Is there evidence that new races of man appeared coinceding with biblical Adam?

Homepage Forums Science Is there evidence that new races of man appeared coinceding with biblical Adam?

This topic contains 139 replies, has 11 voices, and was last updated by  michael17 1 year, 2 months ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 140 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #7992

    Yes, very confusing for some. Thinking about it leaves them with very furrowed brows.

     

    #7996

    However, mitochondrial eve must have had a mother!

    Yes, it’s not all about Eve. Her mother could be Lucy.

    #7999

    michael17
    Participant

    “The Eve mentioned by Simon is “Mitochondrial Eve“. Please read the”common misconceptions”  Good article.   The gap or bottleneck that gets little attention as of late is the civilization gap between Jericho, Catal Huyuk  Bay of Cambay 9000BCE and Mesopotamia 3000 BCE. The morphologically different Paleoamerican would be concurrent with Megafauna-ice age civilizations. I posit that this corresponds to the end of ice age races and the start of the sons of Adam. (With the sons of Adam commencing in ~6000 BCE)

    Also in Europe the populations of today are genetically different from the ice age populations. Having different haploid groups.

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 3 months ago by  michael17.
    • This reply was modified 1 year, 3 months ago by  michael17.
    • This reply was modified 1 year, 3 months ago by  michael17.
    • This reply was modified 1 year, 3 months ago by  michael17.
    #8001

    Strega
    Moderator

    What exactly are the sons of Adam?

    #8004

    michael17
    Participant

    What exactly are the sons of Adam?

    The races of today. Also in Europe the populations of today are genetically different from the ice age populations. Having different haploid groups.

    #8008

    .
    Participant

    What? You mean the Bible’s not real? lol

    #8010

    Strega
    Moderator

    The ‘races’ of today?  I was under the impression we were all one race, unless you mean the sub classifications of different peoples.  These sub classifications are very minor.

    There is no ‘gap’ in human development; we all gradually mutated. There’s no abrupt change in this development. We have to look back over 200,000 years of gradual development, finding little bits of information from the snapshot jigsaw pieces we find in archeological digs and discoveries.

    When we contemplate the Jesus story of over 2,000 years ago, we are very short of information surrounding the lifestyles of the people who lived then.  You have to multiply that by 100 to grasp the vast time difference that generations of humans have had to evolve.

    The Tower of London is interesting to walk around.  Although it is only hundreds of years old, you can see the doorways which the soldiers used to go into rooms are only about 5’6” high.  This indicates the height of humans has changed quite noticeably over just a few hundred years.  We have become over 10% taller at least, many of us even more so.

    The term ‘sons of Adam’ is meaningless. There is no abracadabra moment which defines a change of sufficient nature to raise eyebrows.

     

    #8012

    The races of today. Also in Europe the populations of today are genetically different from the ice age populations. Having different haploid groups.

    Are you trying to say that modern humans have a different number of chromosomes to earlier Homo sapiens from the Ice Age? What exactly is that genetic difference between “us and them”? Again, all humans are genetically similar. There may be minor genetic differences between isolated groups. Peoples living high up in the Himalayas may have evolved extra veins in the lips to combat the cold. Nepalese runners almost always beat seasoned “Western” marathon runners in the Himalayan marathon because of how their lungs are more efficient at processing oxygen at altitude. Even some blind humans have evolved to use echo location by making clicking sounds.

    However we are only talking a few lines of coding in a 3 billion line program. Even in those lines we are only taking a few letters difference in a thousand word line.

    If I used my time machine to go back 15,000 years to Australia or Africa and kidnapped a baby, brought him back to the year 2000 and you met him today, in 2018, he would look and sound like any other teenager. He would have 46 chromosomes, just like you or me (I won’t as we have enough teenagers as it is).

    Imagine a herd of 5,000,000 atheist bison on the plains of South Dakota as they have done for millions of years before Homo sapiens evolved. Some are fatter than others, some are taller, or faster, or more fertile than others. Across the herd their fur is a mix or dark brown to very light brown.

    A meteorite strike (or humans) kills all but 500 of them. That is their bottleneck. After 6000 years (I just plucked that number at random. There is no scientific basis to it) they have returned and the “new herd” is genetically similar to the original herd. They are the same “race”. The bottleneck made virtually no difference to their gene pool.

    I posit that this corresponds to the end of ice age races and the start of the sons of Adam. With the sons of Adam commencing in 6000 BCE….

    That is a great attempt to square modern science with the Book of Genesis. Bravo Michael but did we not have a similar argument 7 years ago on TA?

    #8017

    Unseen
    Participant

    Wasn’t there such a thing as an Eve? I’ve heard somewhere that all of humans are descended from 7 individuals, or something similar. It’s a common idea that there was at least one population “bottleneck” somewhere in ancient Homo sapiens history, which is not at all surprising, considering how every other species of human has died out within the short 2 million year history of the Homo family tree.

