Atlantis Online
November 13, 2019, 09:57:52 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Giant crater may lie under Antarctic ice
http://space.newscientist.com/article/dn9268
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

Adam and Eve - new DNA report-genetics

Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Adam and Eve - new DNA report-genetics  (Read 1652 times)
Majeston
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 447



WWW
« on: March 10, 2007, 12:09:53 pm »

Adam and Eve
Summary & Genetic Reports Corroboration





[Updated 2/9/07]
The Urantia Book states that Adam and Eve lived on earth
approximately 38,000 years ago and that they were biologically superior
to everyone else on the planet. Adam and Eve, along with their progeny
are said to have created a permanent improvement in the genetic makeup
of mankind. The Urantia Book addresses the nature of the biologic
differences that Adam and Eve contributed to human genetics and also
the spread these new and superior genetic traits throughout the world.

A University of Chicago study first published in 2006 helps develop the
corroboration of the information about Adam, Eve, and their progeny
based on research techniques that allow scientists to track the history of
human genetics based on genetic samples from a cross section of the
current human population. This study finds parallels to the Urantia
Book’s story of Adam and Eve regarding when the genetic contribution
was introduced, how it was introduced, how much it has spread into the
human gene pool, and the effect this contribution has had on human
development. (Several decades after the Urantia Book’s publication,
sonar readings in the eastern Mediterranean basin provided powerful
support to the Urantia Book’s description of the location of the Garden
of Eden. See [Garden of Eden Report.])

Adam and Eve Report

Prepared by Halbert Katzen with special thanks to Fred Harris
[Updated 2/17/07]

(This report involves material about genetics research that is rather
complex. Every effort was made to only use quotes that would be the
easiest for people to comprehend who are not familiar with this field of
science. However, the material does not lend itself well to this effort.
Definitions of terms are provided in the report to assist the reader’s


comprehension of quoted material. The intention in writing the report in
this fashion is so the reader does not have to trust the writer for
interpretations of the original source material. For this reason, original
source material is used as much as possible. Because of the complex
nature of this material, soon an “Executive Summary” will be written for
this report that provides a middle ground analysis between the short
Summary above and the rather lengthy and detailed report below. The
Executive Summary will, of course, avoid using quotes from the original
source material and put everything in the simplest terms possible. Thank
you for your patience with this process.)

The Urantia Book’s story of Adam and Even compared with the
University of Chicago Study titled: Evidence that the adaptive allele
of the brain size gene microcephalin introgressed into Homo sapiens
from an archaic Homo lineage.

According to the Urantia Book, Adam and Eve, along with their
progeny, are responsible for a genetic upgrade that has had a lasting
effect on the human population. Specific details are provided about
when and how this occurred. The Urantia Book also describes the degree
to which this genetic upgrade has spread throughout the world.
Additionally, it reveals information about the nature of this genetic
upgrade. In regard to all of these aspects of a genetic upgrade being
introduced into the human population, research done out of the
University of Chicago (the “Study”) is in harmony with the history
provided in the Urantia Book about Adam, Eve, and their progeny.1 This

1 Unless otherwise noted as a Urantia Book reference (example: (UB 60:1.9), meaning the 60th
chapter, first section, ninth paragraph), all references in quotations are taken from the Study
which can be found at the following website.

http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/103/48/18178?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULT
FORMAT=&fulltext=lahn&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT Footnotes
have been removed from selected quotations in an effort to eliminate distracting extraneous
material that otherwise can be accessed by going directly to the full text of the Study. The word
“Urantia” refers to, is synonymous with, Earth. The vast majority of the material pertaining to
Adam, Eve, and their progeny can be found in Chapters 74 through 80 (referred to in the book as
“Papers,” and is a little over 60 pages.


Study was first published online on November 7, 2006 in Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

The Study was presented by Patrick D. Evans, Nitzan Mekel-Bobrov,
Eric J. Vallender, Richard R. Hudson, and Bruce T. Lahn from the
Howard Hughes Medical Institute (Departments of Human Genetics and
Ecology and Evolution, and Committee on Genetics) at the University of
Chicago. It was received for review August 10, 2006 and edited by
Henry C. Harpending at the University of Utah. Naturally, those of us
who are enthusiastic about the Urantia Book are very grateful to and
wish to thank those mentioned above and all others involved with the
development and presentation of this research.

Conversations about genetics, and especially the quality of genetic
endowment, have a tendency to create discomfort and fear because of
current and historical attempts at ethnic cleansing and the concern that
the science will be inappropriately used to support racists and those with
elitist attitudes. For these reasons, it is important to be clear that,
notwithstanding the Urantia Book’s very direct treatment of this topic
and in ways that are specific regarding the issues of quality, the Urantia
Book is unequivocal in admonishing us to treat all human beings with
love, kindness, dignity, and respect. According to the Urantia Book, the
significance of our spiritual equality is paramount. It states:

“God is spirit, and God gives a fragment of his spirit self to
dwell in the heart of man. Spiritually, all men are equal. The
kingdom of heaven is free from castes, classes, social levels,
and economic groups. You are all brethren.” (UB 134:4.7)

“Although you cannot escape the recognition of differential
human abilities and endowments in matters intellectual,
social, and moral, you should make no such distinctions in
the spiritual brotherhood of men when assembled for worship
in the presence of God." (UB 133:0.3)


