Hello, cousin! (re: Recent common ancestors to all living humans)

quote:

---

The interesting thing is that it is far earlier than the time of mitochondrial eve. Note that this is interesting in the sense that it is counter-intuitive.

---

I'm sure that you mean "more recent", not "earlier". I would say that it is only the degree of difference that could be counter-intuitive.The mitochondrial Eve is the most recent common ancestor through an unbroken female line. Even without considering the meaning of that qualification we can know that the most recent common ancestor cannot be more distant in time and intuitively should be more recent.When we consider that the possible lines of descent are greatly expanded it at least becomes plausible that the most recent common ancestor could be significantly more recent than the mitochondrial Eve.

As RAZD has stated this paper is based on mathematical modelling. It is not based on direct evidence, as would be required if it were to be evidence of Noah. Moreover if the Flood story were literally true Noah would be the "Y-chromosome Adam", and likely not the most recent common ancestor. In other words it is the wrong result produced by the wrong method to support your ideas.