Did Eve grow up in Bostwana?
Oct 28, 2019 17:10:12 #
What I will present is just an interesting science article but it raises some curious questions. Scientists have recently determined to the best of their present ability that the region of Botswana is the cradle of the human race: all of us came from an ancestral woman species located there 200,000 years ago. And by DNA was certainly black.
This may cause a good deal of consternation for those bigoted against African-Americans, as the two are related. Both share the same great, great, great, great, great...well, the same roots.
Also, for some Christians the time frame is preposterous: the earth is only 6 or 7 thousand years old.
Then there is the science factor collaborating with Evolutionary Theory. But the science is impossible to question. What we now accept as proof-positive of a person's guilt in criminal cases is DNA testing; their testing was extensive and came to this conclusion of humankind's origin. Yet maybe we can call her Eve and see the homeland of Eden in Botswana.
Here is the full article below: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/cradle-of-modern-human-life-found-in-botswana-maybe
Searching for the homeland of the modern human species has been a fundamental quest in science and culture, particularly because we all carry genetic echoes from our original fathers and mothers.
Travel back in time far enough by pouring over fossils and peering at genetic ancestry and the signs say all modern humans roaming the Earth came from Africa.
But Africa is an enormous continent featuring an overwhelming scope of geographical and cultural diversity. Today, anywhere between 1,000 to 2,000 languages stretch from the Saharan desert across the mountain rainforests to the savannah grasslands.
So, where exactly did our modern ancestors come from, long before they spread to the farthest reaches of the world? Northeastern Botswana.
This region of the African nation is the answer that the journal Nature revealed Monday in a study that traced the origins of the deepest maternal lineage known to humans.
The project, conducted by a dozen scientists from three continents, claims that the mother of all modern humans living today — from New Zealand to New York — originated in this region of Africa 200,000 years ago.
The project, conducted by a dozen scientists from three continents, claims that the mother of all modern humans living today — from New Zealand to New York — originated in this region of Africa 200,000 years ago.
“We have known for a long time that modern humans originated in Africa,” Vanessa Hayes, a geneticist at the Garvan Institute of Medical Research who led the study, said at a press briefing last Thursday. “What we hadn’t known until this study was where exactly this homeland was.”
The team combined genetic ancestry tracing with climate modeling to paint a picture of how our ancient mothers must have lived. This northern portion of Botswana — known as the Makgadikgadi basin — now contains arid salt flats, but the study says it was once a lush wetland, filled with enough animals and edible vegetation to sustain our hunter-gatherer ancestors.
This legacy carries on today in the way the Khoisan live. They are a group of hunter-gatherers who still inhabit this region and whose voluntary DNA contributions made the study’s discovery possible.
But before booking a flight to visit this motherland of all motherlands, it’s important to know that not all anthropologists and archaeologists believe this is the cradle of life. The debate has arisen because genetics appear to indicate one thing about human history, but fossils and artifacts point to something completely different.
For nearly a decade, scientists believed our human species — Homo sapiens — came from in Africa because the oldest fossils bearing our resemblance date back 200,000 years. But those specimens — known as the Omo remains — were discovered in Ethiopia, thousands of miles north of the newly proposed homeland in Botswana.
Moreover, the Omo fossils lost their mantle as the oldest known sapiens when a 300,000-year-old skull found even farther away — Morocco — was unveiled in 2017. That’s 100,000 years older than the date scientists have proposed for the Botswana origins.
So how can our DNA paint one picture of our origins, while bones paint another? Well, discovering the origin of modern humans involves more than tracing your maternal heritage.
What the study did
People often speak about “DNA” as though it is a singular entity, but human cells actually contain two types of this genetic material. “Nuclear” DNA, found in a cell’s nucleus, contains the information that defines most of human existence — eye color, hair color, height, mental capacity.
But a small fraction of DNA is housed in another part of your cells, the mitochondria. Mitochondrial DNA allows mitochondria to perform their key task of making energy.
Mitochondrial DNA is also special because you only inherit it from your mother, unlike nuclear DNA which is a mixture from both parents. Mitochondrial DNA can also serve as an ancestry stopwatch because it mutates 10 times faster than nuclear DNA, about once every 8,000 years.
Let’s say our moms are sisters, and yours develops a random mutation in her mitochondrial, while mine doesn’t. Your family’s mitochondrial blueprint will be forever different than mine. That single mutation serves as a fork in the road of our ancestry — one that can now be traced backwards through time (and space if our families move away from each other).
Since the late-1980s, geneticists have known that if you collect enough human samples from enough places in the world, then mitochondrial DNA can be used to trace maternal heritage from today back to the time when we diverged from our most recent common ancestor, which some refer to as Mitochondrial Eve.