Furthermore, even though the Urantia Book encourages us in general
terms to address ourselves to the task of improving humanity’s genetic
endowment and does not mince words on the subject, at the same time it
is also unequivocal in stating that non violent social change is the only
appropriate way to effect social change. With regard to the issue of how
people should be treated, the Urantia Book states:

“[R]eligion should not be directly concerned either with the
creation of new social orders or with the preservation of old
ones. True religion does oppose violence as a technique of
social evolution, but it does not oppose the intelligent efforts
of society to adapt its usages and adjust its institutions to new
economic conditions and cultural requirements.” (UB
99:0.1,2)

“War is an animalistic reaction to misunderstandings and
irritations; peace attends upon the civilized solution of all
such problems and difficulties.” (UB 70:1.2)

“And the fruits of the divine spirit which are yielded in the
lives of spirit-born and God-knowing mortals are: loving
service, unselfish devotion, courageous loyalty, sincere
fairness, enlightened honesty, undying hope, confiding trust,
merciful ministry, unfailing goodness, forgiving tolerance,
and enduring peace.” (UB 193:2.2)

“[Y]ou should manifest the righteous ministry of loving
service to believers and unbelievers alike. . . The fruits of the
spirit, your sincere and loving service, are the mighty social
lever to uplift the races. . .” (UB 178:1.6)

This report is not being written with the intention, directly or indirectly,
to make a statement about how to handle any of the racial/genetic issues
that we face. As a UBtheNEWS.com report, it is intended solely for the
purpose of informing people about the quality of the Urantia Book with


regard to science and history. Because the particular subject matter of
this report will lead readers to those sections of the Urantia Book that are
ripe with the type of straight, scientific talk about genetics that can cause
discomfort, fear, and concern (and is therefore so easily misunderstood
and taken out of context), there is a need to start this report with these
balancing statements and provide the reader with some of these
references as well. Having done this, the remainder of the report will
stay focused on comparing the Study to the related information found in
the Urantia Book.

When and how did the introduction of the upgraded genetic
contribution occur?

By isolating locations on chromosomes that are responsible for specific
traits and then cross referencing the frequency of these traits in a given
population with a baseline genetic ancestor, in this case a chimpanzee,
the researchers were able to calculate when the trait first appeared in the
human gene pool. The chimpanzee provides a reference point, an
“outgroup,” from which all the human genetic samples are considered
sufficiently distant. This allows statistical and probability evaluations to
be conducted that point to when and how the genetic contribution in
question occurred.

“The estimate that all modern copies of the D alleles
descended from a single progenitor copy about 37,000 years
ago is based on the measurement of sequence difference
between different copies of the D alleles. As a copy of a gene
is passed from one generation to the next, mutations are
introduced at a steady rate, such that a certain number of
generations later, the descendent copies of the gene would on
average vary from one another in DNA sequence by a certain
amount. The greater the number of the generations, the more
DNA sequence difference there would be between two
descendent copies, said Lahn. The amount of sequence


difference between different copies of a gene can therefore be
used to estimate the amount of evolutionary time that has
elapsed since the two copies descended from their common
progenitor.”2

For the purposes of the Study,

“[A] panel of 89 DNA samples was obtained from the Coriell
Institute that represents the global diversity of major human
populations. It included nine sub-Saharan Africans, seven
North Africans, nine Iberians, seven Basques, nine Russians,
nine Middle Easterners, nine South Asians, eight Chinese,
one Japanese, eight Southeast Asians, six Pacific Islander,
and seven Andeans.” “We resequenced the panel for a 29-kb
region that spans exons 4–9 of the 14-exon microcephalin
gene. This process led to the identification of 220 segregating
sites delineating 86 distinct haplotypes. . . Of the 178
chromosomes we sampled, 124 (or 70%) belonged to
haplogroup D, defined by the derived C residue at the
G37995C diagnostic nonsynonymous polymorphic site. (For
simplicity, we will refer to haplogroup D as the D allele and
the non-D haplotypes as the non-D allele.)”

Microcephalin is crucial to the regulation and development of brain size.
Microcephaly is a condition in which this gene does not operate properly
and causes severely undersized brain development without otherwise
effecting neurological development. Wikipedia.com defines an allele as
follows:

2 From the Howard Hugh Medical Institute’s online Research News dated November 6, 2006.

http://www.hhmi.org/news/lahn20061006.html


“In genetics, an allele (pronounced al-eel or al-e-ul) is any

one of a number of viable DNA codings occupying a given

locus (position) on a chromosome. Usually alleles are DNA

(deoxyribo-nucleic acid) sequences that code for a gene, but

sometimes the term is used to refer to a non-gene sequence.

An individual's genotype for that gene is the set of alleles it

happens to possess.”

With regard to the issue of timing, the Study states that “[t]hese unusual
features of the microcephalin genealogy suggest the possibility that the
MRCA [most recent common ancestor] of the D clade introgressed into
humans from a divergent Homo lineage at or some time before 37,000
years ago. In the ensuing sections, we describe stringent statistical tests
that support this introgression model.” “Within modern humans, a group
of closely related haplotypes at this locus, known as haplogroup D, rose
from a single copy 37,000 years ago. . .”

