(June 9, 2017 at 12:57 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote:(June 9, 2017 at 12:37 pm)Jehanne Wrote: Right here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_Eve
Thanks for the link. That is what I thought you where talking about. However I don't think that it says... what you think it says. The only thing that I can see that possibly be taken to your point is the statement "studies indicate that the size of the ancient human population never dropped below tens of thousands". I would disagree. I think that it was zero at one point. And I'm a bit skeptical of any claim, that it went from zero to tens of thousands, with no in between.
You may also want to look at the misconceptions part of the article.
I did, in particular:
Quote:Not the biblical Eve
Owing to its figurative reference to the first woman in the Biblical Book of Genesis, the Mitochondrial Eve theory initially met with enthusiastic endorsement from some young earth creationists, who viewed the theory as a validation of the biblical creation story. Some even went so far as to claim that the Mitochondrial Eve theory disproved evolution.[42][43][44] However, the theory does not suggest any relation between biblical Eve and Mitochondrial Eve because Mitochondrial Eve:
- is not a fixed individual (see above)
- had a mother
- was not the only woman of her time, and
- Y-chromosomal Adam is unlikely to have been her sexual partner, or indeed to have been contemporaneous to her.