Humanity's Common Ancestor Only ~3500 Years Old

[Ramo]

There's no such thing as a purely mathematical model (for something like this). They're getting the migration data from somewhere, be it from DNA evidence or somewhere else.

[Ramo]

You actually believe that everyone alive today is descended from one person. Your delusion has reached new heights. It's actually pretty sad to see someone so blind.

Pot kettle black.

[Berzerker]

The Australian Aboriginies were isolated for 40000 years or whatever. Does this mean they're not human?

No, it means the "computer program" is bogus - does not compute...

Ramo, how did people live in N & S America 6,000 years ago, people who have descendents there today, come from a parent living in SE Asia 3,500 years ago? Or how could Autralian aborigines who've been down under for ~60 k?

This is interesting though, and let's say they're off a few thousand years, does the Tower of Babel ring a bell? According to what I've read on it, a relatively small group of people in a Mesopotamian city within maybe the past 12,000 years angered God by building a structure that would ascend Heaven. If this really happened then the structure must have been a real threat, not just a man made mountain (ziggurat). And what was God's punishment? He scattered the people to the corners of the Earth and confounded (or caused by dispersion) their languages.

But there's still many problems with this news, other research estimates the time it takes for color changes, i.e., how fast a black man from Africa would need to live in N Europe to become white. And so far the estimate is 20,000 years. Now, it's possible our common parent was a soldier who got laid alot wherever the army went or Momma was a slave girl or something, maybe even a prostitute...

But this requires us to believe that where ever peoples had been established for millennia, this parent sired offspring who would supplant the world's population in 3,500 years. I'd believe the Babel story before I believed that...

[Iskandar Reza]

At any rate, it's still a theory based on simulation of numbers, yet to be proven. If another lab elsewhere replicates the experiment and gets the same date, maybe it'll move a notch up in my list. But without anything else other than numbers and stats I'll still consider it purely mathematical. After all migration data is still statistics and thats numbers.

Until then I still think the date's too recent.

[Berzerker]

i have no doubts that we all share a common ancestor, maybe not as old as the mitochodrial eve, but not as recent as this purely mathematical model suggest.

I believe mitochondrial Eve is by definition, the common ancestor. So far they estimate her around 250,000 years ago. The Sumerians/Akkadians have myths about the creation of the first people and according to the Bible there is a cryptic passage about God's spirit or breath residing in man for 120 years. This has been taken to mean 120 years and researchers say it might refer to how long one of the major patriarchs lived, but this could also mean 120 years in "God's" years, which according to the Mesopotamians, was 3,600 years. That's 432,000 years, and this just happens to be the time frame when anatomically modern humans were "evolving" from a more "primitive" creature - and that's just how the Sumerians describe what happened to "create" us... The gods found a creature they altered to enhance intelligence etc to make a "primitive worker" to slave away for the gods... The Zulu believe in very old times the "artificial ones" went to war with the apemen...

[Iskandar Reza]

So the Zulu believe we're the artificial ones?

[Ramo]

Ramo, how did people live in N & S America 6,000 years ago, people who have descendents there today, come from a parent living in SE Asia 3,500 years ago? Or how could Autralian aborigines who've been down under for ~60 k?

Interbreeding into the original population. Let's suppose that a guy gets in the Americas 1500 years ago, let's suppose every generation is 30 years, meaning 50 generations. If, on average, the number of people descended from him increases by 1.5 times each generation, you get .64 billion descendents by today. It's a simple model with made up assumptions, but surely you get the idea.

But there's still many problems with this news, other research estimates the time it takes for color changes, i.e., how fast a black man from Africa would need to live in N Europe to become white. And so far the estimate is 20,000 years. Now, it's possible our common parent was a soldier who got laid alot wherever the army went or Momma was a slave girl or something, maybe even a prostitute...

If you were 10^-32 Vietnamese (i.e. 100 generations away, to be conservative), you wouldn't look very Vietnamese. This has absolutely nothing to do with skin color.

BTW, I don't believe that claim. What about the Roma (originally from South Asia - not a very different skin tone from Subsaharan Africans)? They've turned white in far shorter time periods than 20,000 years.

