Dawkins warns of "a pair of temptations" in chapter 1. Those warnings were:
1.) historians are tempted to scour the past for patterns that repeat themselves.
2.) the idea that the past works to deliver our particular present is "the conceit of hindsight
Addressing #1: The idea that we can predict the future based on looking at events of the past may lead us to make mistakes and ignore what matters now. When addressing evolution (and especially human evolution), looking for patterns may point us in a direction that "misses the current point".
Addressing #2: The "conceit of hindsight" shows us how we (humans) think that we are the end-of-the-line for evolution. I think this is why (at least most people in the United States) are uncomfortable with human evolution discussion. In fact, only 4 in 10 Americans "believe" in evolution!
(http://www.gallup.com/poll/114544/darwin-birthday-believe-evolution.aspx)
Now that has a lot to do with evolutionary education (you'd be amazed at the number of colleagues that avoid the topic) I think that people are uncomfortable with the idea that all the steps of evolution weren't aimed at creating us. This makes people's heads hurt, and I've noticed that most people avoid what makes their head hurt. ;)
As far as the "mtDNA eve", the mitochondrial DNA of all humanity pinpoints the 'people' common ancestor in the all female line and "Y-chromosome Adam" is the equivalent in the all-male line. They are two out of a multitude of most recent common ancestors (MRCAs) that could be used to trace humans back. This answers the question of being the entire picture (it isn't).
Scientists use coalescent gene trees to help resolve the long-standing debate over human origins. The 'out of Africa' theory has many competing ideas over who, when and how many times humans left the continent (OOOA) and if we evolved separately once we arrived at a new destination (YOOA). However, based on the coalescent gene trees, we can be both descendants of a recent African exodus, and simultaneoulsy descen
Seriously...I will finish this later 'cause I've got students who expect me to answer their questions...the audacity!
Black
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Nice, consise explanation. Regarding the poll you mentioned, the skepticism is unfortunate. Did you see the picture of the billboard I posted on my second blog entry? Take a look : )
ReplyDeleteNice, explanation. Don't forget that Dawkins meantioned Alan Templeton to figure out the "out of africa" theory. Explained how he used lots of seperate genes instead of just one to explain the timing and history of human migrations.
ReplyDeleteI really like your explanation! You did a good job explaining everything. I really like the extra facts you added in.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the debate of the "Out of Africa Theory" has many different versions, however I do believe as an Anthropologist and behavioral science majors that people did spread out from different continents during the one-big landmass of Pangaea. Whether it first emerged in Africa as of this moment has some credibility from fossil evidence, but we are still in our infancy and do not have enough fossil evidence of the human line to really know all the facts yet of evolution.
ReplyDelete