Over the years, as more genetic information was collected from more people, this Mitochondrial Eve– whose mitochondrial DNA profile is dubbed the “L0 haplogroup” — has been traced closer and closer to southern Africa, landing squarely among the click-speaking Khoisan people.
But Khoisan remains and archaeological sites stretch across the region — from below the Zambezi river and Okavango Delta in northern Botswana to the southernmost tip of Africa. Over hundreds of years, this area has been influenced by migrants, such as non-click speaking Bantu cultures from central Africa — making the genetic picture murky.
“The first effort [of the study] was to seek out people who do not identify as Khoisan, but could potentially be carrying the oldest L0 haplogroup,” said Eva Chan, a bioinformatics scientist in the Human Comparative and Prostate Cancer Genomics Lab at The Garvan Institute of Medical Research, who co-authored the study.
So, Chan, Hayes and their colleagues collected 198 new DNA samples from southern Africans and compared them with about 1,000 previously collected genetic profiles from the region.
What the study found
Their results show that mitochondrial Eve — which statistically speaking is not one woman, but a group of closely related women — emerged approximately 200,000 years ago in the Makgadikgadi basin.
Based on their genetic data, the first families stayed in this region for 70,000 years.
“There was once a very large lake there… It stretched all the way from Namibia, across Botswana and into Zimbabwe,” Hayes said, adding that it was bigger than Lake Victoria — Africa’s largest lake.
The team proposes that by the time Mitochondrial Eve and her modern human offspring appeared in this region 200,000 years ago, Lake Makgadikgadi would have started breaking up into smaller bodies of water, creating a wetland.
Based on their genetic data, the first families stayed in this region for 70,000 years.
“Then suddenly around 130,000 years ago, we see divergence happening, or splitting up the lineages,” Hayes said. One group moved northeast, based on genetic analysis. A second branch of the original L0 families didn’t move south until 110,000 years ago.
To better explain why these migrations occurred, the research team created climate models, based partly on nearby ocean sediment cores that contain clues about ancient vegetation and rainfall.
“By comparing the climatic data with timelines of the genetic divergences, we found a striking pattern,” said Axel Timmermann, director of the Center for Climate Physics at Pusan National University in South Korea. “More rainfall around 130,000 years ago, northeast of the Makgadikgadi homeland created a green corridor — a vegetated corridor — for migration for the first group.”
This may cause a good deal of consternation for those bigoted against African-Americans, as the two are related. Both share the same great, great, great, great, great...well, the same roots.
Also, for some Christians the time frame is preposterous: the earth is only 6 or 7 thousand years old.
Then there is the science factor collaborating with Evolutionary Theory. But the science is impossible to question. What we now accept as proof-positive of a person's guilt in criminal cases is DNA testing; their testing was extensive and came to this conclusion of humankind's origin. Yet maybe we can call her Eve and see the homeland of Eden in Botswana.
Here is the full article below: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/cradle-of-modern-human-life-found-in-botswana-maybe
Searching for the homeland of the modern human species has been a fundamental quest in science and culture, particularly because we all carry genetic echoes from our original fathers and mothers.
Travel back in time far enough by pouring over fossils and peering at genetic ancestry and the signs say all modern humans roaming the Earth came from Africa.
But Africa is an enormous continent featuring an overwhelming scope of geographical and cultural diversity. Today, anywhere between 1,000 to 2,000 languages stretch from the Saharan desert across the mountain rainforests to the savannah grasslands.
So, where exactly did our modern ancestors come from, long before they spread to the farthest reaches of the world? Northeastern Botswana.
This region of the African nation is the answer that the journal Nature revealed Monday in a study that traced the origins of the deepest maternal lineage known to humans.
The project, conducted by a dozen scientists from three continents, claims that the mother of all modern humans living today — from New Zealand to New York — originated in this region of Africa 200,000 years ago.
The project, conducted by a dozen scientists from three continents, claims that the mother of all modern humans living today — from New Zealand to New York — originated in this region of Africa 200,000 years ago.
“We have known for a long time that modern humans originated in Africa,” Vanessa Hayes, a geneticist at the Garvan Institute of Medical Research who led the study, said at a press briefing last Thursday. “What we hadn’t known until this study was where exactly this homeland was.”
The team combined genetic ancestry tracing with climate modeling to paint a picture of how our ancient mothers must have lived. This northern portion of Botswana — known as the Makgadikgadi basin — now contains arid salt flats, but the study says it was once a lush wetland, filled with enough animals and edible vegetation to sustain our hunter-gatherer ancestors.
This legacy carries on today in the way the Khoisan live. They are a group of hunter-gatherers who still inhabit this region and whose voluntary DNA contributions made the study’s discovery possible.
But before booking a flight to visit this motherland of all motherlands, it’s important to know that not all anthropologists and archaeologists believe this is the cradle of life. The debate has arisen because genetics appear to indicate one thing about human history, but fossils and artifacts point to something completely different.
