Posted on 09/04/2010 10:15:45 AM PDT by SunkenCiv
About incest - sort of, but I’m not sure about the blue eyes thing - it’s a geographically common trait that occurs within a wide gamut of races (Europe, Middle East, India, etc.)
Shows the power of mathematics.
Still, all of this mtDNA analysis is under the cloud of discoveries that every now and then some mtDNA from the father gets in there and does stuff!
The Sa'ami ancestry of the Iroquois, Cherokee, Ojibway/Chippewa, Berbers, Fulbe, Yakuts/Sakha and the Sa'ami was demonstrated with such a mtDNA sequence referred to by some as "the X factor". This sequence is dated back about 9,000 years ~ at the end of the Younger Dryas. Not all Sa'ami have this sequence ~ there are others.
Given that we are all cousins to a certain extent and have common ancestors if you go back far enough then yes, we are all products of ‘incest’ depending on how you define the term. To be honest though, once you get to second or third cousin and beyond, calling these kinds of sexual relations ‘incest’ is stretching the term a bit...
You wouldn’t be a lawyer would you?.
Nope, considered becoming one, but I decided the pay wasn’t for me, so I decided to work in an assistant at a coin shop and just do the lawyer stuff in my spare time as a hobby instead...
Thanks redhead. The author has a really bad combover.
Unverifiable, non-scientific, estimations, and ramblings.
Anything but the Bible, Alex, for $200.
Thanks, it’s my pleasure. :’)
:’) She’s a real nowhere girl though. :’)
I wonder, wonder, who, I wonder who, who wrote the book of mtdna... ;’)
I doubt it. They used the fragmentary DNA info from a Neandertal as a “reference” for their approach to “calculating” the rate of change, meaning this “study” is bogged down in exactly the same way as previous “studies”.
This purports to show the last common female ancestor, at best.
That’s 200-fold. Name one study that says that.
Seems reasonable.
Good thinking on your part good luck.
The book traces mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosome histories, to find the original donors in our past. It is a very good book, with a lot of interesting ideas. I’ve enjoyed reading it. Not quite finished, but it’s worth a look.
Hang on, while I go look...
YIKES!! that looks worse than Bill O'Reilly or The Donald.
Thanks! Oldie related topic:
The Human Family Tree: 10 Adams and 18 Eves
NY Times | May 2, 2000 | Nicholas Wade
Posted on 10/10/2004 8:21:08 PM PDT by neverdem
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1241240/posts
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.