If as they claim all modern humans come from Africa, than why is our mtDNA not closer?

Question

If Eve's daughters move into an area and mated. Only the females passed on mtDNA but the males did not mate with their sisters, then why are there not pockets of mtDNA that is different.

Answer 1

As who claim and closer to what? Our mtDNA is close to our contemporaries, and also similar to our ancestors.

Answer 2

A Star Trek episode used the phrase "replicant fade" and compared it to making copies of copies. There's a slight change each time you do it. That explains the mtDNA changes.

With asexual reproduction one parent contributes all the genes. However, even with this method there are mutations and changes. That's how asexual organisims evolve.

When the "African Eva" theory was developed the mtDNA change suggested that "the idea of a single ancestral mtDNA molecule from a woman living in sub-Saharan Africa about 200,000 years ago" This has since been shown to be in error and the theory is no longer seen as valid.

While an mtDNA "clock" would greatly help in determining the relationships to human populations " the pace at which these clocks "tick" can be difficult to measure, particularly because DNA evolves at different rates in different species, and because rates may perhaps vary over time"

The "Out of Africa" theory supposed a small number of modern humans left and populated the world. Over time the mtDNA mutated and produced the diffrences we see today.

Answer 3

MtDNA isn’t the only DNA to tell a story—the DNA found in the chromosomes in the nucleus of our cell tells a story, too, but it is comprised of jumbled bits and pieces that could have been inherited from any one of our ancestors. The mtDNA story line does not meander; it is a straight shot back to one woman, nicknamed Mitochondrial Eve.

Other people were alive at the time, but she is the only one with a straight line of daughters untill today.

Eve’s daughters copied her mtDNA faithfully. But on occasion, as generations passed, a small variation would creep into one of her descendants. This change or mutation was copied just as faithfully for many generations, like a favorite family version of a classic recipe, until another mutation occurred

Our mtDNA today contains a cumulative record of all those changes, and by studying the mtDNA of people around the world—and their associated mtDNA mutations—it’s often possible to trace our mtDNA to a specific geographic region and even get a rough time estimate of when our ancestors were there

The individual mutations in your DNA set you apart from others and are called your “haplotype.” And people who share particular patterns of mutations in their haplotype fall into clusters called “haplogroups.” Some haplogroups are common in Africa, others hail from Europe, and still others are linked to Asia and the Americas.

Answer 4

You got the question wrong, I was never an primite. When Adam and Eve were created, there we not continents. The Bible says the earth was divided some time later so it does not matter where they got the bones of the so called ancestors of theirs. The things might have been human like because they were designed by the same Being who designed humans. If we really evolved, there would have been some people who would be more advamced than others i.e. getting past human becoming something else like a super human

Answer 5

mtDNA has a high mutation rate and little in the way of repair mechanisms. This is what makes it a excellent tracker of human evolution and migration; despite what some ideologues may think.

Answer 6

This theory is one of the worst abuses of logic in science.

What actually happened according to simple logic.
A single female somewhere and it doesn't matter where about 140,000 inherited a single mutation on her mitochondria. All humans are descended from her down the matriarchal lineage or female lineage. Through EVOLUTION all other mitochondria that were present were eliminated because of some specific unknown selection that favored that particular mitochondria. Saying that selection would only work if it happened in Ethiopia is bizarre and twisted logic that defies any grasp of reality and what actually happened. It would work equally well if the mutation happened in any part of the population. I wonder sometimes if paleontologists take basic biology or is this really difficult to grasp. I do understand why they think she lived in Ethiopia and it is even more bizarre. They think the current population reflects what lived there 140,000 years ago and because that population shows the greatest diversity in their mitochondria that makes them the oldest. The fact that the population is centered in human geography doesn't seem to enter their heads as a possible contribution to the diversity because humans apparently are incapable of movement except northward away from Ethiopia.

Answer 7

Some now believe differently.
The models we are taught of human history are based on interpretations that could well be MISinterpretations.

Check out the books I list under "sources". They put forth some very DIFFERENT theories THAT MAKE A LOT MORE SENSE!

Answer 8

It is close. We are one of the closest related species on this planet.

Answer 9

Closer to what?

The decision that our DNA is "not closer" is the results of which supervised and published studies?

Doth thou knoweth from what thou speaketh?

Answer 10

because it is proven that all humans come out of africa.