Mitochondrial Eve for dummies

by bohm 29 Replies latest jw friends

  • bohm
    bohm

    Hey!

    Introduction

    Here is a quote some of you may recognize:

    "I just saw an article the other day about the mitochondrial Eve (ME) in Nature, I think its funny that after putting down evolution for so long, scientists are now seriously considering we all descented from one woman, just like the genesis said all along! Times are surely changing!"

    The problem with this statement is that it is kind of true, but it leaves the JW with an impression that science is finally beginning to dig up evidence for genesis, but scientists are just to dense to interpret it correctly. That is blatantly false. Let me give an example:

    Both genesis AND evolution predict humans existed 5000 years ago, and that is what we find. However no creationist would think this is evidence that support creation over evolution.

    Yet the ME, despite the fancy name, is nothing more than that situation in a different setting, and that is why no serious creationist would use it as an argument. So refuting it to a family member consist of nothing more than explaining them what it mean.

    Mitochondrial Eve for dummies

    Consider a group of 3 random woman and the following question: How many mothers do these women have?. The answer may be 1 (they are all sisters), 2 (two of them are sisters) or 3 (none of them are sisters). The key observation is that 3 women can never have 4 or more mothers. Thats it! Applying this on a greater setting, we can say for sure that a million woman will never have more than a million mothers, infact it is quite likely they have fewer since (presumeably) some of them are sisters.

    This quickly lead us to the mitochondrial Eve: First, consider all women alive today. Secondly, consider this groups mothers - notice the two groups need not be disjoint (in case a mom and daughter is alive at the same time). We can apply our key observation to the second group and say with confidence that this group cannot be LARGER than the first. We may repeat this again and consider the group of mothers of all the women in the second group - again this cannot be LARGER than the number of women in the second group.

    If we repeat this operation again and again we get groups of women where each group cannot be larger than the last - and in general it will get smaller each time a woman has more than one daughter [thus a reduction by 1/4th or something like that over each generation is not entirely unreasonable a priori]. At some point we are left with just one woman, whom we call the mitochondrial Eve. Whats special with her is that she is the direct descendant (on the maternal side) to all woman alive today, thats why she is called Eve.

    The properties of ME

    This emediately allow us to clear away some misconceptions. First off

    Nobody has ever been surpriced by the existence of a ME. It is a logical conclusion that she must exist, just like it is a logical conclusion humans existed on earth 5000 years ago. If our genomen didnt show signs of a ME, we would need to come up with some pretty funky rationalizations to make evolution work.

    Secondly, the ME was not the only woman alive at the time - plenty of other women coexisted and some have living descendants. The mitochondrial eve only talks about a strictly maternal lineage.

    Thirdly, you can do the same argument with men instead of women and get 'Adam'. This does not mean they knew each other.

    Fourth, The reason scientists care about this is that one can use these observation together with statistics and genetics to get an idea about how man evolved. What we find is that the ME lived about 200'000 years ago, and 'Adam' lived about 50'000 years ago. Furthermore, it allow us to trace how humans have migrated when the world was populated. This is why no creationist bring up the issue on his own - he know it is very strong evidence against the creation myth, and the only real defense is 'well the water canopy magically fix everything that has to do with genetics, without leaving a trace!'.

    Fifth, The dangerous word 'mitochondrial' refers to a certain part of the genomen found in humans which are only inherited from mom to daughter - this, and other properties, make the statistical analysis easier and is the reason why scientist work with Eve rather than Adam.

  • Lillith26
    Lillith26

    Great Info... Thankyou

  • Borgia
    Borgia

    What we find is that the ME lived about 200'000 years ago, and 'Adam' lived about 50'000 years ago.

    Although the reasoning is sound ... to consider WHO the first EVE was is quite a difficult one for you must first define wat a human is. And since all species are evolved .... the rise of a new species is not something easily determined. Even the defining line between what can be considered to be the EVE of the homo sapiens and the last of homo erectus. To me it seems to be quite a moot point really, a point that easily lends itself to be quote harvested.

    Cheers

    borgia

  • JWoods
    JWoods
    homo erectus

    Uhhhhh - ummm.....he he he he he .... he said "homo erectus".....he he he he ....ummmmmmmmmmm....

  • moshe
    moshe

    Christians don't like this dna stuff as it disproves the literal Garden of Eden story and the Flood of Noah story and by then association the divine story of Jesus becomes tainted, too.

  • inkling
    inkling
    Although the reasoning is sound ... to consider WHO the first EVE was is quite a difficult one for you must first define wat a human is.

    Wait, but I thought that "Eve" was simply the most recent common female ancestor of all currently living human females.

    Therefore, "what" eve was, "fully" human or some previous species, dosn't factor into the calculation... right?

    [inkling]

  • bohm
    bohm

    Inkling: True :-).

    Update! I messed up (slightly). ME is ofcourse the most reason common maternal ancestor to all living human, not just women. it doesnt really matter much - just consider the set of mothers of ALL living human, and apply the argument from above.

  • Goshawk
    Goshawk

    Exactly bohm,

    We all inherit our Mitochondrial genetic material from our mothers, more specifically the mothers egg cell mitochondria. The article I read several years ago traced the variation in mitochondrial genetic material into several major groups. The name of the article was The Seven Daughters of Eve.

  • loosie
    loosie

    I watched the national geographic show called the human family tree. I didn't see how it supported creation at all. It was talking about the humans we desended from not what we were before humans.

  • Farkel
    Farkel

    Scientific American had an article only two years back where a genetic researcher concluded that every human being on earth today descended from only a very few thousand ancestors who were alive a mere 2,000 years ago.

    Farkel

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit