One of the internet memes propagated a broadcast by the Church Of Scienceology cult, those closed minded people who believe science is infallible omnipresent and omniescent is the "Weez Aalz From Afrieekaa" fallacy, so when I spotted online an article reporting a news study which, relying heavily on guesses and assumptions, made a case that all humans living outside Africa were put there by a mass migration between 50,000 and 60,000 years ago. As a recent archeaological project quite recently found evidence of human habitation in Norfolk, England around one million years ago I decided to check out this obvious load of bollocks to see where the scientists had either gone wrong or obviously faked their results to secure their research grants.
Here's an extract of the original article (reproduced under fair use terms)
Australian Aborigines have long been cast as a people apart. Although Australia is halfway around the world from our species’s accepted birthplace in Africa, the continent is nevertheless home to some of the earliest undisputed signs of modern humans outside Africa, and Aborigines have unique languages and cultural adaptations. Some researchers have posited that the ancestors of the Aborigines were the first modern humans to surge out of Africa, spreading swiftly eastward along the coasts of southern Asia thousands of years before a second wave of migrants populated Eurasia.
Not so, according to a trio of genomic studies, the first to analyze many full genomes from Australia and New Guinea. They conclude that, like most other living Eurasians, Aborigines descend from a single group of modern humans who swept out of Africa 50,000 to 60,000 years ago and then spread in different directions. The papers “are really important,” says population geneticist Joshua Akey of the University of Washington, Seattle, offering powerful testimony that “the vast majority of non-Africans [alive today] trace their ancestry back to a single out-of-Africa event.”
Yet the case isn’t closed. One study argues that an earlier wave of modern humans contributed traces to the genomes of living people from Papua New Guinea. And perhaps both sides are right, says archaeologist Michael Petraglia of the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History in Jena, Germany, a co-author on that paper who has long argued for an early expansion out of Africa. “We’re converging on a model where later dispersals swamped the earlier ones,” he says.
A decade ago, some researchers proposed the controversial idea that an early wave of modern humans left Africa more than 60,000 years ago via a so-called coastal or southern route. These people would have launched their migration from Ethiopia, crossing the Red Sea at its narrowest point to the Arabian Peninsula, then rapidly pushing east along the south Asian coastline all the way to Australia. Some genetic studies, many on mitochondrial DNA of living people, supported this picture by indicating a relatively early split between Aborigines and other non-Africans. But analysis of whole genomes— the gold standard for population studies— was scanty for many key parts of the world.
The early part of the comment thread was a run of the mill squabble between Bible fundamentalists and Science fundamentalists. When scientific fallacies about DNA, early human development and how we share 50% of our DNA with our siblings I decided to join the thread, its always fun to wind up the science worshipppers. My contribution starts with throwing a banana skin into the mix for the science fanboys to slip up on.
We begin with a commenter styled 'error error' erroniously trying to challenge the theory that Australian aborininies were actually the first humans and are a genertically unique race.
error error • a day ago
What a load of bull. Mungo Man predated Aborigines. Not to mention it's erroneous to declare facts when you are basing stances off culture and language that were never recorded in any sophisticated method. I'd be amazed if Aborigines where here more than a thousand years. No constructions other than an eel dam. Population of around 10-20K.
Paul Beck error error • a day ago
But aren't the scientists reaching their conclusions based off of genomic analysis - and not culture and language? Such science is pretty sophisticated.
Arthur Foxake Paul Beck • a day ago
A biologist named Ann Marcaida (unfortunately now deceased) was enlightening me on basic genetics once and told me we share about 30% of our genome with bananas. I in my turn was able to assure her that a resident of the US west coast would be exposed to more radiation from eating a banana a day for a year than from stuff leaking out of Fukushima. We also share a surprisingly high proportion of our DNA with amoeba. Genetics is not very sophisticated science at all. A lot of assumptions and guesswork are involved.
SeanM62 Arthur Foxake • 14 hours ago
Huh?? Hard to discern the argument from the banana. Your understanding of genetics?? Very much like "I know more, much more, than the generals about ISIS." There is a lot we don't know, but there is a new discovery every day, which makes genetics an extremely exciting subject!!
You have to love the sheer illogic of Sean's response. I demolish his attempts to be clever about bananas in my reply. Although I made it clear I am not a biologist and know little of genetics except what I have learned in conversation with biologists or read for general interest, I was involved in the nuclear industry for several years where I learned a lot about radioactivity and bananas.
Arthur Foxake SeanM62 8 hours ago
And thus in trolling for The Church Of Sciencology cult you show your ignorance. I do not have an argument on genetics, all I did was repeat what a very highly qualified research biologist told me. You should perhaps read of Rupert Sheldrake's genome wager with Lewis Wolpert on genetics - he may be unorthodox but he makes more sense sense than Dawkins.
As for the banana, well I know people like you are not interested in facts, but for those who might stumble on the thread and are, here's a wikileaks article explaining how the 'banana equivalent dose' is a standard measure of radioactivity in the nuclear industry.
And here's a handy calculator to help you work out the banana equivilent dose of anything and see that I was right about bananas (everything is radio - active to some extent and bananas are quite high on the scale.)
Whether Ann was right about genetics I could not say, but she did say that what we think we know of the subject is mostly based on the misunderstanding propagated by Dawkins (in the selfish gene). As she is not around to elucidate, a little research into epigenetics (the stuff in our genome we do not inherit biologically), now a recognised scientific field, throws most of the pseudo-scientific bullshit about (to misquote Zager and Evans) "Everything you think, do and say is written in your DNA.
And as for your tragically inept attempt at sarcasm in the reference to ISIS, it really depends on which generals you mean. Iranian and Syrian generals know quite a lot about ISIS I'd guess, Russian generals somewhat less and US generals nothing at all given that everything the USA has done to combat ISIS in the past three years has been the exact opposite of what needed to be done, assuming The White House has been telling us the truth and was actually trying to oppose ISIS rather than support them. Therefore what little I know about ISIS is certainly more than the US generals know because I would have been smart enough to avoid involvement in that mess, having learned lessons from Iraq and Afghanistan.
Fractal Film Dimensions Arthur Foxake • 16 hours ago
Arthur you're not a geneticist and you're simply not understanding how it works. It always makes me laugh when people claim to be experts about fields they know nothing about. You share %50 percent of your dna with siblings. Does that mean you share more with chimp than your own brother?
Here we have a perfect example of someone whose argument is, "You're not a scientists, you don't understand how science works," Does Fractal Film Dimensions know more than I do about the topic under discussion. We shall see.
Arthur Foxake @ Fractal Film Dimensions • 4 minutes ago
What makes me laugh is when science trolls trot out the stock answers according to the dogma of their faith. "You're not a scientist so you don't understand how science works," how many times have I seen that on the comments of various people who tried to inject something unorthodox into a thread. I wonder if you science fanboys understand how like the inquisitors of the medieval Catholic Church you attitudes are.
My comment made clear I am not a geneticist. What the biologist I mentioned told me about human DNA and bananas is in fact well documented, here's one source, you can find hundreds more if you put an hour into research http://www.scientificamerican
You say I share 50% of my DNA with siblings. Hopelessly wrong, in fact all humans share 99.9% of their DNA with other humans. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ . So are you saying my siblings and I are actually not related? Or that my siblings are bananas? What you are actually grasping for but failing to get hold of is that of the very small fraction of DNA that is not common to all of us humans, 50% is shared with my siblings.
Hmmm, you might want to edit or remove your comment, it seems I know far more about science than you.
TJ @ Fractal Film Dimensions • 8 hours ago
That's not an apples and apples comparison.
For example, you share a MUCH higher percentage of "DNA" with your brother than 50%, your brother and you ONLY differ in the specifics on the chromosomes donated by your two parents...