What is meant by “introgression” will be taken up shortly, but first let us
turn our attention to what the Urantia Book says about timing (saving
statements about the nature of their genetics for later). “Adam and Eve
arrived on Urantia [Earth], from the year A.D. 1934, 37,848 years ago.”
(UB 74:0.1) Given the rounding and margin of error aspects of the
Study, with respect to when the genetic upgrade occurred, the Urantia
Book and the Study are aligned.

Having established alignment regarding when the event occurred, the
next question to ask is how this occurred. Understanding how this
occurred is a rather involved question both in terms of the Study and the
Urantia Book. Therefore, they will be addressed in turn, starting with the
Study.

In order to appreciate how the introduction of this new genetic material
occurred according to the Study, one must first become familiar with
what is meant by “introgression?” Wikipedia.com describes it this way:


“Introgression, in genetics (particularly plant genetics), is the
movement of a gene from one species into the gene pool of
another by backcrossing an interspecific hybrid with one of
its parents. An example of introgression is that of a transgene
from a transgenic plant to a wild relative as the result of a
successful hybridization.

“An introgression line (abbreviation: IL) in plant molecular
biology is a line of a crop species that contains genetic
material derived from a similar species, for example a "wild"
relative. An example of a collection of ILs (called IL-
Library) is the use of chromosome fragments from Solanum
pennellii (a wild variety of tomato) introgressed in Solanum
lycopersicum (the cultivated tomato). The lines of a IL-
Library covers usually the complete genome of the donor.
Introgression lines allow the study of quantitative trait loci,
but also the creation of new varieties by introducing exotic
traits.”

In simpler terms, this means that if two species are sufficiently similar,
then one species can pass along a gene to the other species in a way that
allows this new genetic material to be influential and persist from
generation to generation.

Research done in the Study indicates a strong likelihood that the
microcephalin gene in question introgressed into the human gene pool
from a single source. Bruce Lahn (one of the researchers in the Study) in
a separate article published November 6, 2006 on the Howard Hughes
Medical Institute website queries and comments, “Might mating
between an ancient human and a Neanderthal - perhaps occurring in only
a single instance - have introduced a gene variant into the human
population that enhanced human brain function? That question is at the
heart of a new study by researchers at the Howard Hughes Medical


Institute and the University of Chicago.”3 The Study states, “Within
modern humans, a group of closely related haplotypes at this locus,
known as haplogroup D, rose from a single copy 37,000 years ago and
swept to exceptionally high frequency (70% worldwide today) because
of positive selection.” This report will refer to this possibility as “single
source introgression.”

With regard to the issue of positive selection, Wikipidia.com explains:

“Whether or not selection takes place depends on the
conditions in which the individuals of a species find
themselves. Adults, juveniles, embryos, and even eggs and
sperm may undergo selection. Factors fostering selection
include limits on resources (nourishment, habitat space,
mates) and the existence of threats (predators, disease,
adverse weather). Biologists often refer to such factors as
selective pressures. . . election does not guarantee that
advantageous traits or alleles will become prevalent within a
population. . . Through genetic drift, such traits may become
less common or disappear. In the face of selection even a so-
called deleterious allele may become universal to the
members of a species. Though deleterious alleles may
sometimes become established, selection may act
"negatively" as well as "positively." Negative selection
decreases the prevalence of traits that diminish individuals'
capacity to succeed reproductively (i.e. their fitness), while
positive selection increases the prevalence of adaptive traits.”

This issue is important because without positive selection coming into
play, the likelihood that single source introgression would not only
persist but also spread quickly is extremely unlikely. In the plant and
animal world lack of mind function and instinct, respectively, are

3 From the Howard Hugh Medical Institute’s online Research News dated November 6, 2006.

http://www.hhmi.org/news/lahn20061006.html


considered responsible along with environmental factors for defining the
circumstances in which positive selection occurs. With regard to human
populations, broader sociological considerations must be taken into
account with regard to positive selection. Creative choice and intention
become factors to consider as well.

Before directly addressing such issues it is important to understand how
term “genetic drift” is used in the discipline of genetics research. Again,
from Wikipedia.com we get the following explanation:

“In population genetics, genetic drift is the statistical effect
that results from the influence that chance has on the success
of alleles (variants of a gene). The effect may cause an allele
and the biological trait that it confers to become more
common or more rare over successive generations.
Ultimately, the drift may either remove the allele from the
gene pool or remove all other alleles. Whereas natural
selection is the tendency of beneficial alleles to become more
common over time (and detrimental ones less common),
genetic drift is the fundamental tendency of any allele [which
will be defined next] to vary randomly in frequency over
time due to statistical variation alone, so long as it does not
comprise all or none of the distribution.

“Chance affects the commonality or rarity of an allele,
because no trait guarantees survival or a given number of
offspring. This is because survival depends on non-genetic
factors (such as the possibility of being in the wrong place at
the wrong time). In other words, even when individuals face
the same odds, they will differ in their success. A rare
succession of chance events — rather than natural selection

— can thus bring a trait to predominance, causing
a
population or species to evolve.


Of course and for good reasons, genetics researchers are not free
(professionally speaking) to turn to “stories about Adam and Eve” for
guidance on issues of single source introgression, whether they come
from the Urantia Book, the Bible, or any other text that is not based on
scientific research. They must develop their theories based on the
science that is available. The Study begins by stating,

 “At the center of the debate on the emergence of modern
humans and their spread throughout the globe is the question
of whether archaic Homo lineages contributed to the modern
human gene pool, and more importantly, whether such
contributions impacted the evolutionary adaptation of our
species. A major obstacle to answering this question is that
low levels of admixture with archaic lineages are not
expected to leave extensive traces in the modern human gene
pool because of genetic drift. Loci that have undergone
strong positive selection, however, offer a unique opportunity
to identify low-level admixture with archaic lineages,
provided that the introgressed archaic allele has risen to high
frequency under positive selection.”

