Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9072 total)
82 online now:
kjsimons (1 member, 81 visitors)
Newest Member: FossilDiscovery
Post Volume: Total: 893,216 Year: 4,328/6,534 Month: 542/900 Week: 66/182 Day: 38/16 Hour: 0/2

Announcements: Security Update Coming Soon


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Common Ancestor?
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3056 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 196 of 341 (693375)
03-14-2013 6:17 PM


...making up half truths is actuallytelling lies...
Some people try to say Y-chromosomal Adam lived 142,000 years ago by ignoring that estimate is alway a range,.e.; Y-Chromosome Adam lived between 60,000 and 142,000 years ago.

"DNA studies had estimated that Y-chromosomal Adam lived between 60,000 and 142,000 years ago."

This still is an interesting time frame, because Genesis has the three "sons" of Noah born 100,000 years before the flood, that lasted 40,000 years is we agree that a day is/can mean a thousand years in the bible.

This estimate bring Noah closer to Mitochondria Eve who was the mother that would correspond to the birth (evolution) of the three racial stocks of Modern man, Ham, Japeth, and Shem.

But these tike frames are supportive of the appearance of Modern Homo sapiens, which DOES also start 150,000- 200,000 years.

Recent new genetic evidence has uncovered a Y-chromosome in a very select and special group of men, (Africans), which sets the Noah species back way farther than his three "sons," as we ought expect.
It tells us that Naoh and his wife, misnomered as "eve," were not Modern Homo sapiens, but some earlier species very akin to us.
The Y-chromosome for Noah corresponds to his appearance 338,000 years ago!

This ancient individual passed down his genetic legacy from father to son over 11,000 generations. In fact, Albert’s ancestor was so old he was probably a member of a different human species to us.

Albert’s ancestor is our ancestor too. In human genetics, Y-chromosomal Adam is the name given to the most recent common ancestor (MRCA) from whom all living people are descended through the male lines of their family tree. Up to now, DNA studies had estimated that Y-chromosomal Adam lived between 60,000 and 142,000 years ago. The discovery that the Y-chromosome of Albert Perry’s ancestor diverged around a staggering 338,000 years ago means that that the Y-chromosomal Adam title now goes to him.

http://www.abroadintheyard.com/...am-suddenly-got-much-older


Replies to this message:
 Message 197 by Eli, posted 03-14-2013 6:39 PM kofh2u has replied

  
Eli
Member (Idle past 2727 days)
Posts: 274
Joined: 08-24-2012


Message 197 of 341 (693378)
03-14-2013 6:39 PM
Reply to: Message 196 by kofh2u
03-14-2013 6:17 PM


Re: ...making up half truths is actuallytelling lies...

Some people try to say Y-chromosomal Adam lived 142,000 years ago by ignoring that estimate is alway a range,.e.; Y-Chromosome Adam lived between 60,000 and 142,000 years ago.
"DNA studies had estimated that Y-chromosomal Adam lived between 60,000 and 142,000 years ago."

40,000 years ago does not fall within that range. It isn't even remotely near one of the extremes. You are correct in that making up half truths is actually telling lies. Even more is when you outright claim that y chromosome Adam lived 40,000 years ago, which is in no estimate or approximation whatsoever.

Everything else you claimed was a non sequitor. You claimed Y-Adam lived 40,000 years ago. You were corrected. Stop claiming it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by kofh2u, posted 03-14-2013 6:17 PM kofh2u has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 199 by kofh2u, posted 03-14-2013 9:46 PM Eli has replied

  
Just being real
Member (Idle past 3172 days)
Posts: 369
Joined: 08-26-2010


Message 198 of 341 (693392)
03-14-2013 9:41 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Dr Jack
08-17-2010 4:36 PM


RE--But, leaving that aside, why should it call it into question? Humans aren't special; we're just another species. There's no reason that a human/chimp common ancestor should be considered more important evidence for the ToE than the hippo/whale common ancestor.--

I was wondering, since creation also predicts that many organisms would share similar features, what evidence is there for common ancestory that does not rely on the similarity argument? Otherwise how can we know which view is the correct one?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Dr Jack, posted 08-17-2010 4:36 PM Dr Jack has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 200 by kofh2u, posted 03-14-2013 9:58 PM Just being real has replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3056 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 199 of 341 (693394)
03-14-2013 9:46 PM
Reply to: Message 197 by Eli
03-14-2013 6:39 PM


Re: ...making up half truths is actually telling lies...
So for people who CAN understand the correspondence between one man who was a common ancestor for all people living today, we can see that the Noah story dove tails perfectly with the facts.

1) Noah and this mitochondria "eve," lived 100 thousand years before the forty thousand year flood started. That would identify that common ancestor who we genetic think lived 142,000 years ago with Noah, and hence us.

2) The forty thousand year flood or duration of extinctions, ended and the agricultural Age of 10,000 years ago began,
This again supports the range for a common ancestor hypothesized by Science and mentioned by Genesis:

19 These are the three sons of Noah: and of them was the whole earth overspread.

20 And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard:

3) Verse 19 above is supported by the findings of science in that during that 40 thousand years modern man of three racial stocks poured in the Americas, and every land on the bglobe, to the tops of the mountains.

Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by Eli, posted 03-14-2013 6:39 PM Eli has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 204 by Eli, posted 03-15-2013 11:08 AM kofh2u has taken no action
 Message 206 by Taq, posted 03-15-2013 1:04 PM kofh2u has replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3056 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 200 of 341 (693395)
03-14-2013 9:58 PM
Reply to: Message 198 by Just being real
03-14-2013 9:41 PM


genetic again is the reason we see common ancestors and ToE

RE--But, leaving that aside, why should it call it into question? Humans aren't special; we're just another species. There's no reason that a human/chimp common ancestor should be considered more important evidence for the ToE than the hippo/whale common ancestor.--
I was wondering, since creation also predicts that many organisms would share similar

The reason we see ToE as indicated by genetics is that two of the normal 24 Ape chromosomes can be seen to have fused together in man who has only 23 chromosomes.

This means that a new creature was evolved by an Act-of-God about 7 million years ago.
Then we have this genetic trail of evidence that follows down the 22 names of species (see Gen 5:2) which are the 22 now extinct humans which science agrees did exist until the great "flood" Out-of-Africa.

After that extinction, 40,000 years ago, all other kinds of humanoids except those with the Y-chromosome of Noah disappeared.

Modern Homo sapiens is the only kind of human left, and he carries evidence of having sexual relations with the "daughters of another kind of man," some think was Neanderthal man.

All this is parallel information found in Genesis.

My question to you is why don't you use this amazing analogy as evidence FOR the Bible instead of seeking to deny the science????


This message is a reply to:
 Message 198 by Just being real, posted 03-14-2013 9:41 PM Just being real has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 201 by Coyote, posted 03-14-2013 10:17 PM kofh2u has taken no action
 Message 202 by Just being real, posted 03-15-2013 2:40 AM kofh2u has taken no action

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 1342 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 201 of 341 (693400)
03-14-2013 10:17 PM
Reply to: Message 200 by kofh2u
03-14-2013 9:58 PM


Re: genetic again is the reason we see common ancestors and ToE
I just have to ask: Where do you get this wretched stuff?

You have so many facts and dates wrong, yet you're peddling this stuff wholesale.

Are you making all this up yourself, or is there some website full of it out there somewhere?


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein

How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein

It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers


This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by kofh2u, posted 03-14-2013 9:58 PM kofh2u has taken no action

  
Just being real
Member (Idle past 3172 days)
Posts: 369
Joined: 08-26-2010


Message 202 of 341 (693423)
03-15-2013 2:40 AM
Reply to: Message 200 by kofh2u
03-14-2013 9:58 PM


Re: genetic again is the reason we see common ancestors and ToE
RE--The reason we see ToE as indicated by genetics is that two of the normal 24 Ape chromosomes can be seen to have fused together in man who has only 23 chromosomes.--

You'll have to forgive me here as I'm not familiar with all the jargon and acronyms, so I would ask that you please explain what "ToE" stands for. Next I would ask again that you explain (apart from using any and all similarity arguments) how you can be sure that humans were not "created" with the 23 chromosomes as is? How do you "know" that two evolved into one fused one?

