The evolution theory of Robert Dorit
During the 1990s Prof. Robert Dorit from Yale managed to identify a very interesting detail in a segment of the Y chromosome in the human DNA chain: it cannot recombine with the maternal chromosomes during fertilization and therefore can only be transmitted by the father.
Its stability is such that it can only evolve by mutation. Studied on 38 individuals chosen from different geographical origins, its genetic portion turned out to be "surprisingly identical" when a comparative study among great apes showed that it was different. Dorit concludes that "the results of this study lend credence to the thesis of a common father for all modern humanity."
He had reached a similar conclusion in an earlier study of a segment of DNA transmitted only by mothers. For Dorit, these ancient ancestors would have lived about 270,000 years ago.
Thus it appears that, if the hominid called "homo erectus" was certainly born in Africa from 1 to 3 million years ago to spread throughout the world, evolving into "homo abilis", and then into "homo sapiens", would have appeared in its specific modern form starting from a very small and well localized population whose descendants, during emigration, would have modified their appearance by mixing with of the most archaic populations from 200 to 280,000 years ago.
The discovery becomes an additional ball and chain in the evolutionist anthill which will once again have to modify the scenario of its conception of the appearance of man on earth.
It now seems appropriate to raise a certain number of clarifications and draw the conclusions which Dorit was careful not to say:
- Genetics cannot replace a dating system in the present case and give the date of appearance of the studied DNA segment. When Dorit states that modern man appeared about 270,000 years ago, he merely takes up, by extrapolation, the data currently advanced in human paleoanthropology. The conclusion goes beyond his acquired expertise in the field of genetics. We are therefore here in the presence of an abusive use of his discovery.
- Dorit states that the genes studied on the specific male and female chromosomes suddenly appeared in a specific population due to a mutation that was at the origin of the modern human population. One cannot be not amazed by this kind of statement from such a specialist, knowing that in this precise domain of genetics the characteristics assumed by a mutation are the following: immediate, irreversible and isolated, that is, non-repetitive and on a individual only. Furthermore, experience shows that a natural mutation never results in an improvement, but rather in an alteration (in the sense of degradation) of the characteristics of the specie.
- The conclusion of Dorit, regarding a collective mutation affecting all males or all families of the same population group in the sense of a notable and noticeable improvement of their race, is at least an erroneous statement according to fundamental knowledge in the domain of genetics. If the mutation occurred, it could only affect one man or one woman at a time.
- Ecological studies on animals have made it possible to know that when an unprotected animal population becomes too small (the threshold varies according to the species, in general a few hundred individuals) it is condemned to inevitably disappear. From the perspective of a unique couple, resulting from a mutation, it is impossible that it could have been at the origin of current humanity, since it was doomed to extinction... It is also understandable why Dorit evokes a "very localized population" affected by this genetic mutation in the absence of a unique pair. It was a step that he could not take without risking falling into a logic of internal contradiction that evolutionists will be careful not to raise.
Even if there are currently three great theories being addressed on the origin of man, they are all based on the theory of the evolution of species which established all prehistoric science in its guiding ideology: the great age of modern man, descendant from a hominid called "homo erectus" by dint of mutations and subsequent evolutions over several hundred thousand years, allows us to reject the biblical texts with their dating, the existence of a unique couple, Adam and Eve at the origin of humanity, and at the same time the very idea of a God Creator of all things, of the world and of life.
In order to keep the theory of evolution credible, its supporters are forced to accept scenarios that contradict the scientific elements on which it should rely for its demonstration (as is the case of Dorit). This theory has thus become a new "religion" which will have many other variations according to the opportunities of new prehistoric and scientific discoveries, since they always go in the direction of distancing humanity from God.
At first glance Dorit preaches for the historicity of a unique pair of relatives at the origin of our humanity, and therefore for the Bible, but he saw himself immediately sacrificed by its discoverer who makes him say the opposite... There are dubious "manipulations" and "mutations" that no longer have anything scientific about them...
By this we must mean a population of male individuals, since the idea of a single initial couple is repugnant to most minds nowadays; you will easily guess why...
The 3 theories can be summarized as follows:
- "Noah's Ark" hypothesis (!): modern man (homo sapiens sapiens) appeared in sub-Saharan Africa approximately 150,000 years ago to occupy the world, giving it the current ethnic groups. Man would descend from a local group of archaic homo sapiens, born around 400,000 years ago (Neanderthal man would descend from another group and become extinct around 35,000 BC) also having a common ancestor with the other archaic groups; "homo erectus" would have appeared 1 to 3 million years ago.
- "Candlestick" hypothesis: modern man descends from different populations of archaic homo sapiens who already populated the world, with certainly homo erectus as a common ancestor.
- Hypothesis of "reticulated evolution": it takes up the second hypothesis, further admitting that there have been mixtures (crossbreeding) between the different groups of archaic homo sapiens.The interpretation of the discovery of Dorit appears as a variant of this 3rd hypothesis.