    Actually, it’s been said that all modern humans have a mitochondrial “Eve.” This does not mean that she was the first human but just that only her genetic material made it forward to modern times. From this article:

    In reality, a mitochondrial Eve is not the first female of a species, but merely the most recent female historically from which all living animals of a species can trace their ancestry. Think of her like the peak of a genealogical pyramid, in which all ancestors of a species meet. While everyone below is descended from her, that doesn’t mean that there is no other female above her, or that lived at the same time as her. Perhaps some of her contemporaries had no surviving children. Or they only had sons, which wouldn’t have passed on their mitochondrial DNA.

    “In any generation there will be some individuals that will leave no progeny,” Marek Kimmel, a professor of statistical genetics and molecular evolution at Rice University, tells Smithsonian.com. “Their genes will be eliminated.” He added that the number of individuals passing their genes to further generations is shrinking all the time, meaning that mitochondrial Eve isn’t a fixed individual over time, but could become more recent as lineages die out. 

     

    #8018

    michael17
    Participant

    “Are you trying to say that modern humans have a different number of chromosomes to earlier Homo sapiens from the Ice Age? What exactly is that genetic difference between “us and them”? Again, all humans are genetically similar. There may be minor genetic differences between isolated groups. Peoples living high up in the Himalayas may have evolved extra veins in the lips to combat the cold. Nepalese runners almost always beat seasoned “Western” marathon runners in the Himalayan marathon because of how their lungs are more efficient at processing oxygen at altitude. Even some blind humans have evolved to use echo location by making clicking sounds…..”-

    No, I’m saying that haplogroups  of ice age men have disappeared from the face of the earth coinceding with the sons of Adam.  Please see the time line in the link below:

    https://www.eupedia.com/europe/origins_haplogroups_europe.shtml

    “That is a great attempt to square modern science with the Book of Genesis. Bravo Michael but did we not have a similar argument 7 years ago on TA?”

    You have a phenomenal memory Reg!

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 3 months ago by  michael17.
    • This reply was modified 1 year, 3 months ago by  michael17.
    #8021

    _Robert_
    Participant

    Here is the source of the pseudoscience.

    https://www.charismamag.com/spirit/apologetics/23968-genetics-expert-confirms-the-reality-of-adam-and-eve

    “One of the most compelling genetic evidences for an original human couple created by God is mitochondrial DNA research done by creation geneticist, Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson,” Purdom says. “He clearly shows that the common human female ancestor of us all (biblical Eve) lived within the biblical timeframe of several thousand years ago.”

    AIG, misrepresenting real science, all day, every day

     

     

    #8026

    michael17
    Participant

    A quicker reference to see the disappearance of megafauna-ice age haplogroups just prior to the sons of Adam. There is a slight overlap into biblical times which may be attributed to the precision and accuracy of the dating  method. This of course should be investigated.

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 3 months ago by  michael17.
    #8028

    jakelafort
    Participant

    appeared out of the fucking  blue?  spontaneous generation?

    how fucking stupid can one be?

    coincided as in existed same time mythical Adam pissed and pooped his bald pants?  sure. so what?

    #8029

    _Robert_
    Participant

    It’s anti-science. Does an apologist ever try to disprove the veracity of their religious beliefs? No. They just do not subscribe to how human knowledge is acquired and advanced. Perhaps the wisest thing to do is just ignore them. To debate them gives their bullshit an undeserved sense of any worth. Real scientists aren’t posting their work on religious websites, looking for some sort of validation from them.

    #8039

    michael17
    Participant

    Repost from seven years ago:

