Archive for April 6th, 2010

X-Woman a New Species? Don’t Tell Me; Evolutionists X-Pect it Will Cause a Rewrite of “Human Evolution”? Well, Not X-Exactly.

Church of Darwin,, Science, Uncategorized | Posted by Chris Parker
Apr 06 2010

(When Neanderthal DNA was finally tested, it was found that it matched yours and mine to 99.99%)This, even if they are eve found in association with “modern” humans it is an article of faith that they never interbred. Here with “X-Woman” they have to make the same claim although the finger was found in association with Neanderthal “artifacts”. It’s clear as our opening quote states, there is no evolutionary ladder–there are rather, a number of fossils, some of which are apes or monkeys and some of which are men.

They are basing their “separate species” claims on the alleged recovery of mitochondrial DNA. The problems with this approach are manifold and technical so may I just say that the claims they have made are grandiose, speculative and silly? Well, here is an article excerpt that might shed some light on the problems. The subject of the article is the mythical mitochondrial Eve:

“The validity of these assertions (re MtDNA Eve) is dependent upon two critically important assumptions: (1) that mtDNA is, in fact, derived exclusively from the mother; and (2) that the mutation rates associated with mtDNA have remained constant over time.

The fact is (again, as we pointed out in the earlier article), we now know that both of these assumptions are wrong!

Ann Gibbons authored an article for the January 2, 1998 issue of Science titled “Calibrating the Mitochondrial Clock,” the subheading of which read as follows: “Mitochondrial DNA appears to mutate much faster than expected, prompting new DNA forensics procedures and raising troubling questions about the dating of evolutionary events.”

In that article, she discussed new data which showed that the mutation rates used to obtain mitochondrial Eve’s age no longer could be considered valid.

Evolutionists have assumed that the clock is constant, ticking off mutations every 6000 to 12,000 years or so. But if the clock ticks faster or at different rates at different times, some of the spectacular results—such as dating our ancestors’ first journeys into Europe at about 40,000 years ago—may be in question (279:28).

Gibbons then quoted Neil Howell, a geneticist at the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston, who stated: “We’ve been treating this like a stopwatch, and I’m concerned that it’s as precise as a sun dial. I don’t mean to be inflammatory, but I’m concerned that we’re pushing this system more than we should” (279:28). Gibbons concluded:

Regardless of the cause, evolutionists are most concerned about the effect of a faster mutation rate. For example, researchers have calculated that “mitochondrial Eve”—the woman whose mtDNA was ancestral to that in all living people—lived 10,000 to 200,000 years ago in Africa. Using the new clock, she would be a mere 6,000 years old (1998, 279:29, emp. added).

“Mitochondrial Eve” a mere 6,000 years old—instead of 200,000?! Gibbons quickly went on to note, of course, that “no one thinks that’s the case,” (279:29). She ended her article by discussing the fact that many test results are (to use her exact word) “inconclusive,” and lamented that “for now, so are some of the evolutionary results gained by using the mtDNA clock” (279:29).

Which brings us to the point of this article. As we pointed out in our introductory sentence, the news gets worse. The “evolutionary results gained by using the mtDNA clock” are not just “inconclusive.”
They’re wrong! In the January 2003 edition of the Annals of Human Genetics, geneticist Peter Forster of Cambridge published an article (“To Err is Human”) in which he documented that, to use his words, “more than half of the mtDNA sequencing studies ever published contain obvious errors.”

He then asked: “Does it matter? Unfortunately, in many cases it does.” Then came the crushing blow for “Mitochondrial Eve”: “…fundamental research papers, such as those claiming a recent African origin for mankind (Cann, et al., 1987; Vigilant, et al., 1991)…have been criticized, and rejected due to the extent of primary data errors” (67[1]:2, emp. added).

Then, as if to add salt to an already open and bleeding wound, Dr. Forster acknowledged that the errors discovered thus far are “only the tip of the iceberg…,” and that “there is no reason to suppose that DNA sequencing errors are restricted to mtDNA” (67[1]:2,3).

One month later, Nature weighed in with an exposé of its own. In the February 20, 2003 issue, Carina Dennis authored a commentary on Forster’s work titled “Error Reports Threaten to Unravel Databases of Mitochondrial DNA.” Dennis reiterated the findings that “more than half of all published studies of human mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequences contain mistakes.”