RE--This means that a new creature was evolved by an Act-of-God about 7 million years ago.--

Is this an assumption or is it something we "know"? If it is something we know then please explain how... apart from use of similarity arguments?

RE--Then we have this genetic trail of evidence that follows down the 22 names of species--

All I see is more "similarity arguments." Let me put it this way. Suppose I asked you to design just one thousand different modes of transportation. Do you think you could do it without a single similar feature in any? Or as a designer would you find that wheels are pretty handy? That wings work best when they contain a certain structures? Or that engines and motors require certain fundamental similarity? My point of course is that a "creator" would have found that certain similar features work best to function within this type of biosphere. Therefore creationists predict that life would all contain a good many similarities, from structure right down to genetic information. But it is not our similarities that interest me. It is our differences that are truly intriguing. Just a small 2 percent or so difference in our DNA can be all that is needed to be the difference between a chimp and a man.

RE--After that extinction, 40,000 years ago, all other kinds of humanoids except those with the Y-chromosome of Noah disappeared.--

Lol. Okay, so how do you know this? Do we have some 40,000 year old intact human DNA to compare to human? And if so how do we know that's its true age?

RE--My question to you is why don't you use this amazing analogy as evidence FOR the Bible instead of seeking to deny the science?--

Where did I deny it? I'm merely questioning it. And what about the Genesis account tells you it is merely an "analogy"?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by kofh2u, posted 03-14-2013 9:58 PM kofh2u has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 203 by onifre, posted 03-15-2013 10:36 AM Just being real has replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2187 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 203 of 341 (693433)
03-15-2013 10:36 AM
Reply to: Message 202 by Just being real
03-15-2013 2:40 AM


Re: genetic again is the reason we see common ancestors and ToE
Is this an assumption or is it something we "know"? If it is something we know then please explain how... apart from use of similarity arguments?

Something we know.

I assume you've graduated high school. It's a shame that you don't already know the history of hominid/chimp biology.

Do we have some 40,000 year old intact human DNA to compare to human?

Yes we do: 40,000 year old DNA

And if so how do we know that's its true age?

By the use of dating methods.

I'm merely questioning it.

You're questioning of it is terrible. It's like that of a kid who keeps asking "but why" but never getting anywhere with the answers.

- Oni


This message is a reply to:
 Message 202 by Just being real, posted 03-15-2013 2:40 AM Just being real has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 205 by Just being real, posted 03-15-2013 12:55 PM onifre has replied

  
Eli
Member (Idle past 2727 days)
Posts: 274
Joined: 08-24-2012


(1)
Message 204 of 341 (693439)
03-15-2013 11:08 AM
Reply to: Message 199 by kofh2u
03-14-2013 9:46 PM


Re: ...making up half truths is actually telling lies...
1) Noah and this mitochondria "eve," lived 100 thousand years before the forty thousand year flood started. That would identify that common ancestor who we genetic think lived 142,000 years ago with Noah, and hence us.

Y-Adam and Mito Eve were not contempoaries. They were seperated by tens of thousands of years. There is no aspect of their relationship that would justify you referring to them as husband and wife.

More like great great great great great great great great great grandma.

And again, there was no "40,000 year flood."

2) The forty thousand year flood or duration of extinctions, ended and the agricultural Age of 10,000 years ago began,
This again supports the range for a common ancestor hypothesized by Science and mentioned by Genesis:

No, there was no 40,000 year flood. Even if there were a "40,000 year flood" it would speak nothing of genetics specifically, let alone point to a common ancestor.