    How did R1b come to replace most of the older lineages in Western Europe ?
    Until recently it was believed that R1b originated in Western Europe due to its strong presence in the region today. The theory was that R1b represented the Paleolithic Europeans (Cro-Magnon) that had sought refuge in the Franco-Cantabrian region at the peak of the last Ice Age, then recolonised Central and Northern Europe once the ice sheet receded. The phylogeny of R1b proved that this scenario was not possible, because older R1b clades were consistently found in Central Asia and the Middle East, and the youngest in Western and Northern Europe. There was a clear gradient from East to West tracing the migration of R1b people (see map above). This age of the main migration from the shores of the Black Sea to Central Europe also happened to match the timeframe of the Indo-European invasion of Europe, which coincides with the introduction of the Bronze-Age culture in Western Europe, and the spread of Italo-Celtic and Germanic languages.
    Historians and archeologists have long argued whether the Indo-European migration was a massive invasion, or rather a cultural diffusion of language and technology spread only by a small number of incomers. The answer could well be “neither”. Proponents of the diffusion theory would have us think that R1b is native to Western Europe, and R1a alone represent the Indo-Europeans. The problem is that haplogroup R did arise in Central Asia, and R2 is still restricted to Central and South Asia, while R1a and the older subclades of R1b are also found in Central Asia. The age of R1b subclades in Europe coincide with the Bronze-Age. R1b must consequently have replaced most of the native Y-DNA lineages in Europe from the Bronze-Age onwards.
    However, a massive migration and nearly complete anihilation of the Paleolithic population can hardly be envisaged. Western Europeans do look quite different in Ireland, Holland, Aquitaine or Portugal, despite being all regions where R1b is dominant. Autosomal DNA studies have confirmed that the Western European population is far from homogeneous. A lot of maternal lineages (mtDNA) also appear to be of Paleolithic origin (e.g. H1, H3, U5 or V) based on ancient DNA tests. What a lot of people forget is that there is also no need of a large-scale exodus for patrilineal lineages to be replaced fairly quickly. Here is why.Polygamy. Unlike women, men are not limited in the number of children they can procreate. Men with power typically have more children. This was all the truer in primitive societies, where polygamy was often the norm for chieftains and kings.Status & Power. Equipped with Bronze weapons and horses, the Indo-Europeans would have easily subjugated the Neolithic farmers and with even greater ease Europe’s last hunter-gatherers.If they did not exterminate the indigenous men, the newcomers would have become the new ruling class, with a multitude of local kings, chieftains and noblemen (Bronze-Age Celts and Germans lived in small village communities with a chief, each part of a small tribe headed by a king) with higher reproductive opportunities than average.Gender imbalance. Invading armies normally have far more men than women. Men must therefore find women in the conquered population. Wars are waged by men, and the losers suffer heavier casualties, leaving more women available to the winners.Aggressive warfare. The Indo-Europeans were a warlike people with a strong heroic code emphasising courage and military prowess. Their superior technology (metal weapons, wheeled vehicles and warhorses) and attitude to life would have allowed them to slaughter any population that did not have organised armies with metal weapons (i.e. anybody except the Middle-Eastern civilizations).
    Genetic predisposition to conceive boys. The main role of the Y-chromosome in man’s body is to create sperm. Haplogroups are determined based on mutations differentiating Y-chromosomes. Each mutation is liable to affect sperm production and sperm motility. Preliminary research has already established a link between certain haplogroups and increased or reduced sperm motility. The higher the motility, the higher the chances of conceiving a boy. It is absolutely possible that R1b could confer a bias toward more male offspring. Even a slightly higher percentage of male births would significantly contribute to the replacement of other lineages with the accumulation effect building up over a few millennia. Not all R1b subclades might have this boy bias. The bias only exist in relation to other haplogroups found in a same population. It is very possible that the fairly recent R1b subclades of Western Europe had a significant advantage compared to the older haplogroups in that region, notably haplogroup I2 and E-V13. Read more Replacement of patrilineal lineages following this model quickly becomes exponential. Imagine 100 Indo-European men conquering a tribe of 1000 indigenous Europeans (a ratio of 1:10). War casualties have resulted in a higher proportion of women in the conquered population. Let’s say that the surviving population is composed of 700 women and 300 men. Let’s suppose that the victorious Indo-European men end up having twice as many children reaching adulthood as the men of the vanquished tribe. There is a number of reason for that. The winners would take more wives, or take concubines, or even rape women of the vanquished tribe. Their higher status would garantee them greater wealth and therefore better nutrition for their offspring, increasing the chances of reaching adulthood and procreating themselves. An offspring ratio of 2 to 1 for men is actually a conservative estimate, as it is totally conceivable that Bronze-Age sensibilities would have resulted in killing most of the men on the losing side, and raping their women (as attested by the Old Testament). Even so, it would only take a few generations for the winning Y-DNA lineages to become the majority. For instance, if the first generation of Indo-Europeans had two surviving sons per man, against only one per indigenous man, the number of Indo-European paternal lineages would pass to 200 individuals at the second generation, 400 at the third, 800 at the fourth and 1600 at the fifth, and so on. During that time indigenous lineages would only stagnate at 300 individuals for each generation.

    Based on such a scenario, the R1b lineages would have quickly overwhelmed the local lineages. Even if the Indo-European conquerors had only slightly more children than the local men, R1b lineages would become dominant within a few centuries. Celtic culture lasted for over 1000 years in Continental Europe before the Roman conquest putting an end to the priviledges of the chieftains and nobility. This is more than enough time for R1b lineages to reach 50 to 80% of the population.
    The present-day R1b frequency forms a gradient from the Atlantic fringe of Europe (highest percentage) to Central and Eastern Europe (lowest), the rises again in the Anatolian homeland. This is almost certainly because agriculture was better established in Eastern, then Central Europe, with higher densities of population, leaving R1b invadors more outnumbered than in the West. Besides, other Indo-Europeans of the Corded Ware culture (R1a) had already advanced from modern Russia and Ukraine as far west as Germany and Scandinavia. It would be difficult for R1b people to rival with their R1a cousins who shared similar technology and culture. The Pre-Celto-Germanic R1b would therefore have been forced to settled further west, first around the Alps, then overtaking the then sparsely populated Western Europe.

    This theorist does not consider the annihilation of the indigenous Cro-magnon Haplogroup in Europe as a result of a cataclysm that ended the Mega-fauna as I do.

     

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 3 months ago by  michael17.
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 140 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.