I may be wrong but my understanding of evolution does not contradict the statement: "All human beings are descendants of Adam."
I shall explain why. Evolutionists state that we are descendants of an ape-like ancestor. To further strengthen this, they claim that the chimps and human beings share a common ancestor. I will not go into the details of explicit calims like the DNA of human beings are 99 percent similar to that of the chimps. But I am not saying that any of this is wrong.
Having said that, we also have done some tests, because of which we have found out that the existing population of the world are all decendants of a single human being -- the Mitochondrial Eve (ME). I am not saying that the ME is the real Eve (of the Bible). Nor am I denying that at this point. I just do not know.
The common explanation of the ME is that the human population faced a bottleneck sometime in the past. And it is because of this bottle-necking that we have the ME. That is fine. I do not disagree with this either.
What I am saying is that because we have something (or should I say someone?) like the ME, the statement: 'All human beings are descendants of Adam' is not false. Coming to think of it, it would be so difficult to argue in support of my statement if we do not have the ME.
Now, many will not agree with my statement. But that is a different issue for i am not arguing to prove my statement. Nevertheless, evolution does not contradict my statement. Am I wrong?
I would like some insight into this and will appreciate all answers. Thanks.
This is incorrect. No-one has ever performed a test for the existence of mitochondrial eve. Her existence is assumed based on the statistical near inevitability of it being so. What they then did have assumed she existed is apply the science of genetic molecular clocks to the data gathered on variation in mitochondiral genomes across the human population to calculate when she lived. Others have dealt with the rest, I'm just going to concentrate on this one bit:
Having said that, we also have done some tests, because of which we have found out that the existing population of the world are all decendants of a single human being
This is incorrect. No-one has ever performed a test for the existence of mitochondrial eve. Her existence is assumed based on the statistical near inevitability of it being so. What they then did have assumed she existed is apply the science of genetic molecular clocks to the data gathered on variation in mitochondiral genomes across the human population to calculate when she lived.
Thanks for the info. Is this also the method they use to say that there is a Y-chromosomal Adam?
Genetic analysis, IIRC, suggests that "Y-nuclear Adam" and "mitochondrial Eve" didn't live at the same time; which would make reconciling the facts with the Bible kinda tricky.
You are quick to jump into a 'reconciliation' story. Having said that, you are also assuming that there are no flaws in the scientific method that arrives at these conclusions. As far as I know, the scientific methods used to calculate the times of existence of ME and Y-chromosomal Adam are not 100 percent foolproof. There is a lot of margin for error. (More so than most other scientific calculations such as the age of the Earth, time of Big Bang, etc). Why then, are you so qiick to quip that reconciling the facts with the Bible would be kinda tricky?
At most we could share a ME who isn't human. In theory we could trace that ME right back to the dawnings of sexual reproduction but the odds against that are so high as to mean it's practically certain not to be the case.
Why not? We may not be able to trace upto where sexual reproduction began. But we might be able to trace more accurately upto the point where we became human?
The present ME may not necessarily be this point. Thats my view.
Mitochondrial Eve is by definition our most recent common ancestor in the female line. There can only be one of those.
I disagree. ME is our most recent common ancestor. But depending on our methodology, we might be able to detect another ancestor who is our most recent common ancestor. This will in principle give us two MEs. No?