For nearly a decade, scientists believed our human species — Homo sapiens — came from in Africa because the oldest fossils bearing our resemblance date back 200,000 years. But those specimens — known as the Omo remains — were discovered in Ethiopia, thousands of miles north of the newly proposed homeland in Botswana.
Moreover, the Omo fossils lost their mantle as the oldest known sapiens when a 300,000-year-old skull found even farther away — Morocco — was unveiled in 2017. That’s 100,000 years older than the date scientists have proposed for the Botswana origins.
So how can our DNA paint one picture of our origins, while bones paint another? Well, discovering the origin of modern humans involves more than tracing your maternal heritage.
What the study did
People often speak about “DNA” as though it is a singular entity, but human cells actually contain two types of this genetic material. “Nuclear” DNA, found in a cell’s nucleus, contains the information that defines most of human existence — eye color, hair color, height, mental capacity.
But a small fraction of DNA is housed in another part of your cells, the mitochondria. Mitochondrial DNA allows mitochondria to perform their key task of making energy.
Mitochondrial DNA is also special because you only inherit it from your mother, unlike nuclear DNA which is a mixture from both parents. Mitochondrial DNA can also serve as an ancestry stopwatch because it mutates 10 times faster than nuclear DNA, about once every 8,000 years.
Let’s say our moms are sisters, and yours develops a random mutation in her mitochondrial, while mine doesn’t. Your family’s mitochondrial blueprint will be forever different than mine. That single mutation serves as a fork in the road of our ancestry — one that can now be traced backwards through time (and space if our families move away from each other).
Since the late-1980s, geneticists have known that if you collect enough human samples from enough places in the world, then mitochondrial DNA can be used to trace maternal heritage from today back to the time when we diverged from our most recent common ancestor, which some refer to as Mitochondrial Eve.
Over the years, as more genetic information was collected from more people, this Mitochondrial Eve– whose mitochondrial DNA profile is dubbed the “L0 haplogroup” — has been traced closer and closer to southern Africa, landing squarely among the click-speaking Khoisan people.
But Khoisan remains and archaeological sites stretch across the region — from below the Zambezi river and Okavango Delta in northern Botswana to the southernmost tip of Africa. Over hundreds of years, this area has been influenced by migrants, such as non-click speaking Bantu cultures from central Africa — making the genetic picture murky.
“The first effort [of the study] was to seek out people who do not identify as Khoisan, but could potentially be carrying the oldest L0 haplogroup,” said Eva Chan, a bioinformatics scientist in the Human Comparative and Prostate Cancer Genomics Lab at The Garvan Institute of Medical Research, who co-authored the study.
So, Chan, Hayes and their colleagues collected 198 new DNA samples from southern Africans and compared them with about 1,000 previously collected genetic profiles from the region.
What the study found
Their results show that mitochondrial Eve — which statistically speaking is not one woman, but a group of closely related women — emerged approximately 200,000 years ago in the Makgadikgadi basin.
Based on their genetic data, the first families stayed in this region for 70,000 years.
“There was once a very large lake there… It stretched all the way from Namibia, across Botswana and into Zimbabwe,” Hayes said, adding that it was bigger than Lake Victoria — Africa’s largest lake.
The team proposes that by the time Mitochondrial Eve and her modern human offspring appeared in this region 200,000 years ago, Lake Makgadikgadi would have started breaking up into smaller bodies of water, creating a wetland.
Based on their genetic data, the first families stayed in this region for 70,000 years.
“Then suddenly around 130,000 years ago, we see divergence happening, or splitting up the lineages,” Hayes said. One group moved northeast, based on genetic analysis. A second branch of the original L0 families didn’t move south until 110,000 years ago.
To better explain why these migrations occurred, the research team created climate models, based partly on nearby ocean sediment cores that contain clues about ancient vegetation and rainfall.
“By comparing the climatic data with timelines of the genetic divergences, we found a striking pattern,” said Axel Timmermann, director of the Center for Climate Physics at Pusan National University in South Korea. “More rainfall around 130,000 years ago, northeast of the Makgadikgadi homeland created a green corridor — a vegetated corridor — for migration for the first group.”
Oct 28, 2019 19:06:10 #
rumitoid wrote:
What I will present is just an interesting science... (show quote)
Good article...
Mitichondrial DNA is amazing... It's like we have another organism living within our cells...
Think the article had an error though... I believe mitochondrial DNA evolves more slowly than regular DNA.... Minor mistake
Oct 28, 2019 19:20:54 #
Canuckus Deploracus wrote:
Good article...
Mitichondrial DNA is amazing... It's like we have another organism living within our cells...