Are you aware that every conclusion you draw is a complete non sequitor from the data, even when it is false data that you make up, it still does not lead to the conclusion that you arrive at?

3) Verse 19 above is supported by the findings of science in that during that 40 thousand years modern man of three racial stocks poured in the Americas, and every land on the bglobe, to the tops of the mountains.

That isn't a finding of science. You are still making things up.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 199 by kofh2u, posted 03-14-2013 9:46 PM kofh2u has taken no action

  
Just being real
Member (Idle past 3172 days)
Posts: 369
Joined: 08-26-2010


Message 205 of 341 (693447)
03-15-2013 12:55 PM
Reply to: Message 203 by onifre
03-15-2013 10:36 AM


Re: genetic again is the reason we see common ancestors and ToE
RE--I assume you've graduated high school. It's a shame that you don't already know the history of hominid/chimp biology... You're questioning of it is terrible. It's like that of a kid who keeps asking "but why" but never getting anywhere with the answers.--

You seem to have the same attitude that one of my HS biology teachers had. He didn't like questions either. But why should we just accept something as a "matter of fact" when we haven't ever been shown a logical trail that leads to the stated conclusions? However I did have one very wise HS science teacher who once told me "There can only be one 'dumb' question... and that is the one that you never bothered to ask."

RE--By the use of dating methods.--

I'll be nice and not ask since this isn't the thread for that discussion.

RE--Yes we do: 40,000 year old DNA--

So where in your link does it support the claim that 24 chromosomes of ape ancestors fused into 23 human chromosomes? And how does it support this claim apart from use of any similarity arguments?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by onifre, posted 03-15-2013 10:36 AM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 224 by onifre, posted 03-16-2013 2:02 PM Just being real has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8519
Joined: 03-06-2009


(2)
Message 206 of 341 (693448)
03-15-2013 1:04 PM
Reply to: Message 199 by kofh2u
03-14-2013 9:46 PM


Re: ...making up half truths is actually telling lies...
So for people who CAN understand the correspondence between one man who was a common ancestor for all people living today, we can see that the Noah story dove tails perfectly with the facts.

You are ignoring all of the other ancestors that lived at the same time who also have descendants in the current population. You are ignoring all of the uncommon ancestors.

This is a rather simple concept to understand by looking at your grandparents. Your mother's father is your ancestor, but you do not carry his y-chromosome. Does that mean that your mother's father is not one of your ancestors? Your father's mother did not give you your mitochondria, so does that mean that she is not one of your ancestors?

A y-chromosome MRCA and a mit-DNA MRCA does not indicate that the human population was founded by a single couple. In fact, the genetic variation elsewhere in our genome argues strongly against it. Mitochondria and y-chromosomes are just 2 genetic markers out of millions in our genome, and the common ancestors for those other markers are going to people other than mit-DNA Eve and Y-chromosome Adam.

Added these wonderful images in an edit:

Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

Edited by Taq, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 199 by kofh2u, posted 03-14-2013 9:46 PM kofh2u has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 207 by kofh2u, posted 03-15-2013 2:27 PM Taq has replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3056 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 207 of 341 (693450)
03-15-2013 2:27 PM
Reply to: Message 206 by Taq
03-15-2013 1:04 PM


Re: ...making up half truths is actually telling lies...
Of course w have genes from all the people in the line of our ascent.
But the Y-chromosome is always passed down to males through that line of ascent that trails back to just those men who also had that exact same chromosome.

Our mother's father is not included there.

When the genetic studies show that all Jewish priests living today are related to just one man, presumaby Aaron, who lived in 1362BC, it means that all the males from that time forward were in their common ascent.

The same thing for the genetic evidence, that we are all related throughour Y-chromosome to just one male who lived 60,000-142,000 years ago.