This is what has occurred with the allele in question. So naturally,
researchers in the Study as well as other genetics researchers must
speculate about different theories that can be supported by the current
state of scientific research and discoveries. Did a mutation occur? “The
new research. . .suggests that human evolution was not just a matter of
spontaneous advantageous mutations arising within the human lineage.”4

Did the allele get introduced through mating with a similar species in
which the allele was either common or anamolous? Archaic Homo
lineages refer to extinct precursors to modern humans. Naturally, these
precursors are not typically known for producing alleles that introgress

4 From the Howard Hugh Medical Institute’s online Research News dated November 6, 2006.

http://www.hhmi.org/news/lahn20061006.html


from a single source, and then, against the odds spread quickly (in the
context of genetic developments) throughout most of humanity. The
problem is that research in this field does not provide a great explanation
for the fact pattern. Some research is pointing in a direction that does not
align well with current theories. However, it is not substantial enough to
support a new theory. Currently, discoveries and research are suggestive,
but not definitive. Therefore, the Study naturally speculates along the
following lines:

“At or sometime before [approximately] 37,000 years ago, a
(possibly rare) interbreeding event occurred between the two
lineages, bringing a copy of the D allele into anatomically
modern humans.”

“Speculation about the identity of the archaic Homo
population from which the microcephalin D allele
introgressed into the modern human gene pool points to the
Neanderthal lineage as a potential (although by no means
only) candidate. Anatomically modern humans and
Neanderthals shared a long period of coexistence, from as
early as 130,000 years ago in the Middle East to as late as
35,000 years ago in Europe, consistent with the estimated
introgression time of the microcephalin D allele at or
sometime before 37,000 years ago.”

“The extent to which anatomically modern humans admixed
with archaic Homo has been the subject of repeated
speculation, particularly in regards to Neanderthals. Thus far,
the mainstream view from fossil and genetic studies leans
toward a model where anatomically modern humans fully
replaced archaic Homo lineages rather than admixed with
them. However, a number of investigators have voiced
opposition to this total replacement model on a number of
grounds, and the debate has yet to be resolved. Particularly
needed to settle this debate is the identification of genetic loci


that show telltale signs of admixture. There have been several
reports of loci in the human genome that display unusually
deep genealogy, and in some cases, admixture between
humans and archaic Homo lineages has been invoked as a
possible explanation. However, these studies cannot
differentiate the admixture model from other possibilities,
such as long-standing balancing selection, that also could
contribute to deep genealogies (see Discussion). As such,
proponents of the admixture scenario have yet to identify a
concrete example of a genetic locus for which there is
compelling evidence of admixture. Furthermore, most
discussions of admixture tend to treat it as a selectively
neutral event, one that happened simply as a byproduct of the
geographical overlap between modern humans and archaic
populations. Such discussions often overlook the possibility
that admixture with archaic lineages, if it indeed occurred,
might have brought adaptive alleles (along with the traits
they determine) into the modern human gene pool, thus
profoundly impacting the biological evolution of our
species.”

“Three features are prominent in this unusual genealogy.
First, the D chromosomes coalesce to its most recent common
ancestor (MRCA) at 37,000 years before present, whereas the
non-D chromosomes coalesce at a far older 990,000 years
before present. The much younger coalescence age of the D
chromosomes, despite their much higher frequency, is
consistent with the action of positiveselection on the D allele
as reported previously (29). Second, and more surprisingly,
however, we found that the D and non-Dchromosomes
belong to two distinct, deeply divided clades connected by a
single branch around the root of the tree (except for a few


rare recombinants between the two clades, as discussed

later).”5

What is meant by coalesce? To understand the coalescent theory of
genetics requires a certain degree of sophistication in probability as well
as genetics. If the reader wants a more detail description, Wikipedia.com
provides a fairly concise inroad to an understanding of this issue under
the heading “Coalescent Theory.” The following excerpts, however, will
hopefully provide most readers with a sufficient appreciation of what is
meant by coalescence for the purposes of this report:

“In genetics, coalescent theory states that all genes or alleles
in a given population are ultimately inherited from a single
ancestor shared by all members of the population, known as
the most recent common ancestor. If the inheritance
relationships are written in the form of a phylogenetic tree,
termed a gene genealogy, the gene or allele of interest is said
to undergo coalescence to the common ancestor. . . Basic
coalescence theory assumes that genes do not undergo
recombination and models genetic drift as a stochastic
process. . . [In the mathematics of probability, a stochastic
process or random process is a process that can be described
by a probability distribution.] Because the process of gene
fixation due to genetic drift is a crucial component of
coalescence theory, it is most useful when the genetic locus
under study is not under natural selection. Advances in
coalescent theory, however, allow extension to the basic
coalescent, and can include recombination, selection, and
virtually any arbitrarily complex evolutionary model in
population genetic analyses. . . Consider two distinct haploid
organisms who differ at a single nucleotide. By tracing the
ancestory of these two individuals backwards there will be a

5 This dating corresponds to when the Urantia Book says the first human beings appeared on
Earth. “From the year A.D. 1934 back to the birth of the first two human beings is just 993,419
years.” (UB 62:5.1)


point in time when the Most Recent Common Ancestor
(MRCA) is encountered and the two lineages will have
coalesced. . . Coalescent theory seeks to reconstruct the
ancestral relationship of individuals and is therefore of great
utility in reconstructing the phylogenetic relationships of
species based on information at the molecular level. . .
Coalescent theory is a natural extension the more classical
population genetics concept of neutral evolution. . .”

