Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 88 (8946 total)
29 online now:
Coragyps, Percy (Admin), Thugpreacha (AdminPhat) (3 members, 26 visitors)
Newest Member: ski zawaski
Post Volume: Total: 865,875 Year: 20,911/19,786 Month: 1,308/2,023 Week: 259/557 Day: 70/76 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   secularists do not want the truth
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 2510 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 11 of 85 (575759)
08-21-2010 12:16 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by archaeologist
08-20-2010 4:58 PM


here is what they found:

the article writes:

The results are based on analyses of mitochondrial DNA. Found in the energy-producing centers of cells, mitochondrial DNA is only passed down the maternal line, and can be traced back to one woman.

yet this is the story they make up to avoid the truth and cling to even though there is no evidence for its legitimacy:

the article writes:

However, this doesn't mean she was the first modern woman, rather it indicates that only her descendants survive to the present day.

"There is always some other female that predated mitochondrial Eve, whose DNA didn't make it up to modernity," said Marek Kimmel, a professor of statistics at Rice University. "So the age of the mitochondrial Eve is always less than the age of the true, first female modern human."

the first true female was Eve Gen. 3:20 states-- "And Adam called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all living...'

even when secularists have the evidence rightin frontof them, they will not accept it. it becomes pointless for christians to present any evidence because if it is not what the secularist wants to hear, then it is ignored, dismissed, rejected and followed by more calls for more evidence.

Quote mine much? You left out a major point in the article:

the article writes:

A maternal ancestor to all living humans called mitochondrial Eve likely lived about 200,000 years ago, at roughly the same time anatomically modern humans are believed to have emerged, a new review study confirms.

The results are based on analyses of mitochondrial DNA. Found in the energy-producing centers of cells, mitochondrial DNA is only passed down the maternal line, and can be traced back to one woman.

However, this doesn't mean she was the first modern woman, rather it indicates that only her descendants survive to the present day.

"There is always some other female that predated mitochondrial Eve, whose DNA didn't make it up to modernity," said Marek Kimmel, a professor of statistics at Rice University. "So the age of the mitochondrial Eve is always less than the age of the true, first female modern human."


There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002

Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by archaeologist, posted 08-20-2010 4:58 PM archaeologist has not yet responded

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 2510 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 19 of 85 (575923)
08-21-2010 7:09 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by archaeologist
08-21-2010 3:08 AM


i don't trust the dating, but if the data is correct then it stands to reason there is some finagling going on to produce the large time span for both. my point is, that the scientific data is pointing towards the validty of the Bible -all people came from adam and eve, but the details are sketchy considering the source.

Just because you don't trust the dating doesn't mean that there is any finagling going on. The fact is that you can't possibly comprehend that there can be anything wrong with your book.

The point is that you are assuming Mitochondrial-Eve was the first Human woman. Mitochondrial-Eve is the MRCA (Most Recent Common Ancestor) of all living humans. Whether it was 10,000 or 50,000 or 100,000 or 200,000 years ago matters not. Mitochondral-Eves mother was also Common ancestor as was her mother and her mother.... The same goes for Y-Chromosome Adam
Except his line starts later

Ancestors Tale writes:

Second, Eve and Adam were not a couple. it would be a mojor coincidence if they ever met, and they could well have been separated by tens of thousands of years. As a subsidiary point, there are independent reasons to believe that Eve preceded Adam. Males are more variable in reproductive success than females: where some females have five times as many children as other females, the most successful males could have hundreds of times as many children as unsuccessful males. A male with alarge harumfinds it easy to be a universal ancestor. A female, since she is less likely to have a large family, needs a larger number of generations to achieve the same feat. And indeed, today's best 'molecular clock' estimates for their respective dates are about 140, 000 years ago for Eve and only about 60, 000 for Adam.


The Ancestor's Tale, Richard Dawkins, p 54


There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002

Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by archaeologist, posted 08-21-2010 3:08 AM archaeologist has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Dr Jack, posted 08-22-2010 7:05 AM bluescat48 has responded

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 2510 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


(1)
Message 21 of 85 (575998)
08-22-2010 12:15 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Dr Jack
08-22-2010 7:05 AM


Re: Not the MRCA!
Thanks for the clarification. Mitochondrial-Eve is the MRCA on the female line. Just as y-Chromosome-Adam is on the male line.


There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002

Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Dr Jack, posted 08-22-2010 7:05 AM Dr Jack has not yet responded

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 2510 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 32 of 85 (576222)
08-23-2010 10:03 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by archaeologist
08-23-2010 4:32 AM


the evolutionary time frame is made up, fictitious, and not real. it doesn't contradict the Biblical record for it does not exisst except in the imaginations of evolutionists. even the archaeological table, the three age sytem, was fictitious and created arbitrarily without evidence or proof. it is wrong as well.

You made the above statement, now back it up with some real evidence.


There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002

Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008


This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by archaeologist, posted 08-23-2010 4:32 AM archaeologist has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by archaeologist, posted 08-24-2010 5:02 AM bluescat48 has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019