Today’s New Reason To Believe

Posted by Fazale ‘Fuz’ Rana, Ph.D.

Lice DNA Supports Biblical Account of Humanity’s Creation

Every parent dreads receiving a note from their children’s school announcing an outbreak of lice. Messages of this sort set in motion a series of unpleasantries for the child, parent, and sometimes the rest of the family.

Some anthropologists, however, take a certain delight in lice infestations. These obligate surface parasites, and their genetic variability, offer insight into human origins and the migration of the first people around the world.

Most scientists who study lice are interested in these parasites for biomedical reasons. For example, some choose to focus on the natural history of these disease-causing organisms. Learning about the timing and location of lice origins, the historical pattern of their spread, and consequently, the contemporary distribution of their genetic variation helps biomedical researchers understand how infectious diseases harbored by insects spread. This information can potentially lead to more effective public health programs and, in some cases, treatments.

In the process of studying the origin and natural history of human parasites, like lice, molecular geneticists have stumbled upon an exciting new way to characterize humanity’s origin and movements around the world. Researchers believe that the timing and location of the origin, as well as the spread, of disease-causing and disease-harboring pests around the world mirrors the timing and location of the origin and spread of humanity. As such, the worldwide genetic variation of these infectious agents can be used in the same way that molecular anthropologists use human genetic variation to gain understanding of human prehistory.

A remarkable study on the global circulation of head lice illustrates how this creature can be used to track the spread of humanity around the world.*

There are three types of head lice (based on genetic fingerprints) distributed around the world: types A, B, and C. Type A is found throughout the world. Type B occurs in North and South America, and Europe. Type C is rare and geographically restricted to Ethiopia and Nepal.

Some investigations posit that Type A head lice established its association with modern humans in Africa shortly after the first people appeared. Type B originated in Europe after humanity spread into Asia and then Europe. Accordingly, Type B head lice appeared in the New World when Europeans colonized the Americas. If this model is correct, then Native Americans would have carried Type A head lice with them when they originally migrated into the Americas from Asia.

Researchers recognized a unique opportunity to test this model with the discovery of pre-Columbian mummies in Peru, dating to about 10,000 years in age, well before the Spanish and Portuguese arrived.

Anthropologists were able to recover the remains of ancient lice from the hair of the mummy. They then successfully extracted DNA from the lice specimens, then amplified and sequenced it. The lice possessed the Type A DNA fingerprint. This result means that the first immigrants into the Americas most likely carried the same genetic version of lice as the first humans in Africa. Type B lice must have been introduced by European settlers.

The natural history of lice matches the expected pattern of the Out-of-Africa hypothesis for human origins. Though often presented and discussed within the context of the evolutionary paradigm, this model has profound biblical implications. This hypothesis, which is substantiated by numerous studies, maintains that humanity originated recently (about 100,000 years ago) from East Africa (near the location theologians ascribed to the Garden of Eden) from a small population. Studies using mitochondrial and Y chromosomal DNA markers trace humanity’s origin back to a single man and woman. The genetic data also indicate that humanity’s migration around the world began at or near the Middle East.

If humanity’s genesis happened in the way described in Scripture, the genetic diversity patterns observed among international people groups would be very similar to those discovered by anthropologists. It looks as if Adam and Eve really existed, giving rise to all humanity.

For a detailed discussion of the myriad evidence in favor of the Out-of-Africa hypothesis and the use of parasites to characterize the origin of humanity see my book Who Was Adam?

---

*This study made science news headlines when first published. I discussed the scientific and biblical implications of this research on the February 11, 2008 edition of our new podcast, RTB’s Science News Flash. This podcast offers a unique Christian perspective on headline-grabbing discoveries. A free subscription is available through iTunes.

Posted by Fazale ‘Fuz’ Rana, Ph.D.

Three New Studies Support Biblical Account of Humanity’s Creation

What’s the first thing that comes to mind when you think of the state of Kentucky? Horse racing? Wildcat basketball? The Louisville Slugger? Bluegrass music? What about burgoo?

Though most people probably haven’t heard about this spicy stew, it’s as much a part of the traditions of the Bluegrass State as the Kentucky Derby. Burgoo consists of a mixture of meats (beef, chicken, pork, mutton, and game animals, if available) and vegetables cooked (and re-cooked) in a large kettle over an open flame until all the flavors meld together. No two Burgoo recipes are the same. The preparation and consumption of Burgoo serves as a center piece for social gatherings. At times the entire community contributes the ingredients to make a large pot of stew.

Molecular anthropologists have recently concocted a burgoo of their own consisting of discoveries that turn the heat up on the support for the Out-of-Africa hypothesis of human origins, and with it, the biblical account of humanity’s beginnings.*

Out of Africa Hypothesis

In a nutshell, this model (also called the replacement model) maintains that modern humans evolved recently (about 100,000 years ago) in East Africa from a small hominid population and then migrated around the world to replace pre-existing hominids. Proponents believe that Homo neanderthalensis and Homo erectus are evolutionary side branches and dead ends.

Relative Proportion of Harmful Mutations in European and African Populations

One recent study, carried out by an international team, examined genetic variation in fifteen African American and twenty European Americans. These workers characterized genetic variability by examining single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and categorizing the DNA sequence differences as benign, possibly damaging, and probably damaging.

They noted that African Americans harbor a greater degree of SNP diversity than European Americans. Interestingly, European descendents have a greater proportion of harmful variations than people with an African ancestry.

These results find explanation if humanity arose in East Africa from a small population, and recently migrated into Europe through a genetic bottleneck. Bottlenecks result when a population drops to low levels and then recovers its numbers, or if a small subpopulation becomes separated from the main group and then later grows in size.

Genetic and Copy-Number Variation

Another study characterized the genetic variability of twenty-nine populations from around the world by monitoring 525,910 SNPs and 396 copy-number differences.

Again, the patterns of genetic variability noted in these two studies for people groups from around the world fit with the predictions of the Out-of-Africa hypothesis.

A third recently reported study focused on about 650,000 SNPs found in the genomes of 938 people representing 51 populations from around the world. The SNP data clustered into a number of groups displaying a geographical relationship that indicates an African origin of humanity and subsequent spread around the world.

Overwhelming Evidence for the Out-of-Africa Hypothesis

These three new research reports can be thrown into a large simmering kettle of studies that support the Out-of-Africa model. (For a detailed discussion of the myriad evidences in favor of the Out-of-Africa Hypothesis see the book Who Was Adam? Collectively, the consensus that emerges from this work indicates that humanity originated recently (about 100,000 years ago) from East Africa (near the location theologians ascribed to the Garden of Eden) from a small population. Amazingly, studies using mitochondrial and Y chromosomal DNA markers trace humanity’s origin back to a single man and woman. These studies also indicate that humanity’s migration around the world began at or near the Middle East.

Though often presented and discussed within the context of the evolutionary paradigm, this model has profound biblical implications. In some respects, the Out-of-Africa hypothesis appears to be the biblical model awkwardly forced into the evolutionary framework, like an incorrect puzzle piece. If humanity’s genesis happened in the way described in Scripture, the genetic diversity patterns observed among people groups around the world would be very similar to those discovered by anthropologists. It looks as if Adam and Eve really existed, giving rise to all humanity.

Next week I will describe another study using DNA extracted from ancient head lice that also lends credence to the biblical account of humanity’s origin. I decided it would be best not to describe this work for now. I didn’t want to ruin anybody’s appetite.

---

___________________________________

*These studies made science news headlines when first published. I discussed the scientific and biblical implications of this research on the February 22, 2008 edition of our new podcast, RTB’s Science News Flash. This podcast offers a unique Christian perspective on headline-grabbing discoveries. A free subscription to this podcast is available through iTunes.

Posted on February 14th, 2007 by Virgil L. Robertson, DC, QME, FAFICC

Bio: Dr. Robertson received his Chiropractic doctorate from Southern California University of Health Sciences in 1985, and currently serves as Clinical Director at Brea Canyon Pain Relief and Rehabilitation Center in Brea, California.

The arch in the small of your lower back is known as the “lumbar lordosis” and it plays an important role in allowing humans to stand upright and walk on two feet. If you’ve ever seen a pregnant woman negotiating her way down the aisle of a supermarket, you’ve surely noticed that the bigger the belly, the more the mother-to-be has to arch backward to keep her balance. Recently, researchers from Harvard University and the University of Texas examined this biomechanical phenomenon and made some fascinating discoveries, which were reported in the December 2007 edition of Nature.

As it turns out, the spines of men and women are not created equal. In fact, it now appears that women have been designed with specific anatomical features that enable them to safely carry the large asymmetric loads associated with pregnancy. Specifically, the research team headed by anthropologist Dr. Katherine Whitcome found that the lumbar spine of human females differs significantly from that of males. The female spine possesses an additional wedge-shaped vertebra, which substantially increases lordotic curvature in women (three wedge-shaped lumbar vertebrae in women vs. two wedge-shaped lumbar vertebrae in men). This feature allows expectant mothers to comfortably assume more extended (lordotic) postures during pregnancy. Additionally, the researchers found that the lumbar zygoapophyseal joint surfaces of women are proportionally larger and more coronally oriented than corresponding posterior joint structures in men. This distinctively female spinal configuration provides a more stable base for posterior weight bearing (hyperlordosis) and helps prevent anterolisthesis (fracture and forward slipping) of the lumbar vertebrae in pregnant women. As pregnancy proceeds and the fetus grows larger, mom simply leans back a little further (up to 28°) to balance the center of gravity over her hips—it’s a simple yet ingenious biomechanical system!

These new research findings indicate that women are particularly well equipped to safely bear the heavy anterior loads that come with pregnancy. Without these anatomical design features, pregnant women would have great difficulty balancing their unborn bundles of joy, and would be much more susceptible to myoligamentous (muscular) injuries and vertebral fractures during the third trimester of gestation.

The research team also reports that the spines of extinct hominid species (australopithecines) possessed the same kind of anatomical features and dimorphic disparities found in humans. The identification of anatomic features and biomechanical systems uniquely common to bipedal primates is not surprising. Previous authors have identified numerous anatomical and physiological characteristics in bipeds that differ from those found in quadrupeds. While the authors of this new study interpret their findings in terms of an evolutionary framework, it should be noted that these findings are, likewise, fully consistent with the predictions of RTB’s Testable Creation Model. In fact, explaining why the unique features of bipedalism appear suddenly in the hominid fossil record some seven million years ago (in the absence of transitional intermediate forms), has proven to be a substantial challenge for evolutionary biologists.

When considering the abundance of elegantly engineered biomechanical systems found in the human body, it’s hard not to be impressed by the obvious hallmarks of design. To quote British physicist Paul Davies, “The impression of design is overwhelming.”

These latest research findings fall into a long line of evidences that provide support for the existence of an Intelligent Designer. The generation of such exquisitely engineered biosystems is simply beyond the scope and capability of random mutation and natural selection.

For more on the emergence of bipedalism see Who Was Adam?