I recently saw a very interesting news report that relates directly to the creation-evolution debate, so I think it would be good to discuss here. In summary, scientists found a skeleton and tested it's DNA; discovering that it had both a neanderthal and a denovisian parent (two early human "subspecies"). Here is a link to the news report:
https://www.cbsnews.com/video/dna-test-of-90000-year-old-bone-reveals-human-hybrid/
When I saw that story, I was reminded of an article I had read in an Answers In Genesis book about how there has only ever been one race of human: human. The story above seemed like a perfect example of that, that humans did not evolve but were created with diversity. One thing I am wondering is, why are neanderthals and denovisians classified differently? I am looking forward to hearing your thoughts on this report!
I just did a quick Google search of ancient human species and found out that scientists vary in how many species there actually were, but there were many other "species" mentioned besides those three. Maybe some of the fossils found were from before the flood. Also, it would be helpful to find out what the fossils they found were actually like.
That is a very interesting theory, J.E.S! I wonder if DNA tests of people today would show evidence of three main families, or if the flood was too long ago to trace back to.
I find it interesting that there are these 3 human "species" (humans, neanderthals, and denisovans), and that there were 3 families that came off the ark (the families of Shem, Ham, and Japheth). Could the genetic differences between neanderthals, denisovans, and humans be explained by the genetic differences that would have existed between these 3 families? Would the genetic differences between the families of Shem, Ham, and Japheth be as large as those between the 3 mentioned human species (considering how much genetic information would have been lost in the flood bottleneck)?
In summary, I have absolutely no idea when it comes to the answers to the questions posed above, and they should be read as my own speculations. In fact, I am not even certain as to whether this correlation is real in the first place...
Food for thought! ;-)
It is a very interesting article. He poses a question of how there came to be so much genetic difference among ancient humans. He said it was likely to be caused by high mutation rates right after the flood, but said that no one knows for sure. (They have a new article about the topic on the site, which is also very good: https://humangenesis.org/2018/08/27/how-many-human-species/). One possibility I wondered about was this: There would have been a loss of human diversity after the flood, like how endangered species today struggle with lost diversity when a large number die. Is it possible that many genes of neanderthals and denisovas were lost? Or is the mutation theory more likely? I have not done much other research in this topic.
I read the article J.E.S. and thanks for posting it.
Here is an interesting article that might provide more information on this discovery from a creationist perspective:
https://humangenesis.org/2018/08/22/the-girl-from-denisova-cave/