Orin, Yes estimating time to Y Adam is fraught with difficulties, but isn't it just "human nature" to try to do so. Perhaps it is our curiosity to know the seemingly unknowable which makes us human. Long may we play the game of estimating time to Y Adam. John. Sent from my iPad > On 12/10/2015, at 5:23 am, Orin Wells via <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > There is a major problem with all of this "scientific" computation to > estimate the earliest ancestor. That is the computed frequency of > mutation on the various markers. I suggest, and maybe I am completely > wrong, that the frequency is just an estimation based on the observable > mutations currently. When I can identify men who have a MRCA who lived > 400 and 500 years ago who are clearly identified by genealogical records > and they have absolutely no mutations between them I really have to > question the accuracy of trying to pin down a common ancestor for all of > us so precisely. > >> On 10/10/2015 10:06 PM, AJ Marsh via wrote: >> Hi Sam, >> >> A good summary. The only comment I would make is that you suggest Y-DNA Adam lived 60,000 years ago which was the accepted figure for a long time, but there are different opinions. Yesterday I read 115,000 years ago somewhere if I recall correctly, and I believe I have seen estimates out to 250,000 years plus. >> >> The latest YFull experimental tree estimates Y-DNA Adam at around 234,900 years ago, >> http://www.yfull.com/tree/A00/ . For the present I would suggest 234,900 years ago is as good a scientific guess as any, but it would not surprise me to see the estimates stretch out further over time. >> >> Using SNP mutation counting for estimates is good, but I keep having nagging feelings that over very long periods of time evolutionary selection might prune out less beneficial SNPs, which may mean for very long time periods our estimates might be low if we base them on all SNPs surviving at a constant rate without evolutionary pruning. There was a time when a x3 fudge factor was used to allow for evolutionary pruning. >> >> Then if we test everybody on earth, and find a single surviving Neanderthal Y-DNA line, Y-DNA Adam estimates might jump out by a factor of 2. >> >> Over time there have different ways of defining "human". I don't know myself what is the best definition. It could be development of full bipedal walking, or tool use, or speech, or building dwellings, or when wives became boss of the family, but perhaps some would argue that even some magpies and chimpanzees can do all of these things. So then you have to define each aspect, like defining a dwelling as being a minimum of 3 rooms, with attached garage, wide screen TV, and A beer fridge. I will leave it to others to resolve these tricky definitions. >> >> John. >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> >>> On 11/10/2015, at 5:08 pm, Sam Sloan via<genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: >>> >>> It is now an accepted scientific fact (as much as any facts of this nature >>> can ever be recognized) that all men alive today are descended from just >>> one man who lived 60,000 years ago. >>> >>> The reason we can be sure of this is that all men have a Y-Chromosome that >>> they pass down to their sons, but not to their daughters because females to >>> not have a Y-Chromosome. >>> >>> By doing DNA studies of this Y-Chromosome, we can see that all men have a >>> similar Y-Chromosome with only minor variations. This tells us that they >>> all have a common origin. >>> >>> This means that if we could go back in time we could find that common >>> origin who is the DNA father of us all. >>> >>> We know that this man had at least two sons. The reason we know this is >>> because if he had only one son that son would be the most recent father of >>> us all, and not his father. >>> >>> What we are now seeking is the MRCA which means Most Recent Common >>> Ancestor. There are no doubt many men who are the fathers of us all, but we >>> want to find the one man who is the most recent. >>> >>> There were other men before him and he also probably had brothers. However >>> the family lines of those other men died out. Their Y-DNA became extinct, >>> except through him. Only the Y-DNA of the Most Recent Common male Ancestor >>> survives in all of us today. >>> >>> We call this man who is our most recent common ancestor our DNA-Adam. The >>> Bible tells us that Adam was the first man. However, he was not really the >>> first man. He had a father and a grandfather and he probably had brothers. >>> However, he was the most recent man from whom all of as are descended on >>> the straight male line. >>> >>> Through DNA studies, we are able to calculate the rate at which Y-DNA >>> mutates. There are minor mutations all the time. Once we know the rate of >>> mutation and we know how far different is our DNA from the DNA of other >>> men, then we can calculate backwards and determine how