It means that your mother's father had that same Y-chromosome as did your father.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 206 by Taq, posted 03-15-2013 1:04 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 208 by Taq, posted 03-15-2013 3:05 PM kofh2u has replied
 Message 209 by NoNukes, posted 03-15-2013 4:16 PM kofh2u has replied
 Message 219 by Eli, posted 03-16-2013 12:05 AM kofh2u has taken no action

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8519
Joined: 03-06-2009


Message 208 of 341 (693453)
03-15-2013 3:05 PM
Reply to: Message 207 by kofh2u
03-15-2013 2:27 PM


Re: ...making up half truths is actually telling lies...
When the genetic studies show that all Jewish priests living today are related to just one man, presumaby Aaron, who lived in 1362BC, it means that all the males from that time forward were in their common ascent.

Why Aaron? How did you determine that a person named Aaron was the source of the Y-chromosome?

Also, those men also have male ancestors who were alive at the same time as the Y-chromosome MRCA. The Y-chromosome is just one genetic marker out of millions, and many of them will have DIFFERENT MRCA's. A Y-chromosome most recent common ancestor in no way indicates that an entire population was spawned by one man.

It means that your mother's father had that same Y-chromosome as did your father.

I guess you are unaware of all the different Y-chromosome haplogroups in the modern population?

http://en.wikipedia.org/...Human_Y-chromosome_DNA_haplogroup


This message is a reply to:
 Message 207 by kofh2u, posted 03-15-2013 2:27 PM kofh2u has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 210 by kofh2u, posted 03-15-2013 7:16 PM Taq has taken no action

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 209 of 341 (693460)
03-15-2013 4:16 PM
Reply to: Message 207 by kofh2u
03-15-2013 2:27 PM


Re: ...making up half truths is actually telling lies...
ut the Y-chromosome is always passed down to males through that line of ascent that trails back to just those men who also had that exact same chromosome.

Only to the most recent such person through the appropriate line. It's highly unlikely that this would link through to the first man.

It means that your mother's father had that same Y-chromosome as did your father.

Think this through dude. If this were the case for everyone on earth, then the common y-chromosome traceback would necessarily be to a very recent person. There's no way you could trace this all the way back to the first humans on earth.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 207 by kofh2u, posted 03-15-2013 2:27 PM kofh2u has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 211 by kofh2u, posted 03-15-2013 7:28 PM NoNukes has replied

  
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 3056 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 210 of 341 (693466)
03-15-2013 7:16 PM
Reply to: Message 208 by Taq
03-15-2013 3:05 PM


Re: ...making up half truths is actually telling lies...

When the genetic studies show that all Jewish priests living today are related to just one man, presumaby Aaron, who lived in 1362BC, it means that all the males from that time forward were in their common ascent.

TAQ:
Why Aaron? How did you determine that a person named Aaron was the source of the Y-chromosome?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-chromosomal_Aaron

Y-chromosomal Aaron
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thomas, et al. dated the origin of the shared DNA to approximately 3,000 years ago (with variance arising from different generation lengths). The techniques used to find Y-chromosomal Aaron were first popularized in relation to the search for the patrilineal ancestor of all contemporary living humans, Y-chromosomal Adam

Y-chromosomal Aaron is the name given to the hypothesised most recent common ancestor of many of the patrilineal Jewish priestly caste known as Kohanim (singular "Kohen", "Cohen", or Kohane). In the Torah, this ancestor is identified as Aaron, the brother of Moses. The hypothetical most recent common ancestor was therefore jocularly dubbed "Y-chromosomal Aaron", in analogy to Y-chromosomal Adam. Although most priestly functions of the Kohanim (such as Temple sacrifices) ended with the destruction of the second Temple by the Romans in 70 CE, the identity of Kohanim has been carefully preserved throughout history. In traditional synagogues, a Kohen will always be the first person called to the Torah, will be asked to publicly bless the congregation at specified times, will be asked to bless a bride and groom at the wedding, and will be asked to "redeem" every first-born male child. Until recently, however, there was neither scientific support nor continuous written record to support the claim of patrilineal descent from Aaron.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by Taq, posted 03-15-2013 3:05 PM Taq has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 220 by Eli, posted 03-16-2013 12:08 AM kofh2u has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022