Re: The death of the RTB model

From: <glennmorton@entouch.net>
Date: Tue Feb 14 2006 - 06:33:10 EST
David wrote:

>This is an interesting discussion and I'm sorry that I'm not yet caught up enough on the science to develop a solid >position on it. Is Templeton's conclusion as solid as all this or is it yet another missile in the apparently hot shooting war >between the "out of Africa" and "multiregional" camps? It wasn't long ago that Spencer Wells was "putting the last nail in >the coffin" of mutiregionalism (e.g. here:

>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1323485.stm) and we were all chatting about his lovely special on PBS. How's a guy >like me who doesn't keep up with the anthropology journals (and doesn't even know what the "A" journals are) to >discern between these kinds of claims?

Well, we weren't all talking about the death of the multiregional model. I have never thought that one can tell all there is to know about human genetic history from mtDNA.  I would point you to http://www.asa3.org/archive/ASA/200201/0310.html

http://home.entouch.net/dmd/hegene.htm

http://home.entouch.net/dmd/neanev.htm

One could clearly see from the morphological data that there was genetic input to modern humanity. One can see it in the red head gene cited on the page above.  One can also easily understand that our mtDNA does not tell the whole story, but people wanted to forget that in favor of the out of Africa/replacement view. 

And I would say that whether or not one likes what I say about anthro (or indeed likes or dislikes me), I have a fair knowledge of it.

>Anyway, I suppose a "special creation" of Adam doesn't require the "out of Africa" hypothesis. Perhaps the "dust of the >ground" in Gen. 2:7 includes genetic material from the hominids God created through evolutionary processes before Adam.

It does because the replacement theory said that the archaics made almost no contribution to modern humanity and a special creation of Adam would say the very same thing. Thus, both views should have the same predictions to make about the genetic connection with the archaics.  And both views fail with Templeton's article.


Received on Tue Feb 14 06:37:58 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Feb 14 2006 - 06:37:58 EST