Humanity came from around 2000 persons?

[achilles12604]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080424/ap_on_sc/close_call

I found this VERY interesting because up until recently, I had assumed that pure evolution was plausible. That many thousands of humans had evolved and expanded over the course of a the last million or so years allowing our population to be so huge today.

But this article suggests two things I find interesting.

1) We were down to a few thousand people just 70,000 years ago. This of course severely limits the numbers of people which could have evolved over the course of a couple million years.

2) There is reason to believe that the entire human race may have come from a "mitocrongrial Eve".



What does the forum think? Is this trouble for traditional evolution? Will the theory need to be re-worked? And last, is this the beginning of scientific evidence supporting a literal reading of Genesis?

[Jerada Davidhefter]

Sfs, we are talking about the development of MODERN man, not our entire evolutionary history. McCulloch speaks correctly.

Back to the original topic, we WERE INDEED reduced to a few thouand members, and even high school science books include this fact.

http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo2/mod_homo_4.htm

however, I will cede a mistake, I meant to type 20,000- not 2000 in my previous post.

[sfs]

From Wikipedia:

Geneticists Lynn Jorde and Henry Harpending of the University of Utah propose that the variation in human DNA is minute compared to that of other species.

Genetic diversity is minute in humans compared to fruit flies, but not to other large mammals. We have almost exactly the same diversity as the western subspecies of chimpanzee, and about half as much as all chimpanzee subspecies combined. So we're a little low, but not extraordinarily so.

They also propose that during the Late Pleistocene [130,000 - 10,000 years ago], the human population was reduced to a small number of breeding pairs " no more than 10,000, and possibly as few as 1,000 " resulting in a very small residual gene pool. Various reasons for this hypothetical bottleneck have been postulated, one being the Toba catastrophe theory.

Yes, I know that they proposed that idea. (Or rather, I knew that Harpending had -- I'd forgotten Jorde was also involved.) It was a perfectly reasonable idea, but my point is that subsequent genetic data (and the vast majority of human genetic data has appeared in the last few years) have not provided support for it. I don't doubt that the ancestral population(s) experienced both increases and decreases in size, as well as other changes. But the genetic evidence, taken as a whole, does not currently give any reason to think there was a decrease in overall population size during that period. Certain modern populations (basically all non-African populations) did go through a bottleneck during that period, presumably as part of the migration out of Africa, and the genetic traces of it are very clear. The same signature is not seen in sub-Saharan African populations.

[sfs]

Sfs, we are talking about the development of MODERN man, not our entire evolutionary history.

From your previous comments, it was not clear to me what you were talking about. You mentioned a doubling of blood flow to the brain, but there's zero reason to attribute that solely to the transition between archaic H. sapiens and anatomically modern H. sapiens.

Back to the original topic, we WERE INDEED reduced to a few thouand members, and even high school science books include this fact.

http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo2/mod_homo_4.htm

a) This site doesn't say anything about human population being reduced that I can see.
b) If you are looking for up to date scientific consensus in high school science books, you will be sorely disappointed.
c) There are a number of other problems with that website, but they're not relevant to this discussion.

however, I will cede a mistake, I meant to type 20,000- not 2000 in my previous post.

You didn't answer my question. Even with your revised figure, which 20,000 years are you talking about? The difference in brain size between archaic and modern H. sapiens is quite modest, but you claim there was something dramatic going on there.

Have you dropped your claim that most humans left Africa?

[Neandertal Ned]

2) There is reason to believe that the entire human race may have come from a "mitocrongrial Eve".

Mitochondrial Eve is an unfortunate misnomer. There is a vast difference between the Biblical literalists view of Eve, the first human woman and the statistical scientists idea of a mitochondrial eve (ME). ME is the most-recent common ancestor of all humans alive on Earth today with respect to matrilineal descent. Her mother was a human and was also an ancestor of all humans alive on Earth today. She probably had siblings and cousins who had descendants. While she is a statistical necessity, she was probably not particularly special for her time. Furthermore, it is possible that the designation could change to some other human ancestor.

The fact that Mitochondrial Eve was traced back to somewhere in Northeast Africa and the fact that her mother was just as human as she, opens the door for her ancestors to have originated from somewhere in the Middle East and to be accurately described as Cushite decendents of Ham.

[Goat]

2) There is reason to believe that the entire human race may have come from a "mitocrongrial Eve".

Mitochondrial Eve is an unfortunate misnomer. There is a vast difference between the Biblical literalists view of Eve, the first human woman and the statistical scientists idea of a mitochondrial eve (ME). ME is the most-recent common ancestor of all humans alive on Earth today with respect to matrilineal descent. Her mother was a human and was also an ancestor of all humans alive on Earth today. She probably had siblings and cousins who had descendants. While she is a statistical necessity, she was probably not particularly special for her time. Furthermore, it is possible that the designation could change to some other human ancestor.

Why? What evidence that 'Ham' existed. "mitochondrial eve'. You do know that it is 'most likely east africa' and not narrowed down to the 'northeast'., don't you?

This appears to be trying to retrofit what it known, modify it a bit (east is not north-east), and shoe horn it into preconceptions.

The fact that Mitochondrial Eve was traced back to somewhere in Northeast Africa and the fact that her mother was just as human as she, opens the door for her ancestors to have originated from somewhere in the Middle East and to be accurately described as Cushite decendents of Ham.[/quote]

[Neandertal Ned]

The fact that Mitochondrial Eve was traced back to somewhere in Northeast Africa and the fact that her mother was just as human as she, opens the door for her ancestors to have originated from somewhere in the Middle East and to be accurately described as Cushite decendents of Ham.

Why? What evidence that 'Ham' existed. "mitochondrial eve'.

Just a name for one of Mitochondrial Eve's ancestors. Mitochondrial Ham!

You do know that it is 'most likely east africa' and not narrowed down to the 'northeast'., don't you? This appears to be trying to retrofit what it known, modify it a bit (east is not north-east), and shoe horn it into preconceptions.

I consider all of areas east of the Nile River to be part of Northeast Africa.

Anything south of Kenya would be Southeast Africa.

[Goat]

The fact that Mitochondrial Eve was traced back to somewhere in Northeast Africa and the fact that her mother was just as human as she, opens the door for her ancestors to have originated from somewhere in the Middle East and to be accurately described as Cushite decendents of Ham.

Why? What evidence that 'Ham' existed. "mitochondrial eve'.

Just a name for one of Mitochondrial Eve's ancestors. Mitochondrial Ham!

You do know that it is 'most likely east africa' and not narrowed down to the 'northeast'., don't you? This appears to be trying to retrofit what it known, modify it a bit (east is not north-east), and shoe horn it into preconceptions.

I consider all of areas east of the Nile River to be part of Northeast Africa.

Anything south of Kenya would be Southeast Africa.

Please show a source for your claim. Let's see you actually support your claims.
While you are at it, perhaps you can back up the claim the TOE is racist. That seems to be a rather incoherent claim.

[Neandertal Ned]

The fact that Mitochondrial Eve was traced back to somewhere in Northeast Africa and the fact that her mother was just as human as she, opens the door for her ancestors to have originated from somewhere in the Middle East and to be accurately described as Cushite decendents of Ham.

Why? What evidence that 'Ham' existed. "mitochondrial eve'.

Just a name for one of Mitochondrial Eve's ancestors. Mitochondrial Ham!

You do know that it is 'most likely east africa' and not narrowed down to the 'northeast'., don't you? This appears to be trying to retrofit what it known, modify it a bit (east is not north-east), and shoe horn it into preconceptions.

I consider all of areas east of the Nile River to be part of Northeast Africa.

Anything south of Kenya would be Southeast Africa.

Please show a source for your claim.

I am the source of my claim. I try to avoid appeals to authority and only resort to them when I really get desperate.

Let's see you actually support your claims.

Let's see you argue against them.

While you are at it, perhaps you can back up the claim the TOE is racist. That seems to be a rather incoherent claim.

