Ancient genomes show how humans escaped Europe’s deep freeze

Ancient genomes show how humans escaped Europe’s deep freeze

A pair of studies offer the most detailed look yet at groups of hunter-gatherers living before, during and after the last ice age. Makes Jeanson’s conclusions ludicrous.

[Mod edits]

1 Like

Your original post was only the link, which can happen if you are posting from mobile?
Please review the edits I made (everything but the link) and adjust as you see fit.


Source papers:

Palaeogenomics of Upper Palaeolithic to Neolithic European hunter-gatherers

A 23,000-year-old southern Iberian individual links human groups that lived in Western Europe before and after the Last Glacial Maximum


YEC also believe people lived before, during, and after the last ice age. :wink: Thanks for sharing.

Cool info in the first paper.

On the basis of the genetic variation of present-day Europeans, this could imply phenotypic differences between post-14 ka hunter-gatherer populations across Europe, with individuals in the Oberkassel [Central Europe] cluster possibly exhibiting darker skin and lighter eyes, and individuals in the Sidelkino [Western Russia] cluster possibly lighter skin and darker eye colour.

What I am most interested in:

But those who believe that there was only a single ice age that was caused and immediately followed by the biblical deluge also have to believe that the genealogy of the people prior and after would’ve been drastically different as the only survivors post-flood came from the middle east supposedly. Yet we simply don’t see this from genetics. Even regarding people of the Americas. People where already present all of the world prior. Their descendants and close relatives persisted thereafter and to this very day, almost like they never noticed being completely wiped out at some point.

Detailed post by Dr. Joel Duff



What Duff spends a lot of time referring to isn’t included in the book, so not sure how much Jeanson stands by it. But I agree with this statement.

However, I would suggest that Jeanson’s thesis that the New World might be uninhabited at the time of Joseph is wrong.

I don’t even remember the title of the book about the inhabiting of the Americas that someone suggested I read, but many archaeologists are convinced that people sailed to the Americas along the coast before they cross over a land bridge. I agree with that. I’ve already argued in the forum I think sailing was ubiquitous after the flood (Psalm 104:26) and Nimrod/Sargon did himself, based on his writings/legends.

I think the “whole world” means what it does when we talk colloquially : “almost everyone from all over the world.” Everyone who didn’t find refuge in the Middle East, specifically Egypt, died out from extreme climate change, or sent representatives, or were really small in number. I don’t think it’s a coincidence so many fossils are found in caves - people had to live in them. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Egypt is the only civilization that has such a long history (they didn’t need to migrate because of climate change). Abraham also left the promised land soon after getting there because of climate.

I think I’ve already made my views somewhat clear after you all have helped clarify them, but when I see the y-chromosome tree above I noticed all of the specimens are near the roots of each haplogroup. The haplogroups’ roots have to be near Babel, or the math of drift means that their lineages would have been extinguished if they weren’t quickly disbursed. But that tree above (especially R1b) doesn’t fit the strict molecular clock Jeanson is working with. I think his population growth curves are a good indication he has the right timeline, but not that the molecular clock ticks consistently. I’ve been playing around in my head with the idea of extreme climate inducing a higher mutation rate for a period of time after Babel. Just skimmed a couple of papers about the possibility of that. There are long branches after or right before the major initial splits.

Anyway, I still appreciate what he is doing because I would have no frame of reference to think about any of this if he wasn’t working on his hypothesis. It’s really cool to have a sketch of this really amazing history. I hope he has more success working on it. You have to start somewhere. I’m sure creationists will adjust their ideas with more data, just like everyone else.

Anyway, I wasn’t quite sure exactly what you were pointing in your post so if there’s something I didn’t address, let me know.

Yes, Jeanson has to exclude data to build his narrative.

Long enough for the united kingdom to precede AiG’s date for Noah’s flood by half a millennium. That does not include the long period of pre-dynastic Egypt.

Fortunately, there was no cause for ancient climate refugees, and we do not have to rely on Bishop Ussher as a guide to paleo-climatology. For just one example, the Hohemheim Oak and Pine tree-ring chronologies not only yield a count going back 12,460 years, and increases the precision of carbon-14 radiometric dating, but through stable isotope analysis provides a window into the climate over that period. Stable isotopes do not date material, but in conjunction with radioactive isotopes, serve as proxies for climate conditions of the time, including estimates of precipitation and temperature. While subsistence living was always individually precarious, habitability was relatively stable in Europe going back until a shift at the Younger Dryas, a rather sudden cold snap of about 800 years which ended about 12,000 years ago. So there is no need to further speed up the Y chromosome molecular clock, especially as Jeanson has already overclocked that to a wildly unrealistic rate.

1 Like

And when was the last ice age that YEC believe that people lived before, during, and after?

1 Like

I would question whether “Egypt is the only civilization that has such a long history”. China likewise has a very long history as well.

I couldn’t give you a better answer than any creationist website does.

I don’t know what you’re referring to here. I don’t have answers on all the rest.

But on the other hand, you expect me to believe that people kept their dishes the same for hundreds, if not thousands of years, when our styles change every 5 years. I’ll stick to waiting until the science changes.

What extra-Biblical evidence do you have for this ancient, “extreme” (but presumably short-lived) climate change event and resulting famine?


The closest thing I can find to such an event was the “4.2-kiloyear event”, but that (i) caused the collapse of the Egyptian Old Kingdom, (ii) had a lesser impact on a number of neighbouring civilisations (Ur was sufficiently unaffected to be able to build a wall to repel Amorite refugees and to become the leading civilisation after the Akkadian Empire’s collapse due to this event), and (iii) lasted for around three centuries.

1 Like

I’m sure it’s related to some of those events you described. When I was researching, I thought it possible that famine could be at the same time as the Akkadian Empire collapse. It makes more sense to me that the political troubles Abraham runs into after the famine means that empire no longer existed. And before all of that, Terah had to move out of Ur. It makes sense to me too that was for political reasons because of the beginning of the Akkadian Empire. People usually move because of climate or politics. Just my own inference - no way to know until archaeology could back it up.

Do you think a three-century drought is actually reasonable? I don’t. Maybe they should check the science again.

Let us recap:

The 4.2-kiloyear event was not an event that caused:

As it led to the collapse of the Egyptian Old Kingdom, but had lesser impact on a number of neighbouring civilisations.

If you are not suggesting that the 4.2ky event was what you are talking about, then the responsibility remains with you to demonstrates a historical event that does correspond to this claim.

This sort of vague hand-waving is hardly compelling. It provides too little historical detail to have any probative value – famines and empire collapses were hardly uncommon in ancient history.

Do I think somebody who spent months attempting to torture the historical record in order to make it fit Jeanson’s ridiculous claims is somebody who is qualified to judge what is “actually reasonable”? No I do not.

Do I think it unreasonable that the prevailing winds and/or ocean temperatures could change for a few centuries (or a single century, see below), leading to localised droughts in some areas? No I do not.

Also, “three centuries” seems to have been a maximalist estimation of the extent of the event, I’ve seen it elsewhere described as only being a single century (its estimation would likely vary depending on where you estimated it, and how you defined its start and end).

Maybe you should make an attempt to understand the science before you attempt to criticise it. Such kneejerk criticism is hardly “thoughtful”.

This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.