RE: Scientific Adam and Eve
June 15, 2015 at 9:34 pm
(This post was last modified: June 15, 2015 at 9:36 pm by Alex K.)
(June 15, 2015 at 8:16 pm)Yeauxleaux Wrote: Anthropologists like to use the term "mitachondrial Eve" to describe the common female answer
I think surely there must be more than one though. I can't see how "modern humans" just emorged fully formed at one point, it had to be a gradual transition. Therefore, there was no point in history where there was ever a "first human" or a last ancestor who definitely wasn't human. There are probably several humans who all people descend from, if there's just one male and one female that basically means we're all interbred.
That reads a bit confused. She is defined as the unique individual who is the latest common female ancestor of all currently living humans *in a purely maternal line*. And while we are inbred in a certain sense because we probably all originate from some organism 3 billion years ago or so, there were never just 2 humans - as long as we were anything close to humans, the population size never dropped below several thousands. This is what analysis of the human gene pool tells us
The fool hath said in his heart, There is a God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Psalm 14, KJV revised edition