Then, after admitting that “published mtDNA sequences are popular tools for investigating the evolution and demography of human populations,” she lamented: “[T]he problem is far bigger than researchers had imagined. The mistakes may be so extensive that geneticists could be drawing incorrect conclusions to studies of human populations and evolution” (2003, 421:773,…
Apologetics Press: How Many Times does “Mitochondrial Eve” have to Die? by Bert Thompson, Ph.D. and Brad Harrub, Ph.D.

As we’ve stated; we fully expect the claims about “X-Woman” to be significantly dialed back once the actual DNA tests come back. In the past few years the harshest critics of this kind of ‘science” tend to other evolutionists with either competing theories or else a certain naïveté about their reasonable criticisms remaining in house.

Do we need to mention what happened to Ida last year? That “fossil” went from the missing link that would “change everything” to just “missing” in about six months. Ardi, another much ballyhooed missing link is also in danger of finding “himself” dead again.

Every few months these days there is a fossil find that evolutionists claim is going to “rewrite” human evolution. Here are a few of such claims going back several years.

Archaeological Finds Add New Chapter To Japanese History .
Oct 21, 1981
stone tools found in Japan supposedly 50,000 years old were going to require rewriting textbooks.

Evolution .Fossils Read To Decipher Human History .
Apr 20, 1994

the private Institute of Human origin in Berkeley, Robert (Walter and his .studies may even rewrite— — the history of human evolution over the past 4 million yean. …

Fossil find could rewrite human history
Thursday, 10 December, 1998, 10:24 GMT
“[This is] probably the most momentous palaeoanthropological find ever made in Africa,” Tobias said of Tanzanian four foot fossil

Article: The Observatory; In the world of anthropology, hypotheses compete for survival.
Jun 16, 1999
Recently as 1500 Years Ago Could Rewrite the Timeline for Human Evolution Mystery Skulls ……

New fossils heat up the battle over who was the first human.(EVOLUT…
Jul 23, 2001)

(EVOLUTION)(Society)(Brief Article) … find Newsweek articles. … Wood of George Washington University, you “have to rewrite human evolutionary history. …
Paleontologists working at a cave in Spain have found 780000-year-old fossils of what they say is a new species on the human family tree. …

Discovery of human-like fossils may rewrite the history of evolution
Jul 12, 2001

Scientists say the new fossils suggest strongly that humans split from apes and walked upright between seven million and nine million years ago …

Skull may rewrite our evolution — Fossil called start of human lineage By MARK
07-11-2002, EVANS,
In what may be the most startling fossil find in decades, scientists in central Africa say they have unearthed the oldest trace of a pre- human ancestor – a remarkably intact skull of an apelike species that may have walked upright as far back as 7 million years ago.
The thick-browed, flat-faced skull was found in Chad,

European fossils rewrite human evolution: Canadian professor
February 19, 2002
CBC News Fossils of ancient human relatives suggest the beginning of the evolution of apes and humans occurred in Europe, not Africa, says a University of Toronto anthropologist

Prehistoric Dwarf Skeleton May Rewrite Human Evolution .
Bangor Daily News – Google News Archive – Oct 28, 2004

Fossils rewrite human evolution – Oct 8, 2007

WELL PRESERVED: An ancient Homo erectus skull was found alongside a Homo habilis jawbone, suggesting early human ancestors may have lived together.

New ape species rewrites our evolutionary history
23 August 2007
Fossil teeth from Africa of a gorilla-like species suggest that the great apes may have evolved more slowly than thought …Emma Young

Ancient Skull May Rewrite Human History
Beijing Review – Mar 11, 2008

Li said that although Xuchang Man was not as old as other discoveries, the skull could “fill a huge gap in our knowledge of human evolution.” …

Georgian bones rewrite story of human evolution
ABC Regional Online – ABC Regional Online – Sep 26, 2009

So I think what we are getting now, the new evidence, is helping us to think more about how little we know about human evolution. …

Discovery suggests humans, apes evolved separately
National Post – Oct 1, 2009

And surprisingly, it’s also rewriting the story of our relation to gorillas and … a complete rewrite about what is known about human and ape evolution, …

Darwin’s theory stands on both feet
Edmonton Journal – Nov 13, 2009

A Canadian scientist has spearheaded a study that could rewrite a key chapter in the story of human evolution, tracing the emergence of one of our defining …

Ardi rewrites human history
Winnipeg Free Press – Feb 8, 2010

Ida: This Changes Everything! This fossil Will Rewrite Human History
April 2009