does it prove we all came from the same maternal parent .since the information on mitochondrial dna is only maternal.And can you add some other info on that.
2007-05-15 16:05:33 · 9 answers · asked by mark 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Biology
It proves we come from a very narrow set of females, not only one. It has been calculated original stock for human gene pool consisted on 50 couples. Besides remember bible eve was created by divine intervention, and human mitochondrial dna is very similar to primate's mitochondrial dna.
2007-05-15 16:09:55 · answer #1 · answered by pogonoforo 6 · 5⤊ 1⤋
applying each and every of the genealogies interior the Bible, human beings pass back a minimum of 20,000 years to as much as 60,000 years. Y-chromosomal Adam does not pass back so a techniques as Mitochondrial Eve that's fairly info that the Bible is actual. the three different halves on the Ark weren't appropriate so mitochondrial Eve is going back to Eve. however the three brothers have been appropriate so Y-chromosomal Adam basically is going back to Noah. info does not rely to those that do not choose to believe.
2016-11-04 01:55:16 · answer #2 · answered by atalanta 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Science can prove absolutely nothing...thus science cannot state that there is no God or that there was no Eve. Science can only provide evidence.
Now, to answer the question: mitochondrial DNA is strong evidence to support a common female ancestor. However, due to the natural variation that can occur in DNA over time (due to mutations), extensive studies as to the actual genetic sequencing of other women's mDNA from various eras compared to "Eve's" needs to be done. This could then be compared to what science believes to be the mutation rate of mDNA to further have supporting evidence.
Mitochondrial DNA within human cells has many similarities to other species as well. BUt don't fret...as I tell many who ask me...it can be argued that when the Maker designed DNA the first time around, He decided to keep some things consistent. As the old saying goes, "why fix what ain't broken?"
2007-05-18 09:12:29 · answer #3 · answered by Kinase 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
It proves that the Bible stories are just interpretations of the understanding of the men who wrote them. If you accept that mitochondrial DNA evidence is correct, as you should, then it could not have arisen 6000 years ago, but much earlier, and not in the Middle East, but in Africa.
Other than that, yes, it's correct, we possibly did have a single female ancestor. But I think that they have found we may have 6 or 7 different origins of mitochondrial DNA.
2007-05-15 17:19:46 · answer #4 · answered by Labsci 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, it just proves that mitochondrial DNA is inherited maternally, not necessarily inherited from ONE ancestral human. I think there's better evidence for supporting Adam/Eve, this is not one of them, sorry. Keep researching though and asking questions! Never stop.
2007-05-15 16:10:44 · answer #5 · answered by abby j 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Absolutely not. This female lived 140,000 ago which is 137,000 years before humans had a written language and 132,000 years before the first human as deduced from the number of generations mentioned in the Bible after Adam. In addition, she wasn't the ONLY human that existed at the time, just the one we descended from.
2007-05-15 16:22:31 · answer #6 · answered by Michael da Man 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
No. But, recent research HAS learned that humans and chimps, for real, interbred for awhile and then diverged once more. Wouldn't it be funny if "Eve" turns out to genetically originate along the ancestral lines of those chimps rather than along the lines of man?
2007-05-15 16:15:19 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
No, it proves that we all derived from a 200,000 year old woman discovered in 1989, in Africa. The woman was named "Eve".
2007-05-15 16:18:37 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Email your problem to smokyhillbreit@yahoo.com
2007-05-15 16:30:20 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