[Ramo]

At any rate, it's still a theory based on simulation of numbers, yet to be proven. If another lab elsewhere replicates the experiment and gets the same date, maybe it'll move a notch up in my list. But without anything else other than numbers and stats I'll still consider it purely mathematical. After all migration data is still statistics and thats numbers.

I don't think you understand what mathematical modelling is...

[Iskandar Reza]

Originally posted by Ramo
I don't think you understand what mathematical modelling is...

Maybe I don't. But pinning my believes on just the figures without relating it to all the facts is not something I do.

Interbreeding into the original population. Let's suppose that a guy gets in the Americas 1500 years ago, let's suppose every generation is 30 years, meaning 50 generations. If, on average, the number of people descended from him increases by 1.5 times each generation, you get .64 billion descendents by today. It's a simple model, but surely you get the idea

You have a good point here.

If you were 10-32 Vietnamese (i.e. 100 generations away, to be conservative), you wouldn't look very Vietnamese. This has absolutely nothing to do with skin color.

That's true. This last post actually makes the model clearer, but I still think it's not entirely sound. It's too optimistic.

[Ramo]

Maybe I don't. But pinning my believes on just the figures without relating it to all the facts is not something I do.

Modeling takes factual relationships of a system and defines them in mathematical terms.

[Ramo]

This last post actually makes the model clearer, but I still think it's not entirely sound. It's too optimistic.

I was just throwing out numbers and assumptions that sound semi-reasonable and are fairly simple and put them into a calculator. That's not what these guys did.

[Iskandar Reza]

I'll look out for the follow up research, until then I still think 1500 b.c. is too recent. Gotta be one hell of a prolific parent with wanderlust instilled into all the offsprings.

[Ned]

It is hard to believe that the peoples of America were related to anyone in the old world subsequent to the ice age. Yet, that is what this research implies.

[Berzerker]

So the Zulu believe we're the artificial ones?

Yes, but they were referring specifically to ancient Africans. I'm not sure about the Zulu's origin but I believe they came from NE and EC Africa, but what I found interesting was their use of "artificial ones", albeit all peoples believed we were fabricated by God(s).

But there is a Mayan/Toltec legend that says some of the earliest attempts to create humans resulted in strange beings that did not survive, including ape people. The Sumerian tale describes how, far from perfect, the gods charged with our creation were like scientists experimenting on some creature and not every result went as planned, not omnipotent beings who don't screw up.

Ramo -

Interbreeding into the original population. Let's suppose that a guy gets in the Americas 1500 years ago, let's suppose every generation is 30 years, meaning 50 generations. If, on average, the number of people descended from him increases by 1.5 times each generation, you get .64 billion descendents by today. It's a simple model with made up assumptions, but surely you get the idea.

So a SE Asian had (not intentionally of course)
offspring go around the world and supplant existing populations all within the last 3,500 years? Then the mitochondrial Eve would have existed 3,500 years ago...
Was this a math model based on the actual evidence from DNA? While there are cases of minority influxes eventually supplanting a population, that's very rare.
Usually a minority influx results in assimilation, elimination, or deportation. Even with the eons of time separating New World natives and European whites and the clash of cultures and diseases, natives have not been supplanted. But some guy's lineage from 3,500 years ago supplanted the world? Trust me Ramo, there's something wrong with the model.

Also, those numbers seem to make assumptions, that this one line grew and grew and was not subject to all that ails us.

If you were 10-32 Vietnamese (i.e. 100 generations away, to be conservative), you wouldn't look very Vietnamese. This has absolutely nothing to do with skin color.

It does if skin color doesn't change that fast. There's way too much variation in people... Pygmies and Watusis living on the same continent, did this SE Asian guy sire both peoples? Another of his offspring sailed for America, another for Australia, and another for Japan, and so on...

BTW, I don't believe that claim. What about the Roma (originally from South Asia - not a very different skin tone from Subsaharan Africans)? They've turned white in far shorter time periods than 20,000 years.

I'd have to see the research. Many Eskimos appear white where the sun don't shine, but they are newcomers to N America after generations in NE Asia too.

[Berzerker]

Gotta be one hell of a prolific parent with wanderlust instilled into all the offsprings.

If true, earth shattering... exxxtremely unlikely...