That George_W_Bush and Saddam_Hussein shared a Common Ancestor.


Given Time_and_Causality_of_Karma:-

M_Evolution / Revolution of Human_Genome:-

a) Both mice and men shared a common ancestor; and

b) Bush and Saddam are M_species of Men.

Thus, a) and b) imply logically and scientifically:-

George_W_Bush and Saddam_Hussein "share"
a common ancestor.

This completed the proof.

Copyright 2004 kx21.com
Karma * a_point_in_time *

a "point". birds_and_mammals_split_from_a_common_ancestor_ 041209
monee http://blather.newdream.net/red/c/connected.html


"...The world

1. It would seem possible that, even with a lot of geographical separation, the MRCA of the entire world is still within historical times, 3000 BC - 1000 AD.

2. Quite likely the entire world is descended from the Ancient Egyptian royal house, c. 1600 BC.
We pick them as an example because they left proven descents for centuries, so it seems likely their descents did not die out, and they are ancestors of some people alive today. Hence probably ancestors of all people alive today.

The interbreeding world

1. The MRCA of almost all of the world is in historical times, quite possibly in classical times, even AD.
By "almost all" I mean over 90 percent of the world, including all of the West, almost all of Asia, and most of Africa. Only cases of extreme geographical isolation could prevent this being the whole world, leaving some aboriginal populations out of this recent family tree. If populations were truly geographically isolated for thousands of years then the MRCA of the entire world may be thousands of years ago. Though even that is not certain since there has been a certain amount of interbreeding since these populations were re-contacted in the last few hundred years. And we only need a small amount of interbreeding to get everyone descended from Europeans. That is, we just need to get them genealogically descended, even if it doesn't show in the DNA - even if the European DNA has been swamped by the rest.

2. Quite likely almost everyone in the world descends from Confucius, c. 500 BC.
We pick him as an example because he is the proven ancestor of some people alive today. Hence probably the ancestor of all people alive today.

The West

1. The MRCA of the West is in historical times, quite possibly as recent as 1000 AD.

2. Quite likely everyone in the West descends from Charlemagne, c. 800 AD.
We pick him as an example because he is the proven ancestor of some people alive today (for example, he is a proven ancestor of my children). Hence probably the ancestor of all people alive today. By the same reasoning, as well as from Continental/pre-Norman figures like Charlemagne, quite likely everyone in the West descends from figures like:

The English/Saxon/pre-Royal Cerdic, c. 500 AD.
The Irish/Celtic Niall of the Nine Hostages, c. 450 AD..."



"...Documentary Redraws Humans' Family Tree

Hillary Mayell
for National Geographic News
January 21, 2003

By analyzing DNA from people in all regions of the world, geneticist Spencer Wells has concluded that all humans alive today are descended from a single man who lived in Africa around 60,000 years ago.

In Journey of Man, Spencer Wells traces human evolution from Africa through Asia to the Navajo people of North America..."



"We all know that all humans are related. So a good question is: When was our Most Recent Common Ancestor (MRCA)?
"Surprisingly, the answer to that question is a lot more recent than DNA studies would suggest, since we are searching all lines of descent, rather than just the lines genes traveled on.
"You do not inherit all your ancestor's DNA, but only a small part of it. And yet, even if you inherit NONE of their DNA (which is not only possible, but probable, as you go back far enough), they are still your ancestor.
"To find the answer to the MRCA, we need to look beyond DNA studies. Mathematical models suggest that, if humans picked mates randomly, the MRCA is in historical times, perhaps c. 1200 AD!

"This is an amazing result, suggesting that we do not have to go back into prehistory to find an ancestor of every single human! But obviously humans do not pick mates randomly - they tend to mate with people in their local geographic area.
"Computer simulations that take this into account suggest that even with a high degree of local mating, the MRCA is still in historical times, perhaps c. 300 AD. If we consider just the West, the MRCA may be as recent as c. 1000 AD."...

"In conclusion, if you have west European ancestry at all, it seems virtually impossible for you not to be descended from Charlemagne, who lived around 800 AD."

"Ninety percent of the world (including all the West) is descended from Confucius:"

"For the MRCA of the whole world, we need to consider extremely isolated aboriginal populations. If they were truly isolated, we may have to go back thousands of years to get a common ancestor with them. For people who did not live in isolated enclaves though - the West, Middle East, more or less all of Asia, most of Africa - the MRCA is highly likely to be in recent historical times (late BC, possibly even AD).
"Anyone with ancestry from these areas is, for example, almost certainly a descendant of Confucius, who lived around 500 BC and who is a proven ancestor of some people alive today in China, hence probably ancestor of all people in the world except the extremely isolated.
"This exciting consensus is fairly new, and is supported by three independent fields of (a) genealogy, (b) mathematical models, and (c) computer simulations.
"The findings are robust with respect to barriers such as religion, class difference, etc. All one needs is a tiny amount of crossing of such barriers in the population in the past in order to get everyone today (of different religions etc.) with a recent common ancestor.
"The only thing that can push back the MRCA before historical times is total geographic isolation of populations from each other, which we know did not happen for most of the world.
"People are inspired (rightly so) by DNA studies of ancient common human ancestors tens of thousands of years ago. And yet the fact is that we are almost certainly all descended from any historical figure in classical times that left descendants."..."



"...Chang’s mathematical model makes the case for the number of ancestors that each of us has: "The mathematics of our ancestry is exceedingly complex, because the number of our ancestors increases exponentially, not linearly. These numbers are manageable in the first few generations—two parents, four grandparents, eight great-grandparents, sixteen great-great-grandparents—but they quickly spiral out of control. Go back forty generations, or about a thousand years, and each of us theoretically has more than a trillion direct ancestors—a figure that far exceeds the total number of human beings who have ever lived."

The article goes on at some length to explain the realities of migration patterns and intermarriage within small communities. Olsen writes, "The number of ancestors common to all Europeans today increased, until, about a thousand years ago, a peculiar situation prevailed: 20 percent of the adult Europeans alive in 1000 would turn out to be the ancestors of no one living today (that is, they had no children or all their descendants eventually died childless); each of the remaining 80 percent would turn out to be a direct ancestor of every European living today..."



"Some Famous Cousins of Senator John Forbes Kerry President George W. Bush"



"...George Bush and John Kerry are officially ninth cousins, twice removed. This means they share the same two great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandparents and their ancestors..."





i'm sure they did/do share common ancestors (many of them), as do/did we all.

"The Genetic Legacy of the Mongols"



"...A new population genetics study may have identified history's greatest lover, at least as measured in millions of descendants in his direct male line.

This mighty progenitor was not a celebrated expert in the amorous arts like Casanova. Instead -- and this might say something about human nature that we'd rather not know -- he owed his lineage's staggering reproductive success to his being perhaps history's greatest fighter.

The 23 co-authors of a paper published electronically by the American Journal of Human Genetics examined the Y-chromosomes of 2,123 men from across Asia. The Y chromosome is found only in men and is passed down from father to son to grandson and so on, just as a surname is passed down "patrilineally." Men who share a unique last name are likely to share a mutual forefather, and so are men who share unique bits of DNA coding in their Y-chromosomes...

In over 90 percent of the Asian men tested, the Y-chromosomes were quite diverse, indicating a multiplicity of paternal-line ancestors in their highly varied family trees. In striking contrast, 8 percent had Y-chromosomes that were virtually identical, indicating a common recent forefather.

This individual man's Y-chromosome is today found in an estimated 16 million of his male line progeny in a vast swath of Asia from Manchuria near the Sea of Japan to Uzbekistan and Afghanistan in Central Asia. That's one of every 200 males on Earth today.

Of course, the scientists didn't use terms like "greatest lover;" but, for academic authors, they did seem rather excited, calling their finding "novel," "striking," and "unique."

So, who was this potent patriarch?

Oxford biochemist Chris Tyler-Smith, one of the co-authors of the new report "The Genetic Legacy of the Mongols," told United Press International, "We are pretty sure that this man lived in Mongolia or nearby, at about a thousand years ago, with an error of plus or minus a few hundred years."

Early in the last millennium, the population of the world was, speaking very roughly, 1/20 as large as it is today. Therefore, the average man alive then has 20 descendants alive today in his direct male line. In contrast, with about 16 million direct descendants, this one mega-ancestor was something like 800,000 times more successful than the average.

The co-authors wrote, "Within the last 1,000 years in this part of the world, these conditions are met by Genghis Khan (c. 1162-1227) and his male relatives. He established the largest land empire in history and often slaughtered the conquered populations, and he and his close male relatives had many children."

His original name was Temujin, but he took the title of Genghis Khan or "Universal Ruler" when he united the fractious Mongolian tribes in 1206. He and his pony-mounted archers then set out on a whirlwind of conquest and destruction. His armies ravished northern China, Samarkand and the other fabled Central Asian cities of the Silk Road, and much of far-off Russia. This earned him such monikers as the Mighty Manslayer, the Scourge of God, the Master of Thrones and Crowns, and the Perfect Warrior.

