Good morning all human beings,

Once upon a time, I watched a documentary on the Discovery Channel or something, and scientists studied our DNAs, using the female DNAs from all over the world. As females, we carry a DNA that is passed on from generation to generation and it is never modified. The mitochondria or something, links us to our parents.


Anyway, scientists discovered that all our DNAs traced back to ONE female (Eve Syndrome).

Scientists believed that we are of ape ancestries. Christians believe that we are of Eve Ancestry. For now, DNA leans toward Christianity. The science community isnt too happy about it, but DNA is DNA.

If you are off, you are off

So, dont worry about being Chinese and Japanese, Korean, muts or Hmong or other kinds. The apple doesnt fall far from the tree. We're all apples, just different color and sizes, but in the end, we are still an apple.

We were meant to be separated by races and languages, to be disintegrated by God. If not, we'll be too smart for our own good

This was a plot for a Japanese RPG back in the 90's.

That means females are carring a female human DNA. What's the big deal? Humans are human because we share similarities and the similarities come from the gene. A human's genome is 99% identical to any person in the world. Beside how do you know that that particular gene is not from a prehistory ape? A human's genome is 90%+ identical to any ape.

Eve in the scientific community means the earliest homo sapien group we can find. Eve in the bible means a modern human. Two completely different things. The same DNA carried by famales over generations and the world supports the out-of-africa theory which says prehistory homo sapien became modern (modern here means the time span of less than 10000 years) human in one place then they migrated to over places. This also tells us the predecessor(s) or Eve(s) of modern human lived in Africa. It has nothing to do with Christanity at all.

First, I'm going to point out this is an Asian history forum, not the place to preach religious fundamentalist pseudo-science such as young earth creationism or intelligent design.


What scientists do know is that according to a mathematical formula, there could be a common lineage (DNA from one person) as recently as 500 BCE. However, this does not mean we are all descended from that one person. If this person does exist, then we all could share similar DNA.

Women made from the ribs of man? Man came from clay and dirt? First children engaged in incestous relationships? At the dawn of earth's creation, there were 2 fully developed humans?
These are fairy tales not to be taken literally.


Futhermore, evolutionary scientists have never said we are descended from apes. In evolution, we are descended from a common primate like creature. Apes, chimps, monkeys are our distant, distant relavtives, not our ancestors.
Our ancestors are the early cavemen, ie homo erectus, australepithicus, etc.

Finally, evolution has been consistently proven and reaffirmed as a valid scientific theory for the past 100 years through genetic research, archeology, zoology, geology, palentology. Ask me later if you want specific proofs.


And if you don't know the difference between theory and scientific theory:

Critics of evolution claim that it is "just a theory"
and therefore has not been proven. However, they have fundamentally misunderstood
the difference between a theory in general terms and a scientific theory because
the word "theory," is used differently by scientists in contrast to a lay person.
In everyday terms, the word "theory" means speculation or opinion;
essentially a hypothesis. In science however, they are are proven hypothesis
that have been verified by other sources. Furthermore, the only difference
between a scientific theory and scientific law is that laws are principles that
describe the fundamental nature of an event, and governs
a single action. Theory, on the other hand, is essentially more complex and
describes the actions and workings of the event. Therefore, a
phenomenon such as gravity is described through "Newton's Theory
of Universal Gravitation" and "Einstein's Theory of Relativity."

I think you were refering to Spencer Wells' Journey of Man: A genetic Odyssey.
I watched the documentary, then bought his book.
I thought I had found the answer to it all.
I prefer not to dwell durther on this for obvious reasons.
Read the book, you will either be impressed or disgusted with it.

All I know is I watched the Discovery or History Channel or whatever, and we, females of the world, carry a special DNA Mitochondria gene, that NEVER EVER changes through time. This DNA links us to our original DNA.

All our DNA, traced back to the SAME female DNA. They call it the Eve something.

Say what you want to say, but it is backed up by evidence.

Remember what I said in my post?

That particular DNA comes from the females of a group of homo sapien not A female. Evolution does not say all gene has to mutate. The term of eve in science is always the oldest homo sapien fossil they can find. Unless you can prove there was a time on earth there was only one female, without using a bible, your evidence is hardly evidence at all.

Don't bother, sounds like this person is on a mission.

"Say what you want to say, but it is backed up by evidence. "


How ironic...double standards...

The concept of Eve, in so far as the ability for the first person to use complex language and be anatomically modern human, was an idea that has been more of less accepted by evolutionary theory for a long time.
Whatever you read into the documentary it does not mean science has taken a blow and theology a justification since it more fits the evolutionary model rather than weakens it.
Don't mistake the using of the word 'Eve' as anything other than a chosen label. It sounds better than "Miss X"
The Single Origin theory is the modern orthodoxy.
In this all humans come from a very small population of modern humans which came out of Africa.
That the original human is called 'Eve' is nothing new (actually creationists should insist on 'Adam' since he was first.)
To trace the DNA markers all the way back to one person is not really conceptually astounding, other than they managed to technically do it.
In theory there has to be a first and this person bred with very similar archiac humans, of which she was born of one, and this is the branch which became homo homo sapiens. Her traits were passed on to the present.

There is nothing to be smug about. I neither denounce creationism, but I think at least that evolution from hominids from at least the later branches are pretty strong as a reality.
Whether God had anything to do with it, or if the Bible is considered literally true as an account of events, is not going to be proven by DNA.
It seems you have kind of misrepresented what the documentary was actually saying.
This is not a proof of the literal biblical Eve, nor that evolution is somehow disproven by science.

Mitochondria are seperate structure within a cell that performs several important functions within the cell such as converting stored food molecules into energy. Mitochondria is carried in the cells of ALL HUMANS however the mitochondrial DNA is only passed to children from their mothers. That is also true for animals but less true for some plants. The mitochondrial eve(the most recent common matrilineal ancestor of all humans) lived approximately 150,000 years ago.
There is also a male equivalent is the y-chromsomal Adam(who lived approximately 30000 to 60000 years after mitochondrial eve had died). Also over time mitochondrial eve and
y-chromosomal adam changes as lineages die out.

That is not right. It mutates *very slowly* over time. Otherwise people would not even be able to approximate the date.
Very similar but different mtDNAs make people think that there should be a common ancestry.
Just like how people tend to think that similar languages are related.

thank you. DNA stored in the Mitochondria (i.e. Mitochondrial DNA) mutates at a fixed period of time. Therefore by comparing the differences between 2 mtDNA can tell us how long the two has branched away from each other.

[quote name='iceangelic' date='Jan 16 2007, 11:23 AM' post='4871991']

Scientists believed that we are of ape ancestries.


Not true, and certainly not by the thoughts of the Paleoanthropologists I know.

I think we've all agreed that iceangelic needs to do a bit more research and delve a little deeper regarding this topic.

Can't agree more.

This topic is a VERY serious one going very deep in the rabbit's hole.
Don't start something you can't finish.