many generations ago >>> the man who is the father of us all lived. >>> >>> By this method, it has been determined that the man who is the father of us >>> all lived 60,000 years ago, give or take a few thousand years. >>> >>> This was not the first man. The first human that we know about that we can >>> definitely say was human was Lucy who lived three million years ago. There >>> must have been people around long before Lucy, but we have not found their >>> bones yet. >>> >>> We also know where Lucy lived. She lived in what is now Ethiopia. >>> >>> Can we find out the earliest female? This is more difficult. Women pass >>> down mtDNA. A woman gives her mtDNA to all of her children, both male and >>> female. It does not mutate much and does so slowly. Thus, we do not know >>> how long ago the earliest female who is the mother of us all lived. We >>> would call her DNA-Eve. However, it is even possible that not all women >>> have a common origin. Perhaps a long time ago there was a man who had a >>> chimpanzee as a girlfriend. Cross-breeding is not impossible and happens >>> more often than we realize. We can be almost certain that the DNA-Adam and >>> the DNA-Eve did not know each other or sleep together. DNA-Eve probably >>> lived thousands of years earlier than he did. >>> >>> This book does not bear a date of publication, but we know it had been >>> published by 1952. It was sold by street-vendors standing on the street on >>> 125th Street in Harlem. By then, the general wisdom was that there were >>> four races of man, Black, White, Chinese and American Indian. Black people >>> did not like being called Black. They preferred to be called Negro. >>> >>> Actually, the Blacks are not black nor are the Whites white. The Chinese >>> are not yellow and the American Indians are nor red. These are just >>> convenient terms people used. >>> >>> However, we know that 60,000 years ago there was just one man who is the >>> father of us all. In general, a male generation lasts 30 years. So, there >>> have been 2,000 generations between the Y-DNA Adam and the men today. The >>> changes in skin color and other physical attributes took place just within >>> those 2,000 generations. >>> Sam Sloan >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > -- > Orin Wells > 253-630-5296 > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I just thought of something I have not seen anybody else say. If we agree that our Most Recent Common Ancestor was a man named Adam and he must have had at least two sons, then we should call his two sons DNA-Cain and DNA-Able. Can we find how they were different? Sam Sloan On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 10:55 AM, AJ Marsh via <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: > Orin, > > Yes estimating time to Y Adam is fraught with difficulties, but isn't it > just "human nature" to try to do so. Perhaps it is our curiosity to know > the seemingly unknowable which makes us human. Long may we play the game > of estimating time to Y Adam. > > John. > > Sent from my iPad > > > On 12/10/2015, at 5:23 am, Orin Wells via <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> > wrote: > > > > There is a major problem with all of this "scientific" computation to > > estimate the earliest ancestor. That is the computed frequency of > > mutation on the various markers. I suggest, and maybe I am completely > > wrong, that the frequency is just an estimation based on the observable > > mutations currently. When I can identify men who have a MRCA who lived > > 400 and 500 years ago who are clearly identified by genealogical records > > and they have absolutely no mutations between them I really have to > > question the accuracy of trying to pin down a common ancestor for all of > > us so precisely. > > > >> On 10/10/2015 10:06 PM, AJ Marsh via wrote: > >> Hi Sam, > >> > >> A good summary. The only comment I would make is that you suggest > Y-DNA Adam lived 60,000 years ago which was the accepted figure for a long > time, but there are different opinions. Yesterday I read 115,000 years ago > somewhere if I recall correctly, and I believe I have seen estimates out to > 250,000 years plus. > >> > >> The latest YFull experimental tree estimates Y-DNA Adam at around > 234,900 years ago, > >> http://www.yfull.com/tree/A00/ . For the present I would suggest > 234,900 years ago is as good a scientific guess as any, but it would not > surprise me to see the estimates stretch out further over time. > >> > >> Using SNP mutation counting for estimates is good, but I keep having > nagging feelings that over very long periods of time evolutionary selection > might prune out less beneficial SNPs, which may mean for very long time > periods our estimates might be low if we base them on all SNPs surviving at > a constant rate without evolutionary pruning. There was a time when a x3 > fudge factor was used to allow for evolutionary pruning. > >> > >> Then