...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Ancient Egyptian DNA from 1300BC to 426 AD
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Cass/: [QB] Bad example... as Mr.Capra likes his sources modern. Here's geneticist Alan Templeton in a 2013 research paper saying exact same thing as me- [QUOTE][b]A trellis or a tree?[/b] The imagery of recent human evolution is dominated by evolutionary trees of human populations. Human populations are shown again and again as separate branches on an evolutionary tree, related to other human populations by splits that occurred at specific times in the past. Even papers that document genetic interchange among human populations, such as the recent papers on admixture with archaic populations (Green et al., 2010; Reich et al., 2010), place human populations on an evolutionary tree with only weak arrows indicating isolated events of admixture that minimally violate an otherwise tree-like structure (see Fig. 4, adapted from Reich et al., 2010). In particular, as is typical of the human population genetic literature, Africans are portrayed in Fig. 4 as having ‘‘split’’ from the rest of humanity a long time ago with not one episode of genetic interchange being portrayed since that ancient ‘‘population separation’’ (Reich et al., 2010, p. 1058). Contrast Fig. 4 to Fig. 3, which also depicts recent human evolution. All aspects of Fig. 3 are supported by explicit hypothesis testing and statistically significant inferences. Indeed, as shown in this paper, [b]our evolutionary history has been dominated by gene flow and admixture that unifies humanity into a single evolutionary lineage, as shown by the trellis structure and arrows of expansion that overlay upon, not replace, earlier populations[/b]. In contrast, the evolutionary trees found throughout the human genetic literature, such as that portrayed in Fig. 4, are simply invoked. There is no hypothesis testing, even though treeness or multiple lineages are testable hypotheses. Simply invoking conclusions without testing them is scientifically indefensible; yet, that is the norm for population trees in much of the human evolution literature. [b]Many of the papers that portray human population trees caution in the text that the populations are not truly genetically isolated, but this makes the tree portrayal even less defensible as the authors are knowingly portraying human evolution in a false fashion. Moreover, it is socially irresponsible.[/b][/QUOTE] http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.397.4618&rep=rep1&type=pdf Read especially that last paragraph - which is why as I said: why are intellectual posters here doing this? They should know better. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3