...which means that in the context of the percent of DNA difference between a man and chimp for example being closer to 98%, you and your brother would be closer to 100% in that context.
So, half of your DNA is from mom, and half is from dad...but, so is your brother's.
Your parent's DNA was also ~ 100% the same too....and so forth, give or take a mutation.
Its not the skin color or hair color differences, and other fairly meaningless differences we are talking about, its about whether you are still human, or, a fruit fly, or, fruit.
Fred Thomas @ Arthur Foxake • 5 hours ago
You obviously don't know anything about science, Arthur. It’s better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than open it and remove all doubt.
This is the kind of comment I love, full of ignorance and self importance and it shows Fred's eagerness to tell me I know knothing about science so overwhelmed any vestige of common sense he may have had that he jumped it without having read any of the preceding comments. Had he done so he would have found confirmation of my points (which admittedly were made in a way that intended to wind up the science fanboys rather than accurately inform - there's no point preaching ruth to religious zealots) in the links provided. All he manages to show us is if all you can contribute is a tired old cliche it's better not to comment that to show how unimaginitive you are. (and I can assure him my mouth was shut when I typed all my comments - dribbling into the keyboard does not do computers any good at all.
Arthur Foxake Fred Thomas • a minute ago
I'm not wasting time trying to educate you Fred, take a look at my replies to the others in this thread who have said I don't know anything about science and inform yourself on how foolish I could have made you look.
error error @ Paul Beck • 11 hours ago
The problem is DNA is more or less unreadable after a short period. The hope in reproducing and find reconciling the missing data, is outside the abilities of a project as this.
TJ @ error error • 8 hours ago
They are comparing READABLE DNA from ancient samples, to CURRENT DNA in the population at large....so, the fact that, yes, DNA CAN degrade over time, is not a deficiency in the study.
The use of proteins in ancient samples, to trace a lot of what DNA was used to trace, has added a new dimension to tracing relationships between long dead fossils...as the proteins often survive far longer.
Also - a general reminder that almost all known living things share common DNA, you, and a sponge at the bottom of the ocean, share common DNA.
Essentially, the more ancient the "function", the more likely that the DNA that did that function billions of years ago, is still involved.
So, the percentage of DNA between a monkey and his banana, or a man and his banana or monkey, or the banana and a fruit fly, etc, is closer than you might realize.
There are many things about the science fanboys (and they are almost always boys) that make winding them up so much fun. The first is that in their evangelical zeal to suppress and questioning, criticism or ridicule of 'science' they do not seem able to grasp that someone using the name "Arthur Foxake" might not be entirely serious. Second is that many of them being borderline autistic they tend to read everything literally. For example, one would expect an intelligent person to spot instantly that anyone talking about anything so outlandish as radio - active bananas (even though bananas are in fact radio - active as shown in my link,) was playing some kind of trick. The others are too numerous to list.RELATED POSTS: br>
The Logical Failure Of Science Fans
Thus in essence is the basis on which many science fans argue in internet comment threads. A question posted on Quora involved me in a discussion with a typical member of this group, he’s besotted with science and argues from the perspective of a religious believer rather that somebody who questions things objectively.
Human DNA Shock: David Icke Was Right All The Time
newly published scientific research shows that Mr. Icke may have been right all along. About 30,000 years ago early human ancestors interbred with a species completely unknown to biologists, geneticists and anthropologists it reveals.
Has Human Evolution Stopped - Are We Now Masters Of Our Own Destiny
The usual arguments around the topic of evolution revolve on the science versus religion war, did we evolve or were we created? That is really an unsatisfactory debate because unless the ancient texts of many religions are interpreted literally then the Big Bang could have been the result of an act of creation while evolution addresses the diversity of life, not its origin. When we consider the question of whether modern biology has made evolution obsolete however, that is fertile ground for those who like to speculate.