if we test everybody on earth, and find a single surviving > Neanderthal Y-DNA line, Y-DNA Adam estimates might jump out by a factor of > 2. > >> > >> Over time there have different ways of defining "human". I don't know > myself what is the best definition. It could be development of full > bipedal walking, or tool use, or speech, or building dwellings, or when > wives became boss of the family, but perhaps some would argue that even > some magpies and chimpanzees can do all of these things. So then you have > to define each aspect, like defining a dwelling as being a minimum of 3 > rooms, with attached garage, wide screen TV, and A beer fridge. I will > leave it to others to resolve these tricky definitions. > >> > >> John. > >> > >> Sent from my iPad > >> > >> > >>> On 11/10/2015, at 5:08 pm, Sam Sloan via<genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>> It is now an accepted scientific fact (as much as any facts of this > nature > >>> can ever be recognized) that all men alive today are descended from > just > >>> one man who lived 60,000 years ago. > >>> > >>> The reason we can be sure of this is that all men have a Y-Chromosome > that > >>> they pass down to their sons, but not to their daughters because > females to > >>> not have a Y-Chromosome. > >>> > >>> By doing DNA studies of this Y-Chromosome, we can see that all men > have a > >>> similar Y-Chromosome with only minor variations. This tells us that > they > >>> all have a common origin. > >>> > >>> This means that if we could go back in time we could find that common > >>> origin who is the DNA father of us all. > >>> > >>> We know that this man had at least two sons. The reason we know this is > >>> because if he had only one son that son would be the most recent > father of > >>> us all, and not his father. > >>> > >>> What we are now seeking is the MRCA which means Most Recent Common > >>> Ancestor. There are no doubt many men who are the fathers of us all, > but we > >>> want to find the one man who is the most recent. > >>> > >>> There were other men before him and he also probably had brothers. > However > >>> the family lines of those other men died out. Their Y-DNA became > extinct, > >>> except through him. Only the Y-DNA of the Most Recent Common male > Ancestor > >>> survives in all of us today. > >>> > >>> We call this man who is our most recent common ancestor our DNA-Adam. > The > >>> Bible tells us that Adam was the first man. However, he was not really > the > >>> first man. He had a father and a grandfather and he probably had > brothers. > >>> However, he was the most recent man from whom all of as are descended > on > >>> the straight male line. > >>> > >>> Through DNA studies, we are able to calculate the rate at which Y-DNA > >>> mutates. There are minor mutations all the time. Once we know the rate > of > >>> mutation and we know how far different is our DNA from the DNA of other > >>> men, then we can calculate backwards and determine how many > generations ago > >>> the man who is the father of us all lived. > >>> > >>> By this method, it has been determined that the man who is the father > of us > >>> all lived 60,000 years ago, give or take a few thousand years. > >>> > >>> This was not the first man. The first human that we know about that we > can > >>> definitely say was human was Lucy who lived three million years ago. > There > >>> must have been people around long before Lucy, but we have not found > their > >>> bones yet. > >>> > >>> We also know where Lucy lived. She lived in what is now Ethiopia. > >>> > >>> Can we find out the earliest female? This is more difficult. Women pass > >>> down mtDNA. A woman gives her mtDNA to all of her children, both male > and > >>> female. It does not mutate much and does so slowly. Thus, we do not > know > >>> how long ago the earliest female who is the mother of us all lived. We > >>> would call her DNA-Eve. However, it is even possible that not all women > >>> have a common origin. Perhaps a long time ago there was a man who had a > >>> chimpanzee as a girlfriend. Cross-breeding is not impossible and > happens > >>> more often than we realize. We can be almost certain that the DNA-Adam > and > >>> the DNA-Eve did not know each other or sleep together. DNA-Eve probably > >>> lived thousands of years earlier than he did. > >>> > >>> This book does not bear a date of publication, but we know it had been > >>> published by 1952. It was sold by street-vendors standing on the > street on > >>> 125th Street in Harlem. By then, the general wisdom was that there were > >>> four races of man, Black, White, Chinese and American Indian. Black > people > >>> did not like being called Black. They preferred to be called Negro. > >>> > >>> Actually, the Blacks are not black nor are the Whites white. The > Chinese > >>> are not yellow and the American Indians are nor red. These are just > >>> convenient terms people used. > >>> > >>> However, we know