PDA

View Full Version : LivingDNA shooting themselves in the foot?



Dibran
08-04-2017, 01:37 AM
So I received my booklet and it practically denies evolution. It does not endorse creationism but come on now really? Just a few statements in the book:

"Darwins biok did not however address human evolution"

"Unfortunately, after his death, individuals reinterpreted his work, making assumptions. "

"Chimps share around 98 percent of their genetic code with human beings. As a result, certain scientists jumped to the conclusion human beings descended from chimps.

"All we know is around 200k years ago species as modern human beings appeared"

I know modern humans and chimps descend from a common ancestor, however the structure of their words seem almost in denial of the concept of evolution. It's almost ironic considering they are a genetics company.....

greerpalmer
08-04-2017, 03:44 AM
So I received my booklet and it practically denies evolution. It does not endorse creationism but come on now really? Just a few statements in the book:

"Darwins biok did not however address human evolution"

"Unfortunately, after his death, individuals reinterpreted his work, making assumptions. "

"Chimps share around 98 percent of their genetic code with human beings. As a result, certain scientists jumped to the conclusion human beings descended from chimps.

"All we know is around 200k years ago species as modern human beings appeared"

I know modern humans and chimps descend from a common ancestor, however the structure of their words seem almost in denial of the concept of evolution. It's almost ironic considering they are a genetics company.....

I think these are overly technical statements that are true among evolutionist scientists/specialists but perhaps not worded the best. I don't think it was intentional but I can see why it was included based on so much misinformation about Neanderthal DNA--you go on the 23andme forum and there are a ton of "if you're a Neanderthal" statements.

Pylsteen
08-04-2017, 07:55 AM
From wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution#History_of_study):


Darwin's book did not address the question of human evolution, saying only that "Light will be thrown on the origin of man and his history."

Yes, he did not know much about genetics. When he opened up the possibility of species evolving from other species, others connected this with descent from apes. LivingDNA is wrong here, because this connection between humans and chimps was made before any DNA known.

angscoire
08-08-2017, 06:17 PM
If they used terms like 'Mitochondrial Eve' and 'Y Adam' like FTDNA then they would deserve criticism as such terms are highly misleading and possibly appease creationists . From your quotes it seems like they are ever so slightly hedging - the last quote struck me as strange , but is out of context so perhaps I should not judge. LivingDna's explanations regarding haplogroups , human history, etc, aren't the worst but they could certainly be improved.