How climate change drove evolution in Africa
Climate Change drove human evolution two million years ago, the headline informed me. Really, WOW, I thought climate change only started when we all got cars and nice, warm homes and started going off to sunny places for holidays. Actually some of us have been trying to tell the warmageddonists that the climate is always changing ...
Albert Einstein Talks With Jon Rappoport About Newtonian Materialism and Determinism Another page from Greenteeth Labyrinth with shines the light of reason onto the scientific hocus pocus and magical thinking that presents fairy tales as science and asks us to believe things that are obviously not true. To read or listen to some of the convoluted logic used to head off critical analysis of the fallactious belief of science you'd think scientists were priests of some nutty religion. Scienceology?How the climate effects evolution
There are people who watch Doctor Who as if it is a documentary and dream of one day being able to travel anywhere in the universe or back and forward in time. The TARDIS is science fiction of course, but nature gave each of us our own Time Machine
Infinity And The Myth Of Space And Time
In debates with science heads about the nature of the universe it is easy to get them tying themselves in knots, all we have to do is nudge them into trying to explain their theoretical universe (a universe made out of mathematics one school of thinking insists) with the observable reality around us. All Einsteins theories were thrown off the rails by his friend Kurt Godel who in an attempt to proved Eistein's theories feasible succeeded in proving they weren't. Godel's work showed infinity (i.e. the universe) cannot be enumerated mathematically. Time and space are human inventions. The universe just is.
A reflection on the way we have treated the world. I am not convinced by 'the science' that the main threat we face comes from carbon dioxide emitted by human activity, in fact I think that is just a diversion to steer attention away from the serious harm we are doing to our planet through many other human activities.
Mind Outside Time
When we talk of the great mysteries we tend to overlook time. we are so conditioned to be slaves to the clock here in our materialist universe we take time for granted. But I have always thought the human mind is the model for Doctor Who's TARDIS and if we were not all obsessed with counting hours and minutes our internal time machine could take us anywhere in infinity or eternity.
Not Only Do Mobile Phones Cook Your Brain, They Cook Men’s Bollocks Too. Today’s news from the technology department will be of far more concern to men, particularly the type of men who don’t think having their heads fried is much of a problem because they keep their brains elsewhere, as the women in our lives are fond of telling us.
City of Berkeley to require cellphone sellers to warn of possible radiation risks
One of the fist themes of this blog was that mobile phones (and wi-fi etc.) do pose a risk to health. Here's the latest admission that the sceptics voices were right, from The Guardian
Wifi affects human memory
People are facing a host of illnesses ranging from brain tumors and leukemia to poor memory and concentration as they become increasingly engulfed by an “electrosmog” as Wi-Fi networks expand globally, scientists in Scandinavia have warned.
The team of experts report that electromagnetic fields (EMF) from mobiles, wireless LANs etc. can influence human blood circulation, respiration, temperature control, water balance and other bodily functions.
Earthquake Hits Stricken Fukushima Plant - Television News Ignores It
Mainstream media has again been caught ignoring news that might prove a tad inconvenient to The Scientific Dictatorship. An mag. 7 earthquake rocked the stricken fukushima nuclear plant which is still leaking radioactive waste two years after being struck by a larger quake and a tsunami. It was not mentioned on mainstream news until new media picked it up and the story went viral.
More Emerging Truth On The Dangers Of WiFi
Bit by bit the truth about health risks related to WiFi wireless internet and cellular telephony emerges into the public domain. DONT PANIC! The risks are easily minimised for adults, children are more susceptible. Inform yourself and control your technology rather than letting it control you.
Dangerous Wi - Fi? Why Lie When The Profiteers Have Political Control Freaks And Corupt Media On Their Side
Last week in The Independent another scheme to use technology as a means of stripping away our individual liberty and using internet technology was reported with the usual enthusiasm by another uncritical, science - worshipping , National Socialist journalist.
Fair Use: This page may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.