The results of the research fit well into the Coalescence Theory model.
“Three features are prominent in this unusual genealogy. . .These
unusual features of the microcephalin genealogy suggest the possibility
that the MRCA of the D clade introgressed into humans from a
divergent Homo lineage at or some time before 37,000 years ago. In the
ensuing sections, we describe stringent statistical tests that support this
introgression model.”

Tracing the genetic change back to a particular time period and a single
source using methodologies consistent with Coalescence Theory is,
however, only one side of the coin with regard to single source genetic
introgression. We must also consider how this introduction of new
genetic material moved forward into the human population. If the
introduction of new genetic material comes from a single source, it is
highly unlikely that this genetic material will spread widely and quickly
throughout the population unless certain circumstances are present. The
genetic introgression must be support by environmental factors and/or
have dominant selection characteristics and/or have socially valued
characteristics that encourage mating with those who have this genetic
trait. There needs to be an explanation for why positive selection
occurred powerfully in this case. The Study puts the issue this way:

“If introgression of archaic lineages into the modern human
gene pool indeed occurred, then genes that have been subject
to recent positive selection in humans may be enriched for
introgressed alleles. Although selectively neutral alleles


introgressed from archaic lineages at low levels are likely lost

by drift or swamped by the large influx of modern human

DNA, an introgressed allele that is selectively advantageous

could escape the effect of genetic drift and rise to high

frequency. As such, these alleles might become detectable in

the modern human gene pool.”

In other words, if the allele is introduced into the human population from
a single source, and there is nothing special about it, then there is a good
chance that genetic drift will occur. A new genetic introgression without
any particularly powerful qualities, biologically, environmentally and/or
socially, might very well just fade out and disappear, or move along very
slowly. It would not be expected to enter the human population quickly
and broadly.

The Study’s research does not lend itself well in support of a theory that
allows for multiple introgressions as compared to single source
introgression. “Lahn said the group's data suggest that the interbreeding
was unlikely to be a thorough genetic mixing, but rather a rare - and
perhaps even a single — event that introduced the ancestral D allele
previously present in this other Homo species into the human line.”6

Coalescence to single source introgression is supported by the results of
the Study’s research. However, the factors associated with genetic drift
somehow have to be overcome because we know that this allele spread
quickly and broadly. Consistent with the introgression model,
“microcephalin has been shown to be the target of strong positive
selection in the evolutionary lineage leading from ancestral primates to
humans.” Additionally, with respect to positive selection the Study
states:

6 From the Howard Hugh Medical Institute’s online Research News dated November 6, 2006.

http://www.hhmi.org/news/lahn20061006.html


“[W]e found that the haplotype structure at the human
microcephalin locus is consistent with the action of recent
positive selection. Specifically, we found that a class of
haplotypes at the locus, dubbed haplogroup D, has a
remarkably young coalescence age (37,000 years) despite an
exceptionally high worldwide frequency (70%). This
observation implies a rapid rise in the frequency of
haplogroup D in humans, which is incompatible with genetic
drift and instead supports the notion that positive selection
has operated on haplogroupD to drive up its frequency.”

Having reviewed the Study’s presentation of the characteristics of the
allele with respect to introgression and positive selection, this is where
we conclude the discussion of how the genetic upgrade was introduced.
Now begins the Urantia Book’s assertions about the shift in our genetic
history during this time period. The Urantia Book’s cosmology describes
how a genetic upgrade occurred, along with the contributing
environmental and sociological factors, which (as the Study puts it)
“rose from a single copy 37,000 years ago and swept to exceptionally
high frequency (70% worldwide today) because of positive selection.”
For the sake of efficiency, this report will address the sociological issues
first, saving most of the discussion of the characteristics of the genetic
uplift for the last section, which will specifically address this issue.

Of course, if one does not start with a Urantia Book perspective, there is
otherwise a lack of scientific information that points to a distinctly
different order of human(like) beings suddenly showing up with out any
trace of previous ancestry. Nonetheless, the Urantia Book’s assertion
that Adam and Eve appeared on Earth without ancestry is consistent
with and provides a description that is compatible with the results of the
Study with regard to the issue of single source introgression and positive
selection. The recounting of their story on earth begins with:

“ADAM AND EVE arrived on Urantia, from the year A.D.
1934, 37,848 years ago. . . At high noon and unannounced,


the two seraphic transports, accompanied by the [celestial
beings] intrusted with the transportation of the biologic
uplifters to Urantia, settled slowly to the surface of the
revolving planet in the vicinity of the temple of the Universal
Father. All the work of rematerializing the bodies of Adam
and Eve was carried on within the precincts of this newly
created shrine. And from the time of their arrival ten days
passed before they were re-created in dual human form for
presentation as the world's new rulers [“dual” refers to the
utilization of both a human and an “angelic” energy
system].” (UB 74:0.1)

