The Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Creationism (2018)

to one another than to non-Neanderthals, as well as genome data from the enigmatic Denisovans (Reich et al. 2010), thus validating the original Neanderthal sequencing project, it appears that many of the major objections are slowly being answered. Why do some haplogroups display less divergence than other groups, even though they arose simultaneously? Heterotachy (changes in site-specific mutation rates over time, perhaps due to functional divergence) has been implicated as an important process in protein evolution (Lopez et al. 2002). Yet, the majority of the sites in the Y chromosome are not in protein-coding regions, so functional divergence does not seem applicable here. Contemporary mutation rates may be higher in one group than another, which is unlikely since they often live among one another within the same populations, that is, with the same genetic and environmental backgrounds. For example, Poznik et al. (2016) noted that the similar patterns seen among Y chromosome haplogroups E1b, R1a and R1b are probably due to shared historical demography. Alternatively, rates may have been higher in one group historically, but this is also difficult because that would mean there was a time when the members of both haplogroups lived in separate places and under different conditions. We do not yet know why some populations appear to be accumulating mutations faster than others. Elevated mutation accumulation in man is an important concern in terms of human health and longevity, and so it will be important to study what factors may have historically affected mutation accumulation rates in different human populations. Factors that might influence the rate of mutation accumulation in a human subpopulation over time would include genetics, epigenetics, environment, culture, and demography. Hallast et al. (2015) also discussed these factors. We would add patriarchal drive as an important contributor to this list. CONCLUSION Strict Darwinists and theistic evolutionists both claim the biblical Adam and Eve never existed. However, after carefully considering the information provided here, their case is significantly weakened. In fact, if the Bible were not true, one would never expect such a strong concordance between biblical and phylogenetic history, as we have shown. Using nearly-complete, whole-chromosome SNV data, we have calculated the founder sequences of the major haplogroups and megahaplogroups of both chrY and chrM. Our founder sequences are consistent with previous analyses that were based on more limited data (e.g., small numbers of SNVs or STRs), as well as more recent studies on whole-chromosome data. We have also created unrooted phylogenetic trees for both chrY and chrM. We show that most of the haplogroup founders tightly cluster within a star-like phylogeny. These trees and our additional analyses show that multiple haplogroup founders were surprisingly closely related, suggesting a small population that underwent explosive population growth, giving rise to all the human chrY and chrM haplogroups in the world. This conclusion is supported by the fact that we see several full or near polytomies in both phylogenies. Within all the haplogroups, the pattern of divergence from the haplogroup founder reflects systematic mutation accumulation consistent with an imprecise molecular clock. There appears to be substantial variance in mutation accumulation rates between haplogroups, especially early in human history, which could lead to anomalies in molecular clock estimates. In the end, there is no reason to reject a literal, historical Adam and Eve. The genetic data are pointing strongly in that direction. In fact, the data we see are exactly what we would expect from the biblical account of human origins. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This work was supported in part by FMS Foundation. Thanks for the helpful suggestions of several anonymous reviewers. REFERENCES 1000 Genomes Project Consortium. 2010. A map of human genome variation from population-scale sequencing. Nature 467:1061–1073. Bandelt, H.J., A. Kloss-Brandstätter, M.E. Richards, Y.G. Yao, and I. Logan. 2014. The case for the continuing use of the revised Cambridge Reference Sequence (rCRS) and the standardization of notation in human mitochondrial DNA studies. Journal of Human Genetics 59:66– 77. Behar, D.M., M. van Oven, S. Rosset, M. Metspalu, E.V. Loogväli, N.M. Silva, T. Kivisild, A. Torroni, and R. Villems. 2012. A Copernican reassessment of the human mitochondrial DNA tree from its root. American Journal of Human Genetics 90:675-684. Barrick, J.E., and R.E. Lenski. 2009. Genome-wide mutational diversity in an evolving population of Escherichia coli . Cold Spring Harbor Symposium on Quantitative Biology 74:119–129. Blein, S., C. Bardel, V. Danjean, L. McGuffog, S. Healey, and D. Barrowdale. 2015. An original phylogenetic approach identified mitochondrial haplogroup T1a1 as inversely associated with breast cancer risk in BRCA2 mutation carriers. Breast Cancer Research 17:61. Blount, Z.D., C.Z. Borland, and R.E. Lenski. 2008. Historical contingency and the evolution of a key innovation in an experimental population of Escherichia coli . Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 105, no. 23:7899–7906. Campbell, M.C., and S. A. Tishkoff. 2010. The evolution of human genetic and phenotypic variation in Africa. Current Biology 20, R166–R173. Cann, R.L., M. Stoneking, and A.C. Wilson. 1987. Mitochondrial DNA and human evolution. Nature 325:31–36, Carter, R.W. 2007. Mitochondrial diversity within modern human populations. Nucleic Acids Research 35, no. 9:3039–3045. Carter, R.W. 2014. More evidence for the reality of genetic entropy. Journal of Creation 28, no. 1:16–17. Carter, R.W., 2017. Extensive mixing among Israelites and non-Israelites in biblical history. Journal of Creation 31, no. 3:75–81. Carter, R.W., D. Criswell, and J. Sanford. 2008. The “Eve” mitochondrial consensus sequence. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Creationism , ed. A.A. Snelling, pp. 111–116. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Creation Science Fellowship. Carter, R., and C. Hardy. 2015. Modelling biblical human population growth. Journal of Creation 29, no. 1:72–79. Carter, R.W. and J.C. Sanford. 2012. A new look at an old virus: Mutation accumulation in the human H1N1 influenza virus since 1918. Theoretical Biology and Medical Modelling 9:42. Carter, R.W., and M. Powell. 2016. The genetic effects of the population bottleneck associated with the Genesis Flood. Journal of Creation 30, no. 2:102–111. Carter et al. ◀ Y Chromosome Noah and mitochondrial Eve ▶ 2018 ICC 148