that 60,000 years ago there was just one man who is > the > >>> father of us all. In general, a male generation lasts 30 years. So, > there > >>> have been 2,000 generations between the Y-DNA Adam and the men today. > The > >>> changes in skin color and other physical attributes took place just > within > >>> those 2,000 generations. > >>> Sam Sloan > >>> > >>> ------------------------------- > >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >> > >> ------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > > -- > > Orin Wells > > 253-630-5296 > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Yes. One son bore one of the following mutations: AF4, AF5, AF7, AF8, AF9, AF10, AF13, L1086, L1087, L1088, L1091, L1092, L1094, L1096, L1097, L1102, L1103, L1104, L1106, L1107, L1108, L1109, L1110, L1111, L1113, L1114, L1115, L1117, L1119, L1122, L1126, L1131, L1133, L1134, L1138, L1139, L1140, L1141, L1144, L1146, L1147, L1148, L1151, L1152, L1154, L1156, L1157, L1158, L1159, L1160, L1161, L1163, L1233, L1234, L1236, L1085, AF3, L1089, L1090, L1093, L1095, L1098, L1099, L1101, L1105, L1116, L1118, L1120, L1121, L1123, L1124, L1125, L1127, L1128, L1129, L1130, L1132, L1135, L1136, L1137, L1142, L1143, L1145, L1150, L1155, or L1235 and the other did not. Well, that's we know it today. Doug McDonald________________________________________ From: genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com [genealogy-dna-bounces@rootsweb.com] on behalf of Sam Sloan via [genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com] Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2015 3:24 PM To: AJ Marsh; genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com Cc: Orin Wells Subject: Re: [DNA] DNA Developments I just thought of something I have not seen anybody else say. If we agree that our Most Recent Common Ancestor was a man named Adam and he must have had at least two sons, then we should call his two sons DNA-Cain and DNA-Able. Can we find how they were different? Sam Sloan On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 10:55 AM, AJ Marsh via <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: > Orin, > > Yes estimating time to Y Adam is fraught with difficulties, but isn't it > just "human nature" to try to do so. Perhaps it is our curiosity to know > the seemingly unknowable which makes us human. Long may we play the game > of estimating time to Y Adam. > > John. > > Sent from my iPad > > > On 12/10/2015, at 5:23 am, Orin Wells via <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> > wrote: > > > > There is a major problem with all of this "scientific" computation to > > estimate the earliest ancestor. That is the computed frequency of > > mutation on the various markers. I suggest, and maybe I am completely > > wrong, that the frequency is just an estimation based on the observable > > mutations currently. When I can identify men who have a MRCA who lived > > 400 and 500 years ago who are clearly identified by genealogical records > > and they have absolutely no mutations between them I really have to > > question the accuracy of trying to pin down a common ancestor for all of > > us so precisely. > > > >> On 10/10/2015 10:06 PM, AJ Marsh via wrote: > >> Hi Sam, > >> > >> A good summary. The only comment I would make is that you suggest > Y-DNA Adam lived 60,000 years ago which was the accepted figure for a long > time, but there are different opinions. Yesterday I read 115,000 years ago > somewhere if I recall correctly, and I believe I have seen estimates out to > 250,000 years plus. > >> > >> The latest YFull experimental tree estimates Y-DNA Adam at around > 234,900 years ago, > >> http://www.yfull.com/tree/A00/ . For the present I would suggest > 234,900 years ago is as good a scientific guess as any, but it would not > surprise me to see the estimates stretch out further over time. > >> > >> Using SNP mutation counting for estimates is good, but I keep having > nagging feelings that over very long periods of time evolutionary selection > might prune out less beneficial SNPs, which may mean for very long time > periods our estimates might be low if we base them on all SNPs surviving at > a constant rate without evolutionary pruning. There was a time when a x3 > fudge factor was used to allow for evolutionary pruning. > >> > >> Then if we test everybody on earth, and find a single surviving > Neanderthal Y-DNA line, Y-DNA Adam estimates might jump out by a factor of > 2. > >> > >> Over time there have different ways of defining "human". I don't know > myself what is the best definition. It could be development of full > bipedal walking, or tool use, or speech, or building dwellings, or when > wives became boss of the family, but perhaps some would argue that even > some magpies and chimpanzees can do all of these things. So then you have > to define each aspect, like defining a dwelling as being a minimum of 3 > rooms, with attached garage, wide