Skip to comments.
Scientists discover most fertile Irish male
Reuters on Yahoo ^
| 1/17/06
| Siobhan Kennedy
Posted on 01/17/2006 9:16:45 AM PST by NormsRevenge
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-111 next last
To: NormsRevenge
...I read the whole article and saw the same therein.
41
posted on
01/17/2006 9:32:31 AM PST
by
CarrotAndStick
(The articles posted by me needn't necessarily reflect my opinion.)
To: Lekker 1
42
posted on
01/17/2006 9:32:47 AM PST
by
PeterPrinciple
(Seeking the truth here folks.)
To: AntiGuv
"There is absolutely nothing in genetic research to even remotely suggest even the most infinitesimal possibility of one-family bottleneck in human genetics within the timeframe that the mythical Noah and Adam would've lived."
The Bible does not describe a bottleneck, some man invented it.
To: NormsRevenge
Its a fact that in ancient times conquest was tied to rape. When you plundered, you screwed your fallen foes women. This is why Khan has so many descendants, and explains Niall, Charlemagne, and other conquerors genes being so common today.
Despite the legends about the burning forge, it's likely that Niall became high king the way most Irish kings did...by killing those who opposed him. This would have given him a lot of opportunity to spread his seed, so to speak.
I'd be curious to know how common his genes are OUTSIDE of Ireland. What made Niall so famous wasn't that he was high king (there were lots of those), but that he was such a prolific raider. There are semi-legendary stories of him leading raiding parties all the way to the Alps, and it's fairly well established that he raided the coasts of Scotland, Wales, England, France, and Germany with impunity. That's a lot of raiding, and a lot of potential "seed spreading".
To: Mr. Brightside
How does this guy compare to Wilt Chamberlain?Not nearly as consistent "in the paint".
To: AntiGuv
Abraham had eight named sons in the Old Testament. Many were never named, but were implied, by his concubines. He, being the Father of all Jews, Levites, Benjaminites, Arabs, Edomites, Midianites, and the Lost tribes of Israel, his genetic material, ie DNA, must be spread all over the planet......
46
posted on
01/17/2006 9:35:43 AM PST
by
Red Badger
(And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against him)
To: Red Badger
I can accept that, but nonetheless Abraham was not Irish!
Regardless of what he was.
47
posted on
01/17/2006 9:36:57 AM PST
by
AntiGuv
(™)
To: AntiGuv
But the Irish could be (and probably are) descendants of Abraham.......
48
posted on
01/17/2006 9:38:45 AM PST
by
Red Badger
(And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against him)
To: Happygal
Surely ye must have an opinion here. ; )
49
posted on
01/17/2006 9:38:54 AM PST
by
TheBigB
("Pitts. has no chance indoors against Indy. NONE."~~maineman)
To: Just mythoughts
If Genesis were literally true, there would be a one-family genetic bottleneck at the juncture of Noah's flood - i.e., everyone would be traced back to Noah's unnamed wife, and everyone would be traced back to Noah as well unless his wife was an adulteress before the flood.
And obviously everyone would trace back to Adam & Eve if that were literally true.
50
posted on
01/17/2006 9:41:16 AM PST
by
AntiGuv
(™)
To: AntiGuv
Timeframe issues aside (which are huge, admittedly), there were plenty of 1-heatbeat genetic bottlenecks.
Google:
"Y-chromosome Adam"
"mitochondrial Eve"
Basically, all humans share at least one, and probably more than one, male and femal ancestor.
Of course, they can't say --- with any certainty --- that the given, proven "adam" (a real misnomer) and "eve" (same) lived at remotely the same time.
That said, obviously each of the bottlenecks had parents, who could presumably qualify.
And yes, I am greatly over-simplifying for brevity.
And no, I am not saying that this is proof of Genesis.
Just that the science and the Bible are not inconsistent, which is something both sides of such debates often forget.
51
posted on
01/17/2006 9:42:40 AM PST
by
MeanWestTexan
(Many at FR would respond to Christ "Darn right, I'll cast the first stone!")
To: Red Badger
The Irish all could be (and probably are) descendents of a paramecium, but that paramecium is not the most fertile Irishman.
52
posted on
01/17/2006 9:43:09 AM PST
by
AntiGuv
(™)
To: MeanWestTexan
Like you said, the timeframe issues are huge. If Genesis is taken as metaphor, then that's a whole 'nother story. In other words, I completely agree with you.
But Adam and Eve would still not be Irishmen!!!
53
posted on
01/17/2006 9:45:10 AM PST
by
AntiGuv
(™)
To: NormsRevenge
My wife teaches at a french school here in San Francisco and every year this one kid brings a list indicating he decends from Charlamagne. I guess if your offspring and their offspring survive for a couple of thousand years you are gonna have a lot of descendants.
To: AntiGuv
LOL!!...The point I was trying to make was that the "Fertility" of the Irish may have been inherited through descendants of Abraham. Somebody got the "hot" gene............
55
posted on
01/17/2006 9:46:09 AM PST
by
Red Badger
(And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against him)
To: Lekker 1
Smurfit Institute of Genetics They also determined that Papa Smurf was the most fertile Smurf and Smurfette was the most tired.
56
posted on
01/17/2006 9:46:41 AM PST
by
techcor
To: AntiGuv
Genesis says there were TWO different days of creation. The first was on the 6th day and the second is described happening after the 7th day of rest wherein there was no man to till the ground. Then the ground tiller was formed and he was given a whole new set of animals to name.
Note back in that first description man in the flesh created in the image of OUR and God, was given dominion of animals, sea, etc., totally different than the creatures of the tiller of the ground was given.
The Bible is about The Adam, his generations and the generations he and his came into contact with until to birth of Christ who is the giver of life. Eve was said to be the mother of all living.... and WHO does the Bible tells us it is that is the LIFE giver.... Christ.
To: AntiGuv
That is why it is called "faith".
58
posted on
01/17/2006 9:50:30 AM PST
by
Blood of Tyrants
(G-d is not a Republican. But Satan is definitely a Democrat.)
To: NormsRevenge
He may have been fertile, but he was still hung like a roll of dimes.
59
posted on
01/17/2006 9:51:08 AM PST
by
ChuckShick
(He's clerking for me...)
To: Blood of Tyrants
Faith or no faith, Noah and Adam were not Irishmen! Geez.. ;^)
60
posted on
01/17/2006 9:52:11 AM PST
by
AntiGuv
(™)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-111 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson