Wednesday, 20 January 2010


I'll quote two and a bit paragraphs:

Most men in Britain are descended from the first farmers to migrate across Europe from the Near East 10,000 years ago, scientists say.


Genetic tests on women showed that most are descendants of hunter-gatherer females. "To us, this suggests a reproductive advantage for farming males over indigenous hunter-gatherer males during the switch from hunting and gathering to farming," said Patricia Balaresque, a co-author of the study.

"Maybe back then, it was just sexier to be a farmer."

Try this thought-experiment: take a brother and sister. The brother is going to be descended from fertile crescent farmers. The sister is going to be descended from indigenous hunter-gatherers. I just want to know where the parents were screwing around...

Bloody cheap science-writing, and crap sub-editing.

Just had to get that off my chest.


Here are the wiki entries for Y-chromosomal Adam (Y-MRCA) and Mitochondrial Eve. As for me, I should go to bed, and not delve into gauche explanations.

Suffice to say, the XX chromozone CAN'T tell us about male ancestors of women. The article conflates what we can know about men and women and their separate ancestries and what we can't know. All the 'don't know' stuff is passed over in silence. It's just poor bloody writing that will only confuse the lay-reader.

Take care all. Dx

No comments: