Man Evolves After Woman

Attention: open in a new window. PDFPrintE-mail

Man evolves after woman is the latest theme in evolution. Professor P Underhill (Stanford University, USA) and associates studied male sex chromosome variations at 167 gene sites in 1062 men from 21 different regions of the world. Their conclusions are based on (a) assumptions about how rapidly genes mutate at present, (b) that this mutation rate has been consistent and (c) that man evolved by mutation and natural selection. (See Nature Genetics vol. 26, p 358-361, 3 November, 2000, and New Scientist 4 November 2000, p.16)

Editorial Comment: Where did they go wrong?

Simple God made Adam "very good" (Genesis 1:31) man started with no mutations. The mutation rate commenced only after Genesis 3, and increased dramatically after the Flood (Genesis 6 - 8). Feed that into your database for a correct time span. We should not be surprised at a trend to evolve women first. We live in an age when feminism and female dominance is "in".

We must never forget that those who seek to deny the truth of Creation will in the end replace it, and what better way than to turn the order in Genesis upside down, particularly since all 'role' morality of man and woman in the rest of the Bible is based on the order of the events in Genesis (see 1 Timothy 2:12-15). Prof. Edgar Andrews reply, published in the Times, is an extra good comment.

From Professor Edgar Andrews:

"Sir, As a scientist I cannot share your enthusiasm for debunking the biblical account of Adam and Eve (report, October 31). Conclusions drawn from the genetic study of Y chromosomes in males and mitochondrial DNA in females must depend on certain unprovable assumptions. The first assumption is that mutation rates in DNA have remained constant over tens of thousands of years, and the second is that mutation rates are, and have always remained, the same for mitochondrial and nuclear DNA.
These assumptions may be the simplest available, but that does not make them correct. Further doubt is raised by the intrinsically improbable conclusion that all women today are descended from a putative ancestor who lived 143,000 years ago, while all men have descended from an ancestor only 84,000 years old. For this to be true, we would have to believe that a race of male humans existed for 60,000 years without leaving any trace of their genetic blueprint in the modern human genome, at the same time as their female partners did leave such traces. The biblical account of man's descent from a single contemporary human pair is far more probable and, personally, I prefer to stick with Adam and Eve."

(Ref. Adam, Man, Genes)

q_and_a2
crc_youtube
outdoor_museum_panel
free_audio2