“[Adam and Eve], being. . . personalized in the similitude of
the mortal flesh of this world, were. . . dependent on the
maintenance of a dual circulatory system, the one derived
from their physical natures, the other from the superenergy
stored in the fruit of the tree of life.” (UB 75:7.6)

“Their Urantia offspring did not inherit the [dual circulatory]
endowment. . . They had a single circulation, the human type
of blood sustenance. They were designedly mortal though
long-lived, albeit longevity gravitated toward the human
norm with each succeeding generation.” (UB 76:4.3)

“The "tree of the knowledge of good and evil" may be a
figure of speech, a symbolic designation covering a multitude
of human experiences, but the "tree of life" was not a myth; it
was real and for a long time was present on Urantia. . . This
superplant stored up certain space-energies which were
antidotal to the age-producing elements of animal existence.
The fruit of the tree of life was like a superchemical storage
battery, mysteriously releasing the life-extension force of the
universe when eaten. This form of sustenance was wholly
useless to the ordinary evolutionary beings on Urantia. . .
When Adam and Eve went astray, [they and their] family


were not permitted to carry the core of the tree away from the
Garden.” (UB 73:6.3,4,7)

“AFTER more than one hundred years of effort on Urantia, .
. . the realization of race betterment appeared to be a long
way off, and the situation seemed so desperate as to demand
something for relief not embraced in the original plans.
Adam and [Eve] were loyal, but they were isolated from their
kind, and they were sorely distressed by the sorry plight of
their world” (UB 75:0.1)

“[T]hey would have sometime met with success had they
been more farseeing and patient. . . They wanted to see some
immediate results, and they did, but the results thus secured
proved most disastrous both to themselves and to their
world.” (UB 75:1.6)

“Every time the Garden pair had partaken of the fruit of the
tree of life, they had been warned by the archangel custodian
to refrain from yielding to the [temptation] to combine good
and evil. They had been thus admonished: "In the day that
you commingle good and evil, you shall surely become as the
mortals of the realm; you shall surely die."”(UB 75:4.4)

Understandably, for a person unfamiliar with the Urantia Book, the
previous quotes may raise more questions than answers. Even still, given
that this is written for people who are unaware of Urantia Book
cosmology (but presumably aware at least generally of the Biblical
account about Adam and Eve), and notwithstanding that such readers are
discouraged from making presumptions about how these two
accountings compare and contrast, hopefully, the above quotes provide
enough of a sense of this aspect of Urantia Book cosmology for one to
appreciate that it works well with the single source introgression model.


Given the limitations on current scientific methodologies, tracing back
an allele that seems to coalesce to a single source is essentially the same
as evidence supporting that it came from a pair of individuals. The
accuracy of the Study’s methodologies does not provide the degree of
precision necessary to distinguish between one or two donors when
considering the possibility of a single source introgression model. With
this in mind, the Urantia Book’s cosmological perspective about Adam
and Eve is altogether harmonious with the Study.

Now we will consider some of information in the Urantia Book that
supports positive selection. Because both the specifics of the spread of
this genetic contribution and the specifics regarding the quality of the
genetic contribution will be take up later, at this point only the more
sociological considerations will be addressed. The Urantia Book states:

“[A]dam [was counseled] not to initiate the program of racial
uplift and blending until his own family had numbered one-
half million. It was never intended that the Garden should be
the permanent home of the Adamites. They were to become
emissaries of a new life to all the world; they were to
mobilize for unselfish bestowal upon the needy races of
earth.” (UB 73:7.3)

“After becoming established in the second garden on the
Euphrates, Adam elected to leave behind as much of his life
plasm as possible to benefit the world after his death. . .
Before Adam died. . . 1,682. . . women were impregnated
with the Adamic life plasm [through artificial insemination].
Their children all grew up to maturity except 112, so that the
world, in this way, was benefited by the addition of 1,570
superior men and women. . .” (UB 76:4.Cool

“THE second Eden was the cradle of civilization for almost
thirty thousand years. Here in Mesopotamia the Adamic


peoples held forth, sending out their progeny to the ends of
the earth. . .” (UB 78:0.1)

“The purer strains of [Adam and Eve’s progeny] had retained
the Adamic tradition of peace-seeking, which explains why
the earlier race movements had been more in the nature of
peaceful migrations. But as the Adamites united with the
Nodite stocks, who were by this time a belligerent race, their
Andite descendants became, for their day and age, the most
skillful and sagacious militarists ever to live on Urantia.
Thenceforth the movements of the Mesopotamians grew
increasingly military in character and became more akin to
actual conquests.” (UB 78:4.5)

“[T]he Adamites were a real nation around 19,000 B.C.,
numbering four and a half million, and already they had
poured forth millions of their progeny into the surrounding
peoples.”(UB 78:2.5)

“The practice of some subsequent nations of permitting the
royal families, supposedly descended from the gods, to marry
brother to sister, dates from the traditions of the Adamic
offspring -- mating, as they must needs, with one another.”
(UB 74:6.9)

“When all is summed up, Adam and Eve made a mighty
contribution to the speedy civilization and accelerated
biologic progress of the human race. They left a great culture
on earth, but it was not possible for such an advanced
civilization to survive in the face of the early dilution and the
eventual submergence of the Adamic inheritance. It is the
people who make a civilization; civilization does not make
the people.” (UB 76:6.4)


Of course, the significance of the above quotes, as the pertain to
sociological aspects of positive selection, is that they reflect how,
according to the Urantia Book, the genetic introgression was planned
and acted upon (notwithstanding the comments about how the original
plan failed to be carried out fully). Introgression and positive selection
were planned for and created events. Additionally, this cosmology
explains why scientists have trouble finding any evidence of the “archaic
Homo lineage.” And naturally, this is explains why they would have just
as much trouble finding evidence that supports other theories as well.
The Urantia Book’s cosmology may not contribute anything by way of
proof, but it does contribute something by way of explanation; it is
consistent with the science and deserves credit for advancing an
explanation in advance of the supporting science.