Think the article had an error though... I believe mitochondrial DNA evolves more slowly than regular DNA.... Minor mistake
Mitichondrial DNA is amazing... It's like we have another organism living within our cells...
Think the article had an error though... I believe mitochondrial DNA evolves more slowly than regular DNA.... Minor mistake
I have no clue if you right about "mitochondrial DNA evolves more slowly than regular DNA" but it is the truest form of tracing ancestry. Indisputable!
Oct 28, 2019 19:26:52 #
rumitoid wrote:
I have no clue if you right about "mitochondrial DNA evolves more slowly than regular DNA" but it is the truest form of tracing ancestry. Indisputable!
Absolutely... Because it evolves/ changes at a much slower pace...
Oct 28, 2019 19:46:10 #
Canuckus Deploracus wrote:
Absolutely... Because it evolves/ changes at a much slower pace...
Tada!
Oct 28, 2019 19:49:06 #
Where in the bible does it say Eve grew up anywhere?
Genesis 2 -
22 Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.
This is what it has to say about where the Garden of Eden is. Does this fit Botswana?
Genesis 2 -
8 Now the Lord God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed. 9 The Lord God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground—trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
10 A river watering the garden flowed from Eden; from there it was separated into four headwaters. 11 The name of the first is the Pishon; it winds through the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. 12 (The gold of that land is good; aromatic resin and onyx are also there.) 13 The name of the second river is the Gihon; it winds through the entire land of Cush. 14 The name of the third river is the Tigris; it runs along the east side of Ashur. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.
Genesis 2 -
22 Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.
This is what it has to say about where the Garden of Eden is. Does this fit Botswana?
Genesis 2 -
8 Now the Lord God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed. 9 The Lord God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground—trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
10 A river watering the garden flowed from Eden; from there it was separated into four headwaters. 11 The name of the first is the Pishon; it winds through the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. 12 (The gold of that land is good; aromatic resin and onyx are also there.) 13 The name of the second river is the Gihon; it winds through the entire land of Cush. 14 The name of the third river is the Tigris; it runs along the east side of Ashur. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.
Oct 28, 2019 20:05:26 #
Oct 28, 2019 20:10:42 #
Rose42 wrote:
Where in the bible does it say Eve grew up anywher... (show quote)
Rose, the title was tongue-in-cheek, sorry. Meant to be ironic.
However, I am not one to take the Garden of Eden literally. "Maybe" is the best I can give. And I find no cause that a literal belief is needed. Has nothing to do with our salvation. "A disputable matter" as Paul says in Romans14:1-3: "Accept the one whose faith is weak, without quarreling over disputable matters. 2 One person’s faith allows them to eat anything, but another, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. 3 The one who eats everything must not treat with contempt the one who does not, and the one who does not eat everything must not judge the one who does, for God has accepted them."
There is other dogma, like the Trinity and Rapture, that are disputable matters and not one of necessary faith in Christ. But don't tell them that. Such beliefs are considered by many to be sacrosanct to being a "true Christian." Love God and your neighbor and your enemy: this is thoroughly safe ground for salvation. How do we love God and our neighbor and our enemy? Be as a little child. "And he said: 'Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.'" (Matthew18:3)
Oct 28, 2019 20:11:10 #
Oct 28, 2019 20:58:49 #
rumitoid wrote:
Rose, the title was tongue-in-cheek, sorry. Meant ... (show quote)
If the account of creation isn’t true then there’s no original sin and no need for Christ’s sacrifice.
Oct 28, 2019 21:19:10 #
Rose42 wrote:
If the account of creation isn’t true then there’s no original sin and no need for Christ’s sacrifice.
Depends what one considers the "original sin" to be....
But yes, I can see how it might trip you up...
Oct 28, 2019 21:39:03 #
Canuckus Deploracus wrote:
Depends what one considers the "original sin" to be....
But yes, I can see how it might trip you up...
But yes, I can see how it might trip you up...
It doesn’t trip me up. I go by God’s word which is very clear. You treat the word like a pot luck.
Oct 28, 2019 21:58:15 #
Rose42 wrote:
If the account of creation isn’t true then there’s no original sin and no need for Christ’s sacrifice.
Symbology is not untrue or a lie. Was Jesus ever actually a lamb?
Oct 28, 2019 23:46:57 #
Rose42 wrote:
It doesn’t trip me up. I go by God’s word which is very clear. You treat the word like a pot luck.
Not sure you are aware of what a potluck is...
Or perhaps it has a different meaning in the states?
Up North a potluck is a meal where everyone contributes food...
Oct 28, 2019 23:47:52 #
rumitoid wrote:
Symbology is not untrue or a lie. Was Jesus ever actually a lamb?
Cannot recall... Did we ever converse on the symbology of the Garden and the Fruit of Knowledge?
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.