- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I just finished a fascinating book about DNA and genetics that, while not a religious book in any way, has some implications for our LDS faith. The book is a Brief History of Everyone Who Ever Lived, the Human Story Told Through Our Genes. By Adam Rutherford. A few points of interest:
* Race has no genetic definition or meaning. As soon as you try to apply scientific precision to the idea of “race” you quickly find it’s meaningless from a genetics point of view.
* Everyone is related to everyone else, probably not going as far back as we’d guess. Geneticists and statisticians estimate everyone on earth shares the same parents as recently as as about 3000 BC. Everyone of European ancestry is related even more recently, as of a few hundred years ago. We are all of royal birth and we are all of unremarkable ancestry.
* There is a footnote specifically addressing the claim that American Indians are descended from the lost tribes of Israel. According to the author “None of these hold water with scientific scrutiny.”
* Ancestry information from 23 and Me, Ancestry.com, and others are interesting and are correct but largely meaningless. Also privacy implications of genetics testing are only in the infant stages. It’s ironic that people carefully guard every bit of personal information but voluntarily turn over their genome to a corporation.
* We have more Neanderthal, Denisovan, and other humanoid genes than most people probably expect. Humans are horny and mobile.
* Sexuality is complicated from a genetics point of view. Probably more so than most LDS would admit. This book gave me the impression that as a church we are missing the boat on human sexuality just as we did with race.
Worth a read if you’re interested in a layman’s book about human evolution.
Quote:Geneticists and statisticians estimate everyone on earth shares the same parents as recently as as about 3000 BC. Everyone of European ancestry is related even more
I really don’t buy this. There are some seriously isolated populations out there.
Quote:It’s ironic that people carefully guard every bit of personal information but voluntarily turn over their genome to a corporation.
Well I don’t and in the case of Iceland the entire population had their genome stolen.
SamBee wrote:
Quote:Geneticists and statisticians estimate everyone on earth shares the same parents as recently as as about 3000 BC. Everyone of European ancestry is related even more
I really don’t buy this. There are some seriously isolated populations out there.
Quote:It’s ironic that people carefully guard every bit of personal information but voluntarily turn over their genome to a corporation.
Well I don’t and in the case of Iceland the entire population had their genome stolen.
It’s certainly counter-intuitive. I’ve read probably 10 things in the media saying the same though, so it’s probably true give or take a 1000 years.
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-19331938 The book talks about how people like to claim they are related to Charlemagne or Ghenghis Kang or whomever. It explains how probably almost any European is a descendant of Charlemagne. And although the book doesn’t say so, one could interpret a common ancestor from 3000 years ago as being our literal Adam and Eve.
A member of my ward’s bishopric won’t put anything on social media but bought his whole family the “23 and me” DNA analysis. He’s not only given his DNA to that corporation, but also potentially the DNA of his posterity for generations to not only that corporation but also to the government.
Thank you. It looks interesting. Roadrunner wrote:
SamBee wrote:
Quote:Geneticists and statisticians estimate everyone on earth shares the same parents as recently as as about 3000 BC. Everyone of European ancestry is related even more
I really don’t buy this. There are some seriously isolated populations out there.
Quote:It’s ironic that people carefully guard every bit of personal information but voluntarily turn over their genome to a corporation.
Well I don’t and in the case of Iceland the entire population had their genome stolen.
It’s certainly counter-intuitive. I’ve read probably 10 things in the media saying the same though, so it’s probably true give or take a 1000 years.
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-19331938 The book talks about how people like to claim they are related to Charlemagne or Ghenghis Kang or whomever. It explains how probably almost any European is a descendant of Charlemagne. And although the book doesn’t say so, one could interpret a common ancestor from 3000 years ago as being our literal Adam and Eve.
A member of my ward’s bishopric won’t put anything on social media but bought his whole family the “23 and me” DNA analysis. He’s not only given his DNA to that corporation, but also potentially the DNA of his posterity for generations to not only that corporation but also to the government.
I’m sceptical of this as we still have uncontacted tribes and those who have been contacted in the last century or so…
I would doubt that the pygmies of the Congo have any common ancestry with the hill tribes of Papua, or the Zulu do with native Greenlanders.
Genghis Khan has 30 million progeny, Charlemagne some millions. I have Charlemagne on my mother’s side (highly likely given I have aome French in me), but probably not on my father’s. I doubt I am related to Genghis, but anyone related to Charlemagne is related to Atilla the Hun who is next down in notoreity.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.