His sons and grandsons extended the Mongol empire to southern China. In Iraq, they demolished the great city of Baghdad in 1258, profoundly setting back Islamic civilization. The Mongols devastated Poland and reached the outskirts of Vienna...

"More seriously, this disproves the theory of history promoted by Marx and Tolstoy that says only social forces matter, not individuals," Cochran claimed. "This shows that one man can make a difference."

Tyler-Smith stressed that the 16 million male descendants are just those who belong to this one patriarchal lineage, not the much greater number who are descended in any fashion from Genghis Khan. "Virtually everybody today who lives near the Asian steppe must have Genghis Khan somewhere in his or her family tree," speculated Cochran.

At present, however, no one has estimated with confidence what percentage of the world's "autosomal" DNA is descended from Genghis Khan. (That's the main body of the genome, which is inherited by both sons and daughters and recombines in random new patterns with each conception. It is more difficult than the Y-chromosome for population geneticists to work with in these kind of massive paternity tests.)

The maximum possible is 0.25 percent of all humans' ancestry, which would be a jaw-dropping figure, but it's probably significantly less because, being a patrilineal culture, the social advantages to being a descendant of Genghis Khan accrued primarily to those in the pure male line.

Tyler-Smith said, "This figure depends a lot on the reproductive success of his descendants who were not recognized as patrilineal relatives. At the maximum, there could now be millions of people (men and women) carrying each of Genghis Khan's autosomal genes. My guess, however, is that the reproductive advantage was focused on the Y (or male) lineage, and so the number carrying each autosomal gene will be much less than this. But it is an empirical question, and further work in these populations could provide the answer."

To be technical, the "most recent common ancestor" of all these modern Asian men was probably not Genghis Khan himself, but instead a recent patrilineal ancestor of his, such as a paternal grandfather. Tyler-Smith said, "We don't think that Genghis Khan was the common ancestor, because our best estimate of the time when the common ancestor lived was a few generations before he was born."

It's likely that some brothers and male cousins of Genghis Khan who shared his Y chromosome enjoyed heightened reproductive success in his enormous wake, rather like how it is said that some of the sex appeal of the rock band Led Zeppelin rubbed off on its lucky roadies.

Still, there's no question that Genghis Khan was the main man in his family. Cochran said, "I don't think Genghis Khan shared much."...

Incredibly, as late as the early 20th century, three-quarters of a millennium after Genghis Khan's birth, the aristocracy of Mongolia, which was 6 percent of the population, consisted of his patrilineal descendants. Today, among the Hazaras, an outlying group of Mongolian-looking people in Pakistan and Afghanistan, many men can recite their genealogies going back about 34 generations to Genghis Khan.

How certain is it that Genghis Khan was the driving force in the dispersion of this extraordinary Y-chromosome? Tyler-Smith said, "The alternative explanation would be that, despite the historically-recorded activities of Genghis Khan, his Y-chromosome did not spread, but that of an unknown man living in the same place at the same time did, to an unprecedented extent." Perhaps showing the English penchant for understatement, the Oxford scientist concluded, "This seems less likely."...

"The really interesting find, however, would be Genghis Khan's DNA," Cochran continued. He suggested that among Inner Mongolians and the Hazaras, on whom Genghis Khan left such a genetic imprint that his Y-chromosome is found in at least a quarter of the men, there must have been a lot of inbreeding among his descendants. Yet, judging from their Darwinian success at surviving and reproducing in large numbers, that might imply that Genghis Khan had very few bad recessive genes of the kind that often damage the health of the offspring of close relations...
"Between that and the fact that he conquered most of the world, it's fair to wonder if he was a little genetically unusual,..."

monee sorry if that was a lot of needless cutting and pasting...
i'm a crazed genealogist, i couldn't help myself.
:) We_are_the_Universe...

and Saddam"s chicken_flavor wired / wireless around_and_across Bush,
vice versa...
123 OOPs....


Is that the final_answer? 051023
"God" Secret_code across_the_Universe... 051023
"Mother" of Apple and Orange, Chicken_and_Egg, ... 051024
99.9 10272005: Scientists map human genetic variation

... The Human Genome Project, which mapped the three billion letters that make up the human genetic_code, showed that any two people (e.g. George_w_Bush & Saddam_Hussein) are
% the same. ...
i.e. Everyone shares 99.9 per cent of their genes...
10272005 http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-10/27/content_3689726.htm 051027
Dog 's DNA may reveal plans of mice and men 051209
what's it to you?
who go