Our Common Ancestor

[leagle]

This has to be one of the most fascinating science items I have ever read.

You would have to go back in time only 2,000 to 5,000 years — and probably on the low side of that range — to find somebody who could count every person alive today as a descendant.

If you go back a little farther — about 5,000 to 7,000 years ago — everybody living today has exactly the same set of ancestors. In other words, every person who was alive at that time is either an ancestor to all 6 billion people living today, or their line died out and they have no remaining descendants.

That revelation is "especially startling," statistician Jotun Hein of England's Oxford University wrote in a commentary on the research published by the journal Nature.

"Had you entered any village on Earth in around 3,000 B.C., the first person you would have met would probably be your ancestor," Hein marveled.
It also means that all of us have ancestors of every color and creed. Every Palestinian suicide bomber has Jews in his past. Every Sunni Muslim in Iraq is descended from at least one Shiite. And every Klansman's family has African roots.

Click for full story (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060701/ap_on_sc/brotherhood_of_man;_ylt=ArfapZblNjnz17gidWuEpPas0N UE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3ODdxdHBhBHNlYwM5NjQ-)

[ladiva]

Very interesting read.....

[Polly]

Yeah...I read about this in the Bible...you know, that Noah's Ark stuff?

[leagle]

No, it is not based on catastrophic action, Biblical or otherwise. It is just mathematics and migration patterns.

[Polly]

Yeah, well....it goes right along with the Biblical account, doesn't it?

[BB2132]

well if you go all the way back to adam and eve you dont have to wonder if every body kin to them in one way or another. lol

[leagle]

This article is not about our oldest common ancestor - it's about our most recent, and how surprisingly recent he or she lived.

Everyone, religious or not, understands we all have an oldest ancestor, be it Adam and Eve, Yama and Yami, or some unnamed Homo erectus.

What is so interesting to me about this study is that it shows a degree of interrelatedness after the differentiation of humans into different races, and way after the migration of humans into the New World, Australia and the Pacific Islands.

[Polly]

This article is not about our oldest common ancestor - it's about our most recent, and how surprisingly recent he or she lived.

Everyone, religious or not, understands we all have an oldest ancestor, be it Adam and Eve, Yama and Yami, or some unnamed Homo erectus.

What is so interesting to me about this study is that it shows a degree of interrelatedness after the differentiation of humans into different races, and way after the migration of humans into the New World, Australia and the Pacific Islands. I agree. That's why I pointed out NOah's Ark as opposed to Adam and Eve.

[RoadstarB]

very interesting, a friend of the family gave my dad a book of the family tree, we had no idea we were kin in any way. The book goes back to when our first family to cross the "Big Water" came to America in the very early 1800's. It tracks them moving down to Mississipi, and some setteling in Choctaw Co. Our friend said he found my grandparents names in the book, we found that we were 4th or 5th cousins. I didn't know a whole lot on my fathers side of the family, this was a great book to learn about them. I found out most were outlaws and rebels, but look at our southern heritege some people had to be to survive. This is very interesting to me.

[phillip]

This article is not about our oldest common ancestor - it's about our most recent, and how surprisingly recent he or she lived.

This article you mentioned really helps confirm the Bible's account of creation. If you found this interesting reading, may I recommend that you (all) go to www.backtogenesis.com (http://www.backtogenesis.com) then click on www.icr.org (http://www.icr.org), and find many articles written by highly respected scientist on this and other interesting subjects. This isn't light reading so save it to your favorites and when the time presents itself, prepare to be fascinated. Thanks leagle for starting this thread.

[roosterbridge]

[quote=leagle]This article is not about our oldest common ancestor - it's about our most recent, and how surprisingly recent he or she lived.

This article you mentioned really helps confirm the Bible's account of creation. If you found this interesting reading, may I recommend that you (all) go to www.backtogenesis.com (http://www.backtogenesis.com) then click on www.icr.org (http://www.icr.org), and find many articles written by highly respected scientist on this and other interesting subjects. This isn't light reading so save it to your favorites and when the time presents itself, prepare to be fascinated. Thanks leagle for starting this thread.

Which creation account? The one in Genesis 1:1-2:3 or the one that immediately follows in 2:4-2:23?

[Wyldfire]

Facinating article Leagle...Thanks alot...Needed that jolt of science right before bed!