Creationist want transitional fossils. Can Evolutionists please have the fossils of Adam and Eve?

Question

I think it would be good if we found a sample of DNA of this "Eve" so we could check the ribosomal RNA to see if she really is the mother of us all. Her skull would also be nice.

Answer 1

Randy G carefully left out this part from hi eve DNA statement... The final sentence is my favorite.

Excerpt from Wikipedia... Wilson's naming Mitochondrial Eve after Eve of the Genesis creation story has led to some misunderstandings among the general public. A common misconception is that Mitochondrial Eve was the only living human female of her time — she was not. Had she been the only living female of her time, humanity would most likely have become extinct due to population bottleneck. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_Eve

Answer 2

It would be nice, but DNA does not survive well for hundreds of thousand of years, and it was that long ago that a single individual was an ancestor of everyone now living. As for the transitional fossils. people asking for such do not understand evolution (now a proven fact) and particularly the genetics thereof. Genetic information is stored in digital, not analog, form, so a one-bit change in inherited genetic code will have a minimum impact on the descendant. But, there is NO MAXIMUM: a one-bit change can activate all, or part, of an intron (or deactivate part, or all, of an exon), causing a change that is arbitrarily large. Hence, a missing "transitional form" may simply have never existed.

Answer 3

i love how 'inreno' is going straight away from this: "It takes a very particular set of situations to maintain some thing as a fossil" and then this interior the subsequent paragraph: "If Darwin replaced into accurate, and evolution is the traditional element, then transitional fossils must be everywhere" you'll imagine those human beings ought to understand what they're typing. I favor that Yahoo! solutions compelled you to listen for your answer previously you submitted it in order that as that folk like this can understand their personal failures. As for the fossils of Adam & Eve, somewhat we ought to continuously be asking the position any of the fossilised human beings from the pre-flood era are, thinking creationists look to imagine that maximum fossils got here about by way of flood. Did all of them fall apart even as a number of different species that supposedly died for the duration of it left a minimum of a few remains? weren't human beings meant to have lined the Earth, necessitating the international-wide nature of the flood?

Answer 4

Sure. We can give you the DNA of Eve.

Anymore smart questions?

--------------------------------------------------------------
Mitochondrial Eve (mt-mrca) is the name given by researchers to the woman who is the matrilineal most recent common ancestor for all living humans; the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) in all living humans is derived from hers. Mitochondrial Eve is the female counterpart of the Y-chromosomal Adam, the patrilineal most recent common ancestor.

The holder of this title is believed by some to have lived about 150,000 years ago in what is now Ethiopia, Kenya or Tanzania. The time she lived is calculated based on the molecular clock technique of correlating elapsed time with observed genetic drift...

====edit====

In response to "Kelly C" below, obviously there was a population bottleneck of some sort if we all came from the same female.

Whether this bottleneck was caused by there being only one female to mate from, or whether this bottleneck is caused by the decedents of every other female dying off, no one knows since we were not there.

Answer 5

All humans on this planet came from one human female. So we learned from mitochondrial DNA testing from 147 different women from all races around the world.

Answer 6

hmm wouldnt the dna of adam and eve be similar to the makeup of dirt and rib bone?

Answer 7

Oh yeah, sure, like we'd be able to tell? We'd just dig up a skull and say oh, this is this person or that person. right. lol

Answer 8

yeah thats a good idea. i mean why wouldnt they know where their graves were? i mean if these people created all of human kind, our ancestors would have had to bury them.

Answer 9

Christians dont claim that creation is a science.

Evolutionists claim that their faith is a science...though they have no empirical evidence.

Answer 10

Nobody cares about your sensless rantings about creation. It is hardly the point.