gogaku at IX.NETCOM.COM
Thu May 9 05:01:29 UTC 2013
I took just a brief look at one of the articles, and that's the impression I got.
I also got the impression that the mistaken idea about everyone being related 1000 years ago comes from the ancestral Eve meme. As I understand it, our ancestral Eve is more of a concept that actually might have been a group of women rather than just one.
On May 8, 2013, at 8:59 PM, Victor Steinbok <aardvark66 at gmail.com> wrote:
> The paper essentially says, as far as I can tell without reading it in
> its entirety, that different European groups have non-trivial genetic
> relationships pointing to nearly any two people from Europe having some
> ancestor in common as recently as 1000 years ago (obviously, some people
> would have ancestors in common a lot closer than that, e.g., if they are
> cousins, but that's not the point--the point is that people who come
> from different nationalities and would not consider themselves in any
> way related are actually related in fairly recent history). The
> reporters then turned it into "all Europeans have a common ancestor from
> 1000 years ago", which I would consider to be rather obvious tripe. But
> if you think I'm being unclear just read the reports for yourself and
> compare them to the original paper (I did post that link and citation
> On 5/8/2013 5:17 PM, Dan Goncharoff wrote:
>> I don't understand this at all.
>> Is someone saying that the 45 million people in Europe in 1000 are NOT
>> 'common ancestors' of the 740 million in Europe now, or that they are,
>> which would seem pretty unexceptional to me?
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
More information about the Ads-l