It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The DNA analysis also determined that, despite the fact that the thylacine resembled a cross between a dog and a tiger, it was a marsupial closely related to striped insect-eaters called numbats, and more distantly to kangaroos and koalas.
According to the Out of Africa Model, developed by Chris Stringer and Peter Andrews, modern H. sapiens evolved in Africa 200,000 years ago. Homo sapiens began migrating from Africa between 70,000 – 50,000 years ago and would eventually replace existing hominid species in Europe and Asia. The Out of Africa Model has gained support by recent research using mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA). After analysing genealogy trees constructed using 133 types of mtDNA, they concluded that all were descended from a woman from Africa, dubbed Mitochondrial Eve.
not really, it supports the out of africa model and what we know about the spread of early homosapiens
Originally posted by SugarCube
This is particularly interesting when taken in the context of the development of human beings - in both the "creationist" and "Out of Africa" model.
they dont all come from 1 woman in a garden of eden style eve
Although the surviving bloodline appears to originate from "Eve", surely there must have been "interbreeding" with another bloodline or we would have had severe inbreeding issues?
nope becasue her grand daughters and great granddaughter (so on and so on) breed with men not descended directly from her so the trait spread but the genetics got mixed up
Even breeding cousins, legal in many countries, appear to exacerbate existing genetic conditions and here we are talking about a single woman and her children as the source of human life. Surely not without some form of divergence added via breeding with other hominids?