Posted on 02/25/2006 9:58:16 PM PST by restornu
Genetic archaeology zooms in on the origins of modern humans.
bookmark
ping
Many royal mummies from this period have been identified, either by modern scholars or 20th Dynasty priests who rescued some of them from the depredations of tomb robbers.
But we cannot always trust these identifications. The incomplete historical record is exacerbated by the fact that royal brothers and sisters, and even fathers and daughters, intermarried. Uncertainty abounds:
How was a particular pharaoh related to his successor?
Which of a pharaoh's wives was the mother of his heir?
There are also many unidentified mummies.
Could one of them be Hatshepsut or Akhenaten?
Were the two fetuses found in Tutankhamun's tomb carried by his wife Ankhensenpaaten?
Since 1993 microbiologist Scott Woodward has been analyzing DNA from the mummified remains of these pharaohs and queens, in cooperation with Nasry Iskander, chief curator of the royal mummies at the Egyptian Museum in Cairo.
YEC INTREP
ping
You mean it thinks its zooming in on the origins of modern humans? So far, alot of the more controversial pronouncements are being proven wrong just a few years later. Reminds me of peking man and alot of other so called early humanoids, which have been proven fake at a later date.
Archive?
You need to do some research. Peking Man was not a fake.
Near as I can remember, the closest to a fake was the Piltdown Man hoax.
Can you support your contention?
(Hint: Don't rely on the creationist websites, as they are full of mis-information on this topic.)
That's how science advances.
In fact, that how everything advances,
two steps forward, one step back
two steps forward, two steps back,
three step forward, and so on.
The kind of advance in knowledge you are looking for will not occur in this life.
I thought the creationists had established the last common male ancestor as Noah. That's a bit shy of 270,000 years.
Mais oui.
Molecular Clockwork And Related Theories
Athena Review
Posted on 02/25/2006 5:40:40 PM EST by blam
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1585561/posts
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)
Perhaps I was not clear on my post vis a vis the other posts I was responding too. When I said that great scientific pronouncements regarding DNA in the particular arena of the evolutionists are generally proven wrong just a few years later, that is precisely what I mean. Of course, science has starts and stops, but in no other area of science is it so polluted with a particular relgion. That relgion would be the anti God relgion.
That's rather an overstatement. It's more accurate to say that it has been shown that the full picture is more complicated than the one narrow "slice" of the picture that various prior studies have produced.
You know what? The anti God folks abound with uber overstatements, so I choose to use some of their own ammo right back at em. Now tell me about the Peking man thing and the overstatements used by that crowd.
...two steps back, one step forward.
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.