Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: PatrickHenry
Spoilsport!

If enough of these "ancient" genes turn up, your explanation is the first to fall.

37 posted on 04/24/2005 7:19:36 PM PDT by VadeRetro (Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]


To: VadeRetro; PatrickHenry; blam

I don't buy it, at least not on such slim evidence. The admixture hypothesis presumes that humans moving out of Africa bred with Asian hominids at least 2 million years removed from those in Africa. If so, the genetic imprint should be much more dramatic and evident ("what you need is 10 or 50 loci--one or two is not sufficient"). I can see interbreeding with Neanderthals, but not with Homo erecti based on this slight evidence.

It's also worth noting that "vanishingly rare" is not the same as nonexistent. That a haplotype appears in 53% of Chinese but only 0.5% of Africans (in a survey with 7.37% margin of error) does not necessarily signify as much as it may appear. To state this differently, there are tens of millions of Asians today descended in some part from a literal handful of Ghengis Khan's comrades - and their gene dissemination was much more recent and diluted in a far larger population.

In other words, all this means so far is that some Southeast Asian alpha male was descended from a "vanishingly rare" African...


42 posted on 04/24/2005 8:20:14 PM PDT by AntiGuv (™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: VadeRetro; PatrickHenry; blam

One more point worth noting is that there are a number of small, very insular African clans. It may just (quite easily) be the case that when you survey 177 people out of a population of more than 800 million that you miss discovering the band with, say, an 80% abundance of this haplotype.


43 posted on 04/24/2005 8:31:29 PM PDT by AntiGuv (™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: VadeRetro; PatrickHenry; blam

PS. One more point worth noting is that a haplotype dated to originate two million years ago (as in the second study) would be from before Homo erectus itself moved out of Africa..


45 posted on 04/24/2005 8:37:43 PM PDT by AntiGuv (™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: VadeRetro; PatrickHenry; blam

PPS. One last point I'd like to note is that a small survey which turns up just one person with a given haplotype could just as easily miss that person. All of a sudden the 4-5 million people represented by that person have 'dropped' to zero, and "vanishingly rare" is now "nonexistent" - although it's not. And, with a 7% margin of error, your extrapolated 4-5 million might actually be more like 60 million.

Even 4-5 million if accurate establishes that the given haplotype has been floating around on the continent for quite a long while.


48 posted on 04/24/2005 8:53:09 PM PDT by AntiGuv (™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson