RE: [asa] Humanity and the Fall: Questions and a Survey

Hi Rich,
 
I think it is hard to evaluate the Mona Lisa by simply analyzing the
pigment in the paint, although it might be one measure. DNA is
certainly a valuable tool, but not the only tool, especially considering
the difficulties extracting useful DNA from fossilized bone. The
physical characteristics of Caucasians versus the other races could have
come about by way of genetic mutation or partly from admixture.
 
You could measure genetic distance against geographical distance and get
a correlation, I'm sure, but Chinese are closer genetically to Brazilian
Indians than black Africans are to Greeks who are closer geographically,
so ancient migration patterns come into play and are not always easily
discerned.
 
I would think a comparison of skulls, and perhaps, body shapes would
yield some clues. The only positive indicator I know of is the bump at
the base of the skull which is unique to those of European descent (I
have it) and could be what's left of the famous Neanderthal bun that
served as a counterweight to their massive jaw.
 
Plus, there are reasonable inferences we can make from the push to
extinction of Neanderthals after contact with Homo sapiens and the human
tendency to save women and children while slaughtering the protective
males. Why should we think it was any different then?
 
Dick Fischer, author, lecturer
Historical Genesis from Adam to Abraham
www.historicalgenesis.com <http://www.historicalgenesis.com/>
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Rich Blinne
Sent: Monday, May 05, 2008 9:35 AM
To: Terry M. Gray
Cc: AmericanScientificAffiliation
Subject: Re: [asa] Humanity and the Fall: Questions and a Survey
 
 
On May 5, 2008, at 12:12 AM, Terry M. Gray wrote:
 
> Dick,
>
> Isn't the description you give here multi-regionalism? Not the
> prevailing view at present. (Despite what Glenn says.) From the data
> Rich summarized, if I understand it, the current human populations
> in each of the locations you mention are much more recent.
>
> Rich, can you clarify?
>
> TG
>
 
Sure. Before I start note this *none of this involves macroevolution*.
So all approaches (YEC, ID, and TE) have the same theological problems
caused by this. If you are going to deny the science you cannot merely
deny macroevolution you must deny genetics itself. Good luck. Dick's
thesis simply does not match the data. As I stated previously both
multiregionalism and out of africa could explain the data until late
last year.
 
Multiregionalism explains the data by what is known as isolation by
distance. This is because until the 20th Century you had limited gene
flow beyond your local area. Environmental factors such as the Toba
super volcano cause bottlenecks which in turn reduce genetic
diversity. So, you could explain the data by saying environment
factors that affected Eurasia and the Americas but not Africa would
explain why there is more genetic diversity again until late last
year. As Dick noted, multiregionalism also posits admixture with
Neanderthal. Current evidence is against that hypothesis but it is not
definitive as of yet. The biggest problem is the Neanderthal loci who
have to been selectively swept (on a gene complex and not single
locus) in 50,000 years. While there is evidence of natural selection
in humans it is mostly purifying natural selection and not directional
natural selection. Furthermore, DNA contamination may overestimate
gene flow. We are at stage two for the question of admixture, but at
this point it appears that modern humans and Neanderthal were separate
species and that all or mostly all Eurasian humans were replaced by
Africans. This hypothesis is also supported by the fossil data.
 
Out-of-africa claims that there will be decreasing diversity the
farther you are away from Africa and *that* is what we see. See here:
http://picasaweb.google.com/rich.blinne/OutOfAfrica/photo#51968753297703
10946
 
In order for multi-regionalism to be true you need to show
environmental factors that would be increasingly harsh the further the
distance from Africa! Again, isolation by distance does not care about
direction.
 
See here for where the genetic samples were taken:
http://picasaweb.google.com/rich.blinne/OutOfAfrica/photo#51968760341449
47506
 
For the bayesian analysis of the different scenarios see here (AF =
out of Africa, MRE = multiregional). Again OOA is preferred.
http://picasaweb.google.com/rich.blinne/OutOfAfrica/photo#51968769489729
81570
 
Rich Blinne
Member ASA
 
 
 
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon May 5 14:19:09 2008