[blam]

I've become increasingly suspicious of theories based on DNA analysis.

[blam]

GGG Ping.

[js1138]

Note that the science priesthood never questions anything or chacks the claims being made by the elect.

[Radix]

I wrote a short paper last year for a Course I took for my own edification.

 

It is elementary stuff, but some FReepers migh appreciate a few excerpts only.

 

 I am no expert, but I found the subject to be fascinating. I am not trying to pass myself off as an Acedemic. I just like the subject, and below is a bit of what I put together. Some of (likely most of it) it obviously "lifted" from the Internet.

 

Mitochondria are small energy-producing organelles found in cells. Surprisingly, mitochondria have their own DNA molecules, entirely separate from our nuclear DNA. Most cells contain between 500 and 1000 copies of the mtDNA molecule, which makes it a lot easier to find and extract than nuclear DNA. In humans the mtDNA genome consists of about 16,000 base pairs (far shorter than our nuclear DNA), and has been completely sequenced. What makes mtDNA particularly interesting is that, unlike nuclear DNA which is equally inherited from both father and mother, mtDNA is inherited only from the mother, because all our mitochondria are descended from those in our mother's egg.

 

The DNA in mitochondria was first discovered in 1963. In that year, researchers discovered that mitochondria have their own DNA or "blueprint" (mtDNA), which is different than the nuclear DNA (nDNA) found in the cells' nucleus. It was noted that the mtDNA was distinct from the nuclear DNA found in the nucleus of cells. It is now believed that mitochondria contain their own DNA because millions of years ago they were once independent living organisms similar to today’s bacteria. ....

 

By comparing mutations in the DNA of people who live in different parts of the world, geneticists are developing new theories about how humans populated the Earth. The evidence points to a common African origin. Much of the work has been based upon maternal lines. The DNA of present-day Africans is more diverse than that of people of other continents, indicating that humans have lived there the longest. Traces of ancient African genes can be found in everyone living today....^.

 

 The discovery of Mitochondrial DNA has lead to numerous new hypothesis concerning the nature and history of humans. Researchers have discovered many new paths which are currently being followed. Some of these R&D programs are hoped will help in a greater understanding of metabolic processes in animals including humans. As the work continues news articles concerning progress can be found abundantly on the World Wide Web....

 

[grey_whiskers]

Bookmarked, dude.

PH, is this worth a ping of the ole' list, there?

Cheers!

[Coyoteman]

Good post.

They'll get this figured out pretty soon then we'll know.

[wyattearp]

I've become increasingly suspicious of theories based on DNA analysis.

I agree, especially when they are based on MtDNA alone. (I am not a scientist or anything, just very interested in the subject).

Try this scenario: Neandertal man meets Homo Sapiens woman, recently arrived from Africa. He really likes her legs, finding them to be far more attractive than the short, stocky, Neandertal women's legs. Her skin color is also very exotic. Homo Sapiens woman likes Neandertal man; those huge biceps and forearms, the red hair, and the bulging muscles really turn her on. Neandertal man and Homo Sapiens woman have children.

As I understand it, there would be NO record of Neandertal man in the MtDNA of their offspring. If I am wrong, please correct me. This is one of the largest areas where I have a problem with the Mitochondrial Eve Theory. This is also one reason that I have a problem with the theories that state that the Neandertal is a genetic dead-end, seeing as they are also based on MtDNA. It is strictly a maternal record.

[concentric circles]

I believe these research methods can be valuable tools but can become error prone when any one is relied on exclusively. This is really a pretty good synopsis for a brief article

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks Blam.

To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list. Thanks.

Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on or off the
Gods, Graves, Glyphs PING list or GGG weekly digest
-- Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)

[restornu]

Do your Ping

[LiteKeeper]

YEC INTREP

[dread78645]

I've become increasingly suspicious of theories based on DNA analysis.

I think 'suspicious' is a little too strong, 'cautious' would be the word I'd use.

Dr. Wolpoff, in this apparent 2001 article, seems to be muddying the water by raising doubts about mtDNA to bolster the multi-regional hypothesis that he, along with Alan G. Thorne, helped originate.

While we don't thoroughly understand the workings of DNA and mutations, we've got a pretty good handle on it. So caution would the proper guide when dealing with this data.
In the intervening 5 years there's little evidence that's turned up to support the multi-regionalists, and a great deal that supports Out-of-Africa II hypothesis.

My take on this article is this is 5 year old argument by FUD - Fear Uncertainty Doubt.

Just my opinion of course.