I am who I am.
Child of Mitochondrial Eve.
One can compare 'differences' between animals, birds and insects with safety but not humans. If Darwin was wrong and hypothesized my ancestors were monkeys I would not feel at all slighted, there is a similarity in that we both have opposable or a prehensile thumb and our DNA is disturbingly close.
While our ancestors have been around for about six million years, the modern form of humans Neanderthals and Homo sapiens only evolved about 200,000 years ago, so we have a had a generous time to finally settle on our path evolution. We all had to start somewhere.....I had no choice, I am who I am.
I recently read a condensed article on the origin of man. It was mooted by an expert in this field that there was insignificant mating between Homo sapiens and Neanderthals who were a close cousin of Homo sapiens having DNA over 99.5% the same. Insignificant or not mating is mating.
It was Neanderthals that did not survive evolution and became extinct around 40,000 years ago about the same time we are told the Australian Aborigine appeared in a place now called Australia having ‘walked’ so we are told from Tanzania with all the rest of us which if they were able to walk they would have been wading all the way. Incidentally at that time Tanzania was not a place, and it was going to be extremely difficult to walk as the continents had broken up 75,000 years prior. A true Australian Aborigine has a much closer resemblance to a Papuan or New Guinean than a Tanzanian so the ‘walk’’ for the Australian Aborigine was not possibly as long as we thought it was, so is it all guesswork?
Pangea was a supercontinent that existed during the late Palaeozoic and early Mesozoic eras. It assembled from earlier continental units approximately 300 million years ago, and it began to break apart about 175 million years ago, so where were the land bridges for the Australian Aborigine to cross enable them to call Australia home?
Now Civilization as we know it is only about 6,000 years old, which is really good news for the Creationist as the bible tells us God created the world 6000 years ago, now that is an uncanny co-incidence in anyone’s book. Homo sapiens who we have to assume were not God’s creatures having appeared around 194,000 Million years earlier did survive; as did the survivors of interbreeding between Neanderthals and Homo sapiens when a distinct human line was established, call it a Mixed-human species.
I cannot see any other reason for such a huge physical disparity between humans that I have to believe that the Negroid races were triggered as result of mating between Homo sapiens and Neanderthals, or alternatively if one finds that statement racially provocative it was the fair skinned races that were the result of this mating between Neanderthals and Homo sapiens. The more alert of you will note I am having two bob each way with this assumption keeping an arms-length away from any provocative politically-incorrect statement.
Visitors from Gliese 581G who had arrived here faster than the speed of light would not understand the critical importance of ”Political Correctness” and would wonder why it should tread lightly when discussing differences in skin colour, we do not theorise eye shape may have been caused by gazing for lengthy periods at the sun.
Those observant among you will realise I am not discussing race but physical characteristics between two human specimens. One has to be extremely careful where one treads with this subject.
If these extra-terrestrial visitors I write of that arrived from Gliese 581G from the constellation Libra observed an Australian Aborigine placed side by side with an indigenous Swede they would without doubt naturally assume they were two ‘similar human species’ whose path of evolution ‘was NOT from a common ancestor’ A mixed race person has two common ancestors as does a non- mixed race person. I watched a documentary that stated that “we all are descendants of about 29 hunter gatherer people in a place now called Tanzania”
It gets better; we were told our DNA can all be traced back to one female, Mitochondrial Eve. Where were the other females? Darwin theorised evolution began when we crawled out of the primordial ooze in one basic life form or another; there must have been more than one female-leaning single cell surely. To take it one step further could Mitochondrial Eve be alive and well today as the modern Female and who in her unique way helps to perpetuate the species.
After the initial discovery of the "mitochondrial Eve", the researcher felt uneasy about using the term "Eve" because it caused many to think that she was the only woman living at that time, much like what is written in Genesis of the Bible concerning Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. It is an interesting point when discussing this subject or astrophysics, God is never mentioned.
I want to strongly stress this personal observation is not meant to be in any way derogatory and has nothing to do with race. Humans were of different colour and physical traits way before we formed races. I am told that we ALL came from Africa, be that as it may.
The physical differences are such that speculation is worth debating without any frenzied name calling. I feel in the name of freedom of expression and freedom of speech I am allowed to debate this hypothesis. To appreciate these huge differences in physical appearance one only has to compare a true Australian Aborigine and a Northern European.
Wiki tells us “results show the genomes of modern humans and Neanderthals are at least 99.5% identical”, but despite this genetic similarity, the two species coexisted in the same geographic region for thousands of years.
Edward Rubin of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, who led one of the research teams, found there was no evidence of any “significant” interbreeding between the two. As an aside, a
difference of just .5% defective DNA can cause significant defects which can be passed on to one’s children and have devastating effects.
I suspect that is “significant” guess work on the part of Mr Rubin. He did say however "While unable to definitively conclude that interbreeding between the two species of humans did not occur, analysis of the nuclear DNA from the Neanderthal suggests the low likelihood of it having occurred at any “appreciable” level."
So he is having two bob each way here. To surmise even a low appreciable level means he agrees that interbreeding did occur and from thereon in it was a matter of time and intensity of the breeding to arrive at what Mr Rubin might term an “appreciable” level. Rabbits and Mice are a prime example.
Skin colour has nothing to do with living in the sun but all to do with pigmentation of the skin this is passed on through a person’s DNA and if there was .5% of Neanderthals DNA that was unlike the DNA of Homo Sapiens it could have been this crucial .5% that caused the diversity in human skin colour and physical difference that through mating triggered a human species on a parallel path of evolution. You’re Genes or mixture of Genes will determine who you are and your physical appearance. Big question who gets to decide a humans DNA, I MAY HAVE THE ANSWER
As I wrote if our ancestors ALL originated from Africa our DNA must have been very close but the discrepancy in skin colour and physical characteristic seem to prove otherwise. Is this the elusive .5% difference?
An insignificant likelihood of mating at any level between Homo sapiens and Neanderthals is all that is needed to have caused the establishment of a distinct human line born with a white OR black skin and with or without Negroid features. What we are being told to believe is the mating between Homo-Sapiens and Neanderthals had little or no effect on our physical appearance. Regardless I must assume there were two similar human species whose path of evolution was NOT from a common ancestry which can be discussed without even referring to skin colour.
Let us approach this from a completely different point of view.
in Part Two.