That you have no appreciation for it shows what an unimaginative kill joy you are.
And notice please that the cited article takes no issue with the utility of evolutionary theory to determine if the hunter gatherer population was descended from a small offshoot of the agricultural population. Amazingly useful that evolutionary theory in determining patterns of common descent.
Talk about a kill joy...LOL! Reread what you just wrote, mr. spock. Are you trying to use Capt. Kirk’s comic book images to seem more human again? The juxtaposition couldn’t be better...LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!
You may have a point. But is all biology evolution? Michael Behe and Jonathan Wells are among those who don't seem to think so. Also, as I understand it, Mendel's theories are largely independent of Darwin's theories, and Mendelian genetics was initially rejected by Darwinists. That successful (falsifiable but not falsified) Mendelian genetics has been adopted in a modern “Darwinian” synthesis may say more about the merits of Mendel's theories than about the merits of Darwin's theories.
In this particular case, change (or lack thereof) in mitochondrial DNA are used to make estimates. These estimates appear to support the “myths.” This is surprising and important to those who believed the relayed tale was a myth. Perhaps it's not so important to those who believed the relayed story.