Let the games begin at GDC
Sounds like it’s more of the same. “When are the new consoles coming out?” “How can we broaden our market?” Blah, blah, blah. How about brainstorming on the best way to make innovative new games? Someone should tell them about my Lifelike Adventure Manifesto.
Why We’re All Jesus’ Children
“Go back a few millenniums, and we’ve all got the same ancestors.” Interesting idea. I have no idea if science supports it though.
I will look this up, but I’ve heard that our human DNA can be traced back to one female ancestor. Will come back once I find something. /runs off to google-search :-)
I’m back. Sorry it took a while longer than I expected. Work gets in the way of my Googling. :-)
The theory is called “mitochondrial Eve”.
I went here, first – “A Shrinking date for Eve”, from Carl Wieland at Answers in Genesis A largish snippet ;-) : “The mitochondrial Eve data does not force the belief that there was only one woman from whom we all descended—in other words, it doesn’t prove the Bible—but—a very important ‘but’—it is most definitely consistent with it. In other words, had there been more than one mitochondrial ‘surname’, it would have been a severe challenge to the biblical scenario. And it was not something that was expected by evolutionists. To explain it in their scenario requires a small population of modern humans to arise in one part of the world (archaic humans having already evolved and spread across the globe), and from there, spread out to replace all the other less-evolved humans, so that we all descend from that small original population (the ‘out-of-Africa’ or ‘Noah’s Ark’ theory of human evolution).”
So there is a substantial issue in how to resolve the rate of mutations in mtDNA, which appear to occur between one generation and the next, and the much lower rate of mutations that seem to be fixed after several million years in the genomes of the great apes. There is a further issue, that the data based on pedigree analysis of the D-loop gives widely varying mutation rates in different studies.”
Both articles are very interesting. :-) Personally, as a Bible believer, I don’t find it odd that current mtDNA data leads to one woman. How long ago she lived is important, but kind of a red herring when it comes to the material point, which is that she really existed. :-)
Oops. Did one HTML link wrong. When I searched for “mitochondrial Eve” in Google, I found many links, including a critique of Carl Wieland’s article, written by Alec McAndrew.
Here’s the link – nothing fancy, this time. :-) http://www.evolutionpages.com/Mitochondrial%20Eve.htm
I will look this up, but I’ve heard that our human DNA can be traced back to one female ancestor. Will come back once I find something. /runs off to google-search :-)
Interesting. Let us know what you find Jami.
I’m back. Sorry it took a while longer than I expected. Work gets in the way of my Googling. :-)
The theory is called “mitochondrial Eve”.
I went here, first – “A Shrinking date for Eve”, from Carl Wieland at Answers in Genesis A largish snippet ;-) : “The mitochondrial Eve data does not force the belief that there was only one woman from whom we all descended—in other words, it doesn’t prove the Bible—but—a very important ‘but’—it is most definitely consistent with it. In other words, had there been more than one mitochondrial ‘surname’, it would have been a severe challenge to the biblical scenario. And it was not something that was expected by evolutionists. To explain it in their scenario requires a small population of modern humans to arise in one part of the world (archaic humans having already evolved and spread across the globe), and from there, spread out to replace all the other less-evolved humans, so that we all descend from that small original population (the ‘out-of-Africa’ or ‘Noah’s Ark’ theory of human evolution).”
Then I searched for “mitochondrial Eve” at Google, and found several links, including . Mr. McAndrew states, in part, “Others who attempted to repeat Parson’s results with pedigree data were unable to do so (10) and derived a rate little different from the rate given by phylogenetic data which yields an MRCA of 150,000 years. In order to help resolve these discrepancies, all the scientists have pooled their data and the result is a mutation rate of one every 1200 years based on the pedigree data – a rate which is still faster by a factor of five than the rate given by the phylogenetic approach.
So there is a substantial issue in how to resolve the rate of mutations in mtDNA, which appear to occur between one generation and the next, and the much lower rate of mutations that seem to be fixed after several million years in the genomes of the great apes. There is a further issue, that the data based on pedigree analysis of the D-loop gives widely varying mutation rates in different studies.”
Both articles are very interesting. :-) Personally, as a Bible believer, I don’t find it odd that current mtDNA data leads to one woman. How long ago she lived is important, but kind of a red herring when it comes to the material point, which is that she really existed. :-)
Oops. Did one HTML link wrong. When I searched for “mitochondrial Eve” in Google, I found many links, including a critique of Carl Wieland’s article, written by Alec McAndrew.
Here’s the link – nothing fancy, this time. :-) http://www.evolutionpages.com/Mitochondrial%20Eve.htm
Also, that is one interesting link. About how we’re all Jesus’s children. Hee. Wild.
Wow, that’s really deep stuff. Now my head hurts. 8^)