According to the authors all our mitochondria came from a very small population about 100,000 to 200,000 years ago, perhaps as small as a population size of two, though later in the paper they qualify that number. According to Stoeckle and Thaler, the same timeframe is true for 90 percent of animal species. No wonder so many people in the theistic evolution/creation dispute got irritated or excited. Theistic evolutionists saw it as an occasion for fanning the flames of anti-evolutionary sentiment. Young earth creationists saw it as evidence for the ark[/i].
I'm citing an evolutionary site so you don't choke on this possibility.
You are a total maroon!
The "evolutionary site" you quoted is nothing but a mouthpiece for the Discovery Institute, a group of wackdoodle creationists who seek to discredit science. It has no scientific pedigree.
Now...most modern humans ARE descnded from a small group of humans but ALSO from a lot of other humans alive at the time.) It's just like 10% of all modern Asians being descendents of Genghis Kahn. But they too have a lot of other ancestors.) There were only a small group alive 100,000 to 200,000 years ago.
That's irrelevant for the Adam and Eve myth. And as far as Noah's Ark is concerned, that myth supposedly took place long after 100,000 years ago.
I would appreciate it if you didn't waste my time by posting things you don't understand. Go back to high school and get some education. Post something from a peer reviewed journal and I'll pay attention to it. Otherwise, bye.
OK, first of all let me note, that I missed that this site has writers who come from the Intelligent Design perspective (that is my bad and I apologize for that). I specifically chose an article that provided more analysis than the typical news agency. The article I was citing was not advocating for Intelligent Design it was only reporting on a study and offering pros and cons and even pointing out other possibilities for interpreting the evidence. Other news agencies reported on the same study. https://phys.org/news/2018-05-gene-survey-reveals-facets-evolution.html https://www.techtimes.com/articles/...-s-animals-appeared-at-the-same-time.htm
Therefore the study by Stoeckle and Thaler on the DNA evidence for origins is still a DNA study requiring careful attention. The authors were conducting an objective study and were not expecting the evidence to point where it did. The known evolutionary bottlenecks do not explain away the findings of the DNA research. The desire to dismiss the findings rather than engage with it illustrates that hard core Darwinists are not really looking for facts or evidence unless it supports their pre-suppositional theories. Their extreme prejudice at times leads them to promoting hoaxes such as the Piltdown Man and then Lucy as one of the missing links. Emotional outbursts over objective findings are usually good evidence of the willingness to dismiss good evidence if it does not agree with the Darwinian faith which gave birth from too long marooned on the Galapagos Islands.
