Re: On ancestry
This is not a DNA-problem.
No. Nothing is a problem for people who don't read the information past the first paragraph..
But the A00 gene has nothing to do with the human/chimp split.
Again, not a problem if you pretend Homo erectus didn't exist. Or Kenyapithecus, Samburupithecus, several species of robust and gracile Australopith, Paranthropus boisei, Homo habilis, Homo ergaster, Homo habilis or Homo heidelbergensis.
Then in 3 weeks, before they starved, they suddenly became aquatic humans on a volcanic rock.
Not a DNA problem?
Some scientists believe that insanity does have a genetic component.
From: AAT@groups.io <AAT@groups.io> on behalf of Allan Krill <krill@...>
Sent: Friday, October 8, 2021 2:22 PM
To: AAT@groups.io <AAT@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [AAT] On ancestry
On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 02:16 AM, Gareth Morgan wrote:
Here's just one example: - https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/a-reasonable-doubt/480747/In your example, Texas police misread the DNA evidence to convict two black men of a crime they did not commit. This is not a DNA-problem.
If a DNA-testing company can't tell the difference between male and female in a sample, they are swindling their customers by selling a worthless product. This is not a DNA-problem.
In your next message to this group, you write: Genetics proves (via A00 gene) that the human/chimp split happened 200,000 year ago. But the A00 gene has nothing to do with the human/chimp split. Other types of DNA show that the human/chimp split was millions of years ago, not a few hundred thousand years ago. No DNA-problem here either.