Specifically, how much has the genetic contribution spread
throughout the human population?

Having consider when and, in a general sense, how the allele was able to
spread quickly and broadly throughout the human population, then next
question to consider is whether the results of the Study are consistent
with Urantia Book’s more specific description of the spread of the
genetic upgrade that occurred.

The results of the Study provide both the percentage of admixture into
the human population as well as a general description of where it started
and to where it has spread. The Study states:

“[W]e found thata class of haplotypes at the locus, dubbed

haplogroup D, has a remarkably young coalescence age

(37,000 years) despite an exceptionally high worldwide

frequency (70%).”

“Speculation about the identity of the archaic Homo
population from which the microcephalin D allele



introgressed into the modern human gene pool points to the
Neanderthal lineage as a potential (although by no means
only) candidate. Anatomically modern humans and
Neanderthals shared a long period of coexistence, from as
early as 130,000 years ago in the Middle East to as late as
35,000 years ago in Europe, consistent with the estimated
introgression time of the microcephalin D allele at or
sometime before 37,000 years ago. Furthermore, the
worldwide frequency distribution of the D allele,
exceptionally high outside of Africa but low in sub-Saharan
Africa suggests, but does not necessitate, admixture with an
archaic Eurasian population.”

In a separate article, Bruce Lahn, one of the researchers, has also put it
this way, “And a third line of evidence, albeit weaker, is that the D
alleles are much more prevalent in Eurasia and lower in sub-Saharan
Africa, which is consistent with an origin in the former area. And we
know that Neanderthals evolved outside of Africa.”7 Unfortunately, the
results of this particular research do not provide a more detailed
description how the allele spread. But what is provided is harmonious
with what the Urantia Book says on the subject:

[T]hese candidate mothers were selected from all the
surrounding tribes and represented most of the races on earth.
. . These children were born and reared in the tribal
surroundings of their respective mothers. [The “candidate
mothers” refers to the 1,682 women who were selected for
artificial insemination by Adam- information which can also
be found at the same citation.] (UB 76:4.Cool

“Infusion of the Adamic stock into the human races not only
quickened the pace of civilization, but it also greatly

7 From the Howard Hugh Medical Institute’s online Research News dated November 6, 2006.

http://www.hhmi.org/news/lahn20061006.html


stimulated their proclivities toward adventure and exploration
to the end that most of Eurasia and northern Africa was
presently occupied by the rapidly multiplying mixed
descendants. . .” (UB 81:3.Cool

“THE second Eden [between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers]
was the cradle of civilization for almost thirty thousand
years. Here in Mesopotamia the Adamic peoples held forth,
sending out their progeny to the ends of the earth. . . From
this region went those men and women who initiated the
doings of historic times, and who have so enormously
accelerated cultural progress on Urantia.” (UB 78:0.1)

“The secondary or northern . . . headquarters [was] situated
east of the southern shore of the Caspian Sea near the Kopet
mountains. From these two centers there went forth to the
surrounding lands the culture and life plasm which so
immediately quickened all the races.” (UB 78:1.3)

“Some of the Adamites early journeyed westward to the
valley of the Nile; others penetrated eastward into Asia, but
these were a minority. The mass movement of the later days
was extensively northward and thence westward. It was, in
the main, a gradual but unremitting northward push, the
greater number making their way north and then circling
westward around the Caspian Sea into Europe.

“About twenty-five thousand years ago many of the purer
elements of the Adamites were well on their northern trek.
And as they penetrated northward, they became less and less
Adamic until, by the times of their occupation of Turkestan,
they had become thoroughly admixed with the other races. . .
Very few of the pure-line [Adamites] ever penetrated far into
Europe or Asia.” (UB 78:3.2,3)


“As the period of the early Adamic migrations ended, about
15,000 B.C., there were already more descendants of Adam
in Europe and central Asia than anywhere else in the world,
even than in Mesopotamia. . . The lands now called Russia
and Turkestan were occupied throughout their southern
stretches by a great reservoir of the Adamites mixed with. . .
[the] red and yellow [races].” (UB 78:3.5)

“The black peoples were moving farther south in Africa and,
like the red race, were virtually isolated.” (UB 78:3.6)

The Urantia Book’s description of the racial development of
humanity is extensive and detailed. There is much more that could
be said on the subject. However, this other material is not directly
related to the results of the Study and is, therefore, omitted,
notwithstanding that it would provide additional contextualization
for and correlations with the results of the Study. Nonetheless, the
above quotes demonstrate the harmony that exists between the
Study and the Urantia Book.

The nature of the genetic upgrade.

