Black Spirituality Religion : Black Man PROVES Adam and Eve Biblical Story is a LIE : His DNA Dates Back 338 THOUSAND YEARS!

Donate

Please support destee.com, the oldest, most respectful, online black community in the world - PayPal or CashApp - Thank you.

Clyde C Coger Jr

Well-Known Member
PREMIUM MEMBER
Nov 17, 2006
62,551
12,037
www.amazon.com
Occupation
Speaker/Teacher/Author
It was Czar Nicholas II, comparing his DNA rate of mutation (change) to present progenitors. This challenged the established theories on the calibration of human dna, for which general science said that they have to do a new think, "going back to the bones" with consideration. Journal of Science 1998. With this new study the calibration of African Eve to present day sets her today just over 6,500 years.

Evolutionary Anthropology 12: 7-18 2003
Nature Journal . p 325 Jan. 1. 1987
Science. Vol. 270. 5347. pp 28 - 29
Yes, it will be interesting to hear your report.



There is definite corroboration with the dated links you offered. If there isn't anything more current, then these facts, based on heteroplasmy, confirm the Russian tzar's DNA and all accompanying data. For example, consider this information:

The question of the tsar's bones was finally put to rest after the remains of his brother, the Grand Duke of Russia Georgij Romanov, were exhumed; the results of the DNA analysis were published in
Nature Genetics in 1996. Like the tsar, the duke had inherited two different sequences of mtDNA from their mother, a condition known as heteroplasmy. But solving the mystery of the Romanov's
remains raised another puzzle that first troubled forensics experts and is now worrying evolutionists. "How often will this heteroplasmy pop up?" wondered Thomas J. Parsons, a molecular geneticist at
the Armed Forces DNA Identification Laboratory in Rockville, Maryland, who helped identify the tsar's bones.

Regardless of the cause, evolutionists are most concerned about the effect of a faster mutation rate. For example, researchers have calculated that "mitochondrial Eve"--the woman whose mtDNA was
ancestral to that in all living people--lived 100,000 to 200,000 years ago in Africa. Using the new clock, she would be a mere 6000 years old.


My question for you however willa is this, having knowledge of this, why not use it as a counter argument in the first place?

And based on the below, things such as evolutionary dating, etc... is quite inconclusive:

That, however, is squarely within the time frame of forensics cases. Heteroplasmy isn't always a complicating factor in such analyses. When it exists in more than one family member, the confidence in the identification gets stronger, as in the case of the tsar. But otherwise, it could let a criminal off the hook if his mtDNA differed by one nucleotide from a crime scene sample. Therefore, Parsons and Holland, in their work identifying 220 soldiers' remains from World War II to the present, now have new guidelines--adopted by the FBI as well—to account for a faster mutation rate. When a missing soldier's or criminal suspect's mtDNA comes up with a single difference from that of a relative or at a crime scene, the scientists no longer call it a "mismatch." Instead the results are considered "inconclusive." And, for now, so are some of the evolutionary results gained by using the mtDNA clock.

http://www.dnai.org/teacherguide/pdf/reference_romanovs.pdf

 

willa

Well-Known Member
REGISTERED MEMBER
Apr 7, 2013
2,402
1,238
There is definite corroboration with the dated links you offered. If there isn't anything more current, then these facts, based on heteroplasmy, confirm the Russian tzar's DNA and all accompanying data. For example, consider this information:

The question of the tsar's bones was finally put to rest after the remains of his brother, the Grand Duke of Russia Georgij Romanov, were exhumed; the results of the DNA analysis were published in
Nature Genetics in 1996. Like the tsar, the duke had inherited two different sequences of mtDNA from their mother, a condition known as heteroplasmy. But solving the mystery of the Romanov's
remains raised another puzzle that first troubled forensics experts and is now worrying evolutionists. "How often will this heteroplasmy pop up?" wondered Thomas J. Parsons, a molecular geneticist at
the Armed Forces DNA Identification Laboratory in Rockville, Maryland, who helped identify the tsar's bones.

Regardless of the cause, evolutionists are most concerned about the effect of a faster mutation rate. For example, researchers have calculated that "mitochondrial Eve"--the woman whose mtDNA was
ancestral to that in all living people--lived 100,000 to 200,000 years ago in Africa. Using the new clock, she would be a mere 6000 years old.


My question for you however willa is this, having knowledge of this, why not use it as a counter argument in the first place?

And based on the below, things such as evolutionary dating, etc... is quite inconclusive:

That, however, is squarely within the time frame of forensics cases. Heteroplasmy isn't always a complicating factor in such analyses. When it exists in more than one family member, the confidence in the identification gets stronger, as in the case of the tsar. But otherwise, it could let a criminal off the hook if his mtDNA differed by one nucleotide from a crime scene sample. Therefore, Parsons and Holland, in their work identifying 220 soldiers' remains from World War II to the present, now have new guidelines--adopted by the FBI as well—to account for a faster mutation rate. When a missing soldier's or criminal suspect's mtDNA comes up with a single difference from that of a relative or at a crime scene, the scientists no longer call it a "mismatch." Instead the results are considered "inconclusive." And, for now, so are some of the evolutionary results gained by using the mtDNA clock.

http://www.dnai.org/teacherguide/pdf/reference_romanovs.pdf
What would I use as a counter argument? The earth is made of elements actually millions, billions of years old coming from the elements of other planetary destructions which is common in space. But when speaking of humanity we are dealing with mitochondrial DNA (from mother) which dates humanity. The data of "26 times faster" than what science has theorized before in dating humanity is momentous. As I mentioned before, they have the "data", but they do not want to let go of their "theory" making instead data inconclusive, because then they would have to give a scriptural concurrence with science. This would require them to take God seriously, which would be very inconvenient to their pride and life style. So, they have elevated theory above evidential data. So many people "can't take the truth!"

Maybe this is what you meant. Why haven't I posted this before when talking about Adam and Eve? I suppose it is because I learn more as I go.
 

Clyde C Coger Jr

Well-Known Member
PREMIUM MEMBER
Nov 17, 2006
62,551
12,037
www.amazon.com
Occupation
Speaker/Teacher/Author
Maybe this is what you meant. Why haven't I posted this before when talking about Adam and Eve? I suppose it is because I learn more as I go.

What would I use as a counter argument? The earth is made of elements actually millions, billions of years old coming from the elements of other planetary destructions which is common in space. But when speaking of humanity we are dealing with mitochondrial DNA (from mother) which dates humanity. The data of "26 times faster" than what science has theorized before in dating humanity is momentous. As I mentioned before, they have the "data", but they do not want to let go of their "theory" making instead data inconclusive, because then they would have to give a scriptural concurrence with science. This would require them to take God seriously, which would be very inconvenient to their pride and life style. So, they have elevated theory above evidential data. So many people "can't take the truth!"


Yes, exactly willa, my reference to using this information in your initial counter argument, is precisely that ... Thanks, really enjoyed our conversation, as usual.






 

Latest profile posts

It's been a good while, but this place has always been home. Thankful to be here.
Hi! I'm not as active on this account as I want to be. For one I tend to forget that this site exists until I check my email. Two, I'm currently in the process of building up a fine art site for Oklahoma black and native historical references. The references correlate with another site that will be a storytelling site that has not yet been produced.
Happy to be back and gaining more knowledge!
Destee wrote on Cindy's profile.
Welcome Home Beloved! :wave: :love:
skuderjaymes wrote on Cindy's profile.
good to see you around Cindy.
Top