From: admin@127.0.0.1
On Fri, 5 Dec 2025 01:02:13 -0500
JTEM wrote:
> RonO wrote:
>
> > When we got the Nenaderthal mitochondrial DNA sequence the estimated
> > divergence was between 250,000 and 500,000.
>
> So it had to be less than that. Period.
>
> They assumed a "Clock Like" rate of mutation which was the same across
> all populations. That's insane. It's literally intelligent design or
> creationism -- "God did it!" -- because it's a denial of evolution i.e.
> selective pressures.
>
> Our mtDNA is very important and subject to a lot of selective pressures,
> or at least it was. As the powerhouse of the cells, the evolution of
> the mtDNA was vital to the push north, the adaptation to colder regions.
> But at the same time, the mtDNA of populations left behind in warmer
> climates was under little to no selective pressures. So...
>
> We had populations that moved out of warmer climates undergoing fairly
> rapid evolution of their mtDNA while those in warmer climates saw
> little to none, their mtDNA supposedly having long since adapted to
> conditions. But, the estimates assume that both were evolving at the
> exact same "Clock like" rate. The result is a wildly exaggerated age
> for divergence.
>
> There's a similar problem with the y chromosome, though that's only
> tangentially related to climate...
>
Well argued, no ranting, so you *can* do it.
> > The current estimates using
> > the genomic DNA sequence places the event that gave the Neanderthals
> > their mitochondrial DNA closer to 500,000 years ago.
>
> Never trust molecular dating, or rotating sock puppets posting to
> usenet & pretending to be interested in science.
>
But not for an entire post, it seems.
--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