Lastly, we look at the correlation between the Study and the Urantia
Book regarding the nature and effect of the genetic upgrade. It is
important to remember that this Study focused on just on alleles that
specifically relate to microcephalin. As the Study noted, the research
techniques used for their research can equally be applied to other alleles.
In time, additional correlations may develop.

According to the Study:

“The gene microcephalin is a critical regulator of brain size.
In humans, loss-of-function mutations in this gene cause a
condition known as primary microcephaly, which is


characterized by a severe reduction in brain volume (by 3- to
4-fold) but, remarkably, a retention of overall
neuroarchitecture and a lack a overt defects outside of the
brain. The exact biochemical function of microcephalin has
yet to be elucidated, but this gene likely plays an essential
role in promoting the proliferation of neural progenitor cells
during neurogenesis. Microcephalin has been shown to be the
target of strong positive selection in the evolutionary lineage
leading from ancestral primates to humans. This observation,
coupled with the fact that this gene is a critical regulator of
brain size, suggests the possibility that the molecular
evolution of microcephalin may have contributed to the
phenotypic evolution of the human brain.”

“In the case of microcephalin, it is all the more intriguing
given the fact that the adaptive allele is associated with an
important brain development gene.”

In a separate article Bruce Lahn makes additional comments on the
subject of brain development and also expands his commentary with
regard to general reproductive fitness:

“Lahn also said that although the disruption of the
microcephalin gene in humans leads to smaller brains, the
role of the D alleles in brain evolution remains unknown.
“The D alleles may not even change brain size; they may
only make the brain a bit more efficient if it indeed affects
brain function,” he said. “For example, someone inheriting
the D allele may have only a slightly more efficient brain on
average. While that enhancement might confer only a subtle
evolutionary advantage on that person, when that effect is
propagated over a thousand generations of natural selection,
the result will be to drive the D alleles to a very high
prevalence.””


““This rapid rise in frequency indicates that the D alleles
underwent positive selection in the recent history of humans.
This means that these alleles conferred a fitness advantage on
those who possessed one of them such that these people had
slightly higher reproductive success than people who didn't
possess the alleles,” said Lahn.”

“Human evolution may also have been influenced by
interbreeding with other Homo species, which introduced
gene variants, known as alleles, that are beneficial to human
reproductive fitness,” according to Bruce Lahn, one of the
Study’s contributors.”8

From the Urantia Book we get the following comments regarding the
nature of genetic upgrade brought to Earth by Adam and Eve:

“[T]he Adamic blood did augment the inherent ability of the
races and. . .improved the brain power of the races, thereby
greatly hastening the processes of natural evolution.” (UB
81:5.1)

“Adam and his offspring . . . were characterized by fair

complexions and light hair color -- yellow, red, and brown.

“The body cells of [Adam, Eve,] and their progeny are far
more resistant to disease than are those of the evolutionary
beings indigenous to the planet. The body cells of the native
races are akin to the living disease-producing microscopic
and ultramicroscopic organisms of the realm. These facts
explain why the Urantia peoples must do so much by way of
scientific effort to withstand so many physical disorders. You

8 From the Howard Hugh Medical Institute’s online Research News dated November 6, 2006.

http://www.hhmi.org/news/lahn20061006.html


would be far more disease resistant if your races carried more
of the Adamic life.” (UB 76:4.7)

“Primitive man is for the most part carnivorous; [Adam and
Eve did] not eat meat, but their offspring within a few
generations usually gravitate to the omnivorous level. . . This
double origin of the post-Adamic races explains how such
blended human s  exhibit anatomic vestiges belonging to
both the herbivorous and carnivorous animal groups.” (UB
52:3.Cool

“[T]he combination of the wheat, rice, and vegetable diet
with the flesh of the herds marked a great forward step in the
health and vigor of these ancient peoples.” (UB 81:1.Cool

From the above quotes one can see that the Urantia Book’s comments
about the genetic upgrade contributed by Adam and Eve not only
parallel the conclusions of and comments about Study specifically with
regard to brain function, but also provide additional information that
supports the issues related to positive selection. As well, though the
Urantia Book does not give a specific percentage regarding how much
their genetic contribution intermixed with the rest of humanity, the
seventy percent figure given in the Study reasonably correlates to the
description given in the Urantia Book about how Adam, Eve, and their
progeny intermixed with the rest of humanity.

Conclusion

In every respect the Study and the Urantia Book are harmonious. They
correlate with regard to when the genetic upgrade occurred, how it
occurred, where and how much it spread, and the nature of the genetic
upgrade. And, of course, it bears mentioning that the information in the
Urantia Book was first published in 1955. The plates for the printing


process were complete by 1946, establishing its position on these
matters a decade before its publication, which places the information in
the Urantia Book well over fifty years ahead of the Study.

The story about Adam and Eve asserts that they were here for the
specific purpose of introducing superior genetics into the human
population. According to the Urantia Book our mythologies about the
Gods coming down from heaven and mating with the humans are said to
have developed during this time period. It is also noteworthy that these
mythologies took root in the general region of the world where Adam,
Eve, and their progeny were first located. Although not included in this
report, there is specific information in the Urantia Book that tracks the
migration of their progeny into the Mediterranean region.

« Last Edit: March 10, 2007, 02:07:39 pm by Majeston » Report Spam   Logged

"melody has power a whole world to transform."
Forever, music will remain the universal language of men, angels, and spirits.
Harmony is the speech of Havona.

http://mercy.urantia.org/papers/paper44.html



Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy