Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Your math is just fine. In fact, it's very conservative, many people would say that 20 years defines a generation for reproductive purposes.
The genetic differences between human races is very small. And it doesn't take long to dissipate them - three or four generations of interbreeding are enough to disassemble the constellation of visible traits that we use to define the different races.
Do you know what identical means? You made the claim that all humans are genetically identical. We're not. If you meant something different you should have written something different.
Did I say that interspecies breeding was the primary cause of human differences? No. Reply to what I wrote, not what you imagined I wrote.
No, clearly you're the one who needs to read up on population genetics because you don't understand what you're talking about. All humans share a common ancestor with one another, but we also share a common ancestor with Neanderthals. If we go back far enough then there was a Mitochondrial Eve for both humans and Neanderthals as well. That doesn't mean that we have the same mitochondrial DNA. You and I don't I have the same mt DNA. Your mother's lineage diverged from mine a long time ago.
You need to read up on Mitochondrial Eve and Y DNA, because you have a poor understanding of the concepts. Knowledge is key.
Look at this phylogenetic tree. You can see that neanderthals have a longer divergent time than the time between Africans and non Africans.
Look at this phylogenetic tree. You can see that neanderthals have a longer divergent time than the time between Africans and non Africans.
Nobody claims otherwise. Neanderthals and the ancestors of homo sapiens diverged several hundred thousand years ago, then these two lines remixed when modern humans left Africa and entered neanderthal lands about 50 thousand years ago. Non-African humans today are to some extent hybridized as a result, although the amount of neanderthal DNA in us is small.
Look at this phylogenetic tree. You can see that neanderthals have a longer divergent time than the time between Africans and non Africans.
What point are you trying to make now? You seem to have abandoned your previous assertion that all humans share the same mt DNA. Now you are just saying that Neanderthals diverged longer ago than non-Africans did from Africans. I agree with this and never claimed otherwise.
A few points to add though. There was a time when there was a non-African population that shared mt DNA with Neanderthals. This mt DNA lineage died off, but the Neanderthal contribution still lives on in the nuclear DNA of Eurasians. Suppose that the mt DNA carried by Neanderthals increased fitness for Eurasians and all Eurasians carried the Neanderthal variation. If that Neanderthal mt DNA still survived in Eurasians, then that tree you posted would look very different. It would show Eurasians being more closely related to Neanderthals than they are to Africans.
I hope that you understand that mt DNA doesn't show genetic similarity. Only nuclear DNA can show that.
The genetic differences between human races is very small. And it doesn't take long to dissipate them - three or four generations of interbreeding are enough to disassemble the constellation of visible traits that we use to define the different races.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what your stating, but evidence doesn't support your claim. There has been mixing of races in Brazil for hundreds of years. Some people are part sub-Saharan African and part European. Some look more African and some look more European and this is based on their percentage of ancestry from either continent.
We see the same thing in other parts of the world. In central Asia, there are people like the Kazakhs and Uyghurs, who are a mix of Europeans and East Asians. Some look more European and some look more East Asian. Some look like a mixture of the two. The traits that we call races certainly haven't been disassembled.
According to science, Homo Sapiens left Africa about 100,000 years ago. And, Europeans and Asians are separated only about 60,000 years ago.
Is 100,000 years really long enough for people to evolve so differently to get the result of Africans and whites? Is 60,000 years really long for people to be so different as the whites and Asians? Do you think other "humans" were inter-mixed with them to create these differences?
The numbers have to fit the agenda. So yes, anything is possible.
When an article on human ancestry goes for the N-word in the second sentence...... you gotta know it's crap.
It's from MIT ...not sure why mentioning Nazi eugenics makes it crap but whatever...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
