Dilara

I comprehend "Adam" t as our common grand-grand-grand-Father - the unique and particular person on the time scale. Am I wrong? But this "common father" exists only if we take divergence as the only principle possible to describe the origin of the humans. Now I see that geneticists accepted the opposite concept: humankind is product of complicated hybridization. So "Adam" stopped to exist. Similar trends go in the linguistics. The linguists declined the former concept of Finno-Ugric identity because of terrible mess in calculating its common linguistic ancestor

Quite recently Svante Pääbo director of the Department of Evolutionary Genetics at the Max Planck Institute said “It is still unclear exactly how much of the complete Neanderthal genome exists today in people, but it seems to approach something like 40 percent.” But 10-15 years ago the hypothesis of neanderthals being involved in making modern people was considered by most of the scholars as ridiculous. They believed that time all modern humans to descend from one person "chromosomal adam" - a pure sapiens. I've just found this - where is that beautiful man on this tree I wonder?

Once I was antisocial as well. I even couldn't speak to unfamiliar person by the phone. Ironically after getting my master degree in philosophy I started working as a reporter of a newspaper. So I had to phone hundreds unfamiliar people daily. But it wasn't my cup of tea either. Now I sit home by the computer all along going out just to buy food