What do you think?
Rate this book
Traced: Human DNA's Big Surprise
"Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson has found the Rosetta Stone of human history." Ken Ham What happened to the ancient Egyptians? When their civilization fell, did the Egyptian people disappear? Or do their descendants exist to this day? What about the ancient Persians? Romans? Mayans? For years, the answers to these questions have been hidden. But no more. Nathaniel T. Jeanson, a Harvard graduate with a Ph.D. in cell and developmental biology, has discovered a DNA-based, generation by generation family tree for global humanity. This tree uncovers the origin and fate of these ancient peoples—and connects them to peoples alive today. “…a ground-breaking book…likely to become a classic.”
Ola Hössjer, PhD, Professor of Mathematical Statistics, Stockholm University, Sweden “…pulls the curtain back further on the mystery of early human history using genetics, history, and linguistics”
Les Bruce, PhD, retired research specialist, Summer Institute of Linguistics International The fascinating research presented in Traced has additional far-reaching consequences for numerous contemporary debates:
Dive into the wild and emerging field of historical genetics and see how these recent discoveries on the fate of ancient civilizations end up uncovering the story of the whole world. Traced: Human DNA’s Big Surprise will inspire, not only budding historians, archaeologists, geneticists, linguists, and anthropologists, but anyone interested the marvelous and messy story of humankind.
Ola Hössjer, PhD, Professor of Mathematical Statistics, Stockholm University, Sweden “…pulls the curtain back further on the mystery of early human history using genetics, history, and linguistics”
Les Bruce, PhD, retired research specialist, Summer Institute of Linguistics International The fascinating research presented in Traced has additional far-reaching consequences for numerous contemporary debates:
Dive into the wild and emerging field of historical genetics and see how these recent discoveries on the fate of ancient civilizations end up uncovering the story of the whole world. Traced: Human DNA’s Big Surprise will inspire, not only budding historians, archaeologists, geneticists, linguists, and anthropologists, but anyone interested the marvelous and messy story of humankind.
251 pages, Hardcover
Published March 11, 2022
271 people are currently reading
515 people want to read
About the author
Nathaniel T. Jeanson
5 books46 followersDR. NATHANIEL JEANSON received his B.S. in Molecular