite aware.Phillip, are of aware of the fact that Mito Adam and Eve are honorary titles and do not mean a fixed person but rather shifting titles across various MCRAs in generations?