The parts that say that African people evolved from monkeys are obviously racist.

The parts that say that Europeans and Asians evolved from African people are obviously racist.

[The Tongue]

If one believes that the Big Bang theory is the best model that we have today as to the origin of the universe, then one must accept according to the current data that has been accumulated by man up until this point in time, that before this particular three dimensional universe came into existence, there was an infinitely dense, Infinitely hot, infinitesimally small singularity of origin.

One must also accept, that the singularity of origin was spatially separated by what we call the BIG BANG, where liquid like electromagnetic energy was spewed out in the trillions of degrees, and that within moments of that event, when the universal temperature had dropped to some billions of degrees, from the quantum of that electromagnetic energy the first sub-atomic particles began to form.

One must also accept that the quantum of that electromagnetic energy are waves, which have Zero mass and no electric charge and yet carry angular and linear momentum, which momentum is the animating principle that pervades the entire universal body of all that evolves from the quantum of that electromagnetic energy.

One is called on by this theory, to accept that those waves were gathered together by their attraction to each other, creating the first sub-atomic particles, which were attracted to each other in the creation of the first basic atoms, which were attracted to each other in the creation of the massive first generation stars, in which gigantic nuclear reactors more complex atoms and molecules were created.

With the super Nova of those first generation stars, a percentage of their mass was blasted off while the greater percentage was crushed into a centrally condensed system (Black Hole) so great that nothing could escape, not even light, and it was around that centrally condensed system that the residue, which was the great nebular cloud of elements (Waters) were anchored in space.

With the attraction of those elements to each other, portions of the cloud began to condense inward creating an expanse between the water/elements above/without, from the water/elements below/within.

From one particular gathering of the waters above from the waters below, our solar system was created, the final process of that ever condensing cloud, was the nuclear fission of the remaining cloud after the planets/dry land had been created, which is our sun, whose light is reflected from our moon that were created in the firmament of space between the elements above (Oort Cloud) from the elements below (Our solar system.)

Knowing now, that everything that exists as this visible cosmos, was once, no more than liquid like electromagnetic energy, the only thing left for you to decide is whether it all simply evolved, or whether there was a divine hand in its creation.

Or perhaps, you might ask the question, "Does an Intellect, which has access to all the gathered universal information and who is the supreme personality of Godhead to have developed within the universal body, evolve from the body of mankind. A species, who is able to exist in the dimension of matter and also in the dimension of anti-matter which co-exists within this dimension.

A new species which has the ability to traverse not only space, but also time, who, after this universal body has once again been condensed into the infinitely dense, Infinitely hot, infinitesimally small singularity of origin, is able to descend to the very beginning, before space and time were created, where He, (The Light of Man) dies in the process of involution as he observes, the creation of his universal body in the process of evolution.

[Goat]

The fact that Mitochondrial Eve was traced back to somewhere in Northeast Africa and the fact that her mother was just as human as she, opens the door for her ancestors to have originated from somewhere in the Middle East and to be accurately described as Cushite decendents of Ham.

Why? What evidence that 'Ham' existed. "mitochondrial eve'.

Just a name for one of Mitochondrial Eve's ancestors. Mitochondrial Ham!

You do know that it is 'most likely east africa' and not narrowed down to the 'northeast'., don't you? This appears to be trying to retrofit what it known, modify it a bit (east is not north-east), and shoe horn it into preconceptions.

I consider all of areas east of the Nile River to be part of Northeast Africa.

Anything south of Kenya would be Southeast Africa.

Please show a source for your claim.

I am the source of my claim. I try to avoid appeals to authority and only resort to them when I really get desperate.

Let's see you actually support your claims.

Let's see you argue against them.

While you are at it, perhaps you can back up the claim the TOE is racist. That seems to be a rather incoherent claim.

The parts that say that African people evolved from monkeys are obviously racist.

The parts that say that Europeans and Asians evolved from African people are obviously racist.

How is it racist?? Because you say so? Please support your claim..