screen TV, and A beer fridge. I will > leave it to others to resolve these tricky definitions. > >> > >> John. > >> > >> Sent from my iPad > >> > >> > >>> On 11/10/2015, at 5:08 pm, Sam Sloan via<genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>> It is now an accepted scientific fact (as much as any facts of this > nature > >>> can ever be recognized) that all men alive today are descended from > just > >>> one man who lived 60,000 years ago. > >>> > >>> The reason we can be sure of this is that all men have a Y-Chromosome > that > >>> they pass down to their sons, but not to their daughters because > females to > >>> not have a Y-Chromosome. > >>> > >>> By doing DNA studies of this Y-Chromosome, we can see that all men > have a > >>> similar Y-Chromosome with only minor variations. This tells us that > they > >>> all have a common origin. > >>> > >>> This means that if we could go back in time we could find that common > >>> origin who is the DNA father of us all. > >>> > >>> We know that this man had at least two sons. The reason we know this is > >>> because if he had only one son that son would be the most recent > father of > >>> us all, and not his father. > >>> > >>> What we are now seeking is the MRCA which means Most Recent Common > >>> Ancestor. There are no doubt many men who are the fathers of us all, > but we > >>> want to find the one man who is the most recent. > >>> > >>> There were other men before him and he also probably had brothers. > However > >>> the family lines of those other men died out. Their Y-DNA became > extinct, > >>> except through him. Only the Y-DNA of the Most Recent Common male > Ancestor > >>> survives in all of us today. > >>> > >>> We call this man who is our most recent common ancestor our DNA-Adam. > The > >>> Bible tells us that Adam was the first man. However, he was not really > the > >>> first man. He had a father and a grandfather and he probably had > brothers. > >>> However, he was the most recent man from whom all of as are descended > on > >>> the straight male line. > >>> > >>> Through DNA studies, we are able to calculate the rate at which Y-DNA > >>> mutates. There are minor mutations all the time. Once we know the rate > of > >>> mutation and we know how far different is our DNA from the DNA of other > >>> men, then we can calculate backwards and determine how many > generations ago > >>> the man who is the father of us all lived. > >>> > >>> By this method, it has been determined that the man who is the father > of us > >>> all lived 60,000 years ago, give or take a few thousand years. > >>> > >>> This was not the first man. The first human that we know about that we > can > >>> definitely say was human was Lucy who lived three million years ago. > There > >>> must have been people around long before Lucy, but we have not found > their > >>> bones yet. > >>> > >>> We also know where Lucy lived. She lived in what is now Ethiopia. > >>> > >>> Can we find out the earliest female? This is more difficult. Women pass > >>> down mtDNA. A woman gives her mtDNA to all of her children, both male > and > >>> female. It does not mutate much and does so slowly. Thus, we do not > know > >>> how long ago the earliest female who is the mother of us all lived. We > >>> would call her DNA-Eve. However, it is even possible that not all women > >>> have a common origin. Perhaps a long time ago there was a man who had a > >>> chimpanzee as a girlfriend. Cross-breeding is not impossible and > happens > >>> more often than we realize. We can be almost certain that the DNA-Adam > and > >>> the DNA-Eve did not know each other or sleep together. DNA-Eve probably > >>> lived thousands of years earlier than he did. > >>> > >>> This book does not bear a date of publication, but we know it had been > >>> published by 1952. It was sold by street-vendors standing on the > street on > >>> 125th Street in Harlem. By then, the general wisdom was that there were > >>> four races of man, Black, White, Chinese and American Indian. Black > people > >>> did not like being called Black. They preferred to be called Negro. > >>> > >>> Actually, the Blacks are not black nor are the Whites white. The > Chinese > >>> are not yellow and the American Indians are nor red. These are just > >>> convenient terms people used. > >>> > >>> However, we know that 60,000 years ago there was just one man who is > the > >>> father of us all. In general, a male generation lasts 30 years. So, > there > >>> have been 2,000 generations between the Y-DNA Adam and the men today. > The > >>> changes in skin color and other physical attributes took place just > within > >>> those 2,000 generations. > >>> Sam Sloan > >>> > >>> ------------------------------- > >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >> > >> ------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > > -- > > Orin Wells > > 253-630-5296 > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message