It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Age Confirmed for 'Eve,' Mother of All Humans

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Age Confirmed for 'Eve,' Mother of All Humans


www.livescience.com

A maternal ancestor to all living humans called mitochondrial Eve likely lived about 200,000 years ago, at roughly the same time anatomically modern humans are believed to have emerged, a new review study confirms.
The results are based on analyses of mitochondrial DNA. Found in the energy-producing centers of cells, mitochondrial DNA is only passed down the maternal line, and can be traced back to one woman.
However, this doesn't mean she was the first modern woman, rather it indicates
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 12:14 PM
link   

However, this doesn't mean she was the first modern woman, rather it indicates that only her descendants survive to the present day.


This is pretty cool. According to this we all came from 1 woman about 200k years ago. Every person living now on the planet currently is related, albeit distantly.

A pretty crazy notion. Makes me wonder what she looked like. And in that time we've mutated enough to be the different races.

I don't know I can completely bring myself to believe this. But it's fascinating nonetheless.

www.livescience.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 12:24 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 12:42 PM
link   
I'm surprised this is just seeing the light of day. A quick wiki source would show that scientists were looking at this theory as far back as 1988 (from what I found).

Shamefully the first thing that came to my mind was 1998's PlayStation game Parasite Eve. Takes the theory of Mitochondrial Eve and adds a survival horror twist to it.

It's a shame that modern day pop culture doesn't bring these fantastic theories to the mainstream public anymore.

PS: I'm new at this and did attempt to read the posting guidelines so if I'm "off-topic" just let me know.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 12:47 PM
link   
i knew they already knew there was an "eve" of sorts.

cool how they pin pointed the age though.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Mitochondrial eve isn't that new of an Idea. She's been around for a while. It just means that we all share the same mitochondrial DNA and common ancestor. It can defiantly prove evolution vs. creationism.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 12:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xiamara
Mitochondrial eve isn't that new of an Idea. She's been around for a while. It just means that we all share the same mitochondrial DNA and common ancestor. It can defiantly prove evolution vs. creationism.



That is one of the hugest debates of all. It is very interesting how science is slowly catching up to describe the things that are taught via creationism. As a man of science (engineering, not so much biological), I myself like to sit on the fence and watch.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by canderson180
 


In the words of louis Black "FOSSILS FOSSILS FOSSILS" I stick to evolution. I don't believe in the bible and hey maybe Adam and Eve if they did exist are really Apes that we evolved from



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 01:09 PM
link   
how come most people will say they dont know, the rest say creationism or evolution. theres such a small percentage that will actually think.. maybe evolution is a part of creationism? maybe the "creator" dsigned evolution? anyways im part of the large percentage that dont know and are not going to waste their time trying to find out.

even though its not a new theory... nice find, s&f



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 01:21 PM
link   
Humans are fiddy percent the same DNA as a Banana.
Ummmm, When did man come along again?
And did us and the Baanana hava common ancestor.
( would this explain sheeple?)

Ps I know that Harvard / MIT did a study that shows man did have go back sex wth his Chmpy ex a few times and the kids were viable...


NEW YORK (AP) - One of the most detailed comparisons yet of human and chimp DNA shows that the split between the two species was a long, messy affair that may even have featured an unusual evolutionary version of breakup sex.

Previous genetic research has shown that chimpanzees and humans are sister species, having split off from a common ancestor about 7 million years ago. The new study goes farther by looking at approximately 800 times more DNA than earlier efforts

www.wtopnews.com...

"It's a totally cool and extremely clever analysis," said Daniel Lieberman, a professor of biological anthropology at Harvard who wasn't involved in the study. "My problem is imagining what it would be like to have a bipedal hominid and a chimpanzee viewing each other as appropriate mates _ not to put it too crudely."


Well who was the daddy and who was the mummy? inquiring minds want to know...the go back with two beasts?


The new data also suggest the final human-chimp split was much more recent than the 7 million-year date that fossils and previous studies indicate _ certainly no earlier than 6.3 million years ago, and more likely in the neighborhood of 5.4 million years



[edit on 19-8-2010 by Danbones]

[edit on 19-8-2010 by Danbones]



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 01:30 PM
link   
haha, what's interesting here is that for decades the atheist and agnostic crowd argued on how we came about, because if there were no women then how did Cain have children.

Religious christians argued that there were sisters that were alive during that time, so cain's wife or wives or baby mother must have been his sister(s).

In response to this atheist/agnostics said "ewwwwww so we are all inbreds?"

hahaha, it seems whether you are religious or not we are inbreds.

It's funny because nobody wins!



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 01:34 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 01:37 PM
link   
Yeah, a big part of why I never believed the creation story of Adam and Eve is because of the inbreeding.

"I choose to procreate with my mother/sister in the name of God." lol please.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by grey580



However, this doesn't mean she was the first modern woman, rather it indicates that only her descendants survive to the present day.


This is pretty cool. According to this we all came from 1 woman about 200k years ago. Every person living now on the planet currently is related


We're like a walking talking example to the Universe that no matter how much you love your cousins or sister you shouldn't sleep with them, or you'll end up like the Terran's.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 01:39 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 01:39 PM
link   
This reminds me of the chicken and the egg. Before anyone flames me for linking to Fox News, I'd say it'd be pretty hard for the MSM to bias this one.

Chicken and the egg, mitochondrial eve, composition of the sun. Scientific advances made in these questions all summer long. Wonder what's in store for the next decade.


www.foxnews.com



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 01:41 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by canderson180
 


*sigh*
This is my problem with scientists:
For the egg to be viable it has to be fertilized which means
the rooster came first.

seriously.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 01:45 PM
link   
Just to recap -

1. The human species split from chimps slowly, and separated distinctly about 7 million years ago, but chimps are still our closest ancestors.

Then,

2. 200,000 years ago, there was another distinct evolutionary break resulting in homo sapiens and our all having the same great-great-great-great-great-great+ grandmother.

My question, given that the info is accurate:

Who were our ancestors during that intervening 6.8 million year period, and what happened to them? ...Was there an apocalypse 200,000 years ago, and only one woman of one homo species survived? Did humans nearly go extinct? Or what?





posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by soficrow
 


Visitors from Planet Nibiru, maybe Cylons?

Kidding aside, there had to have been some kind of external influence or major catastrophe to make such a dramatic shift in genetic makeup.


Anyone know of any major events or ancient references from 200,000 to 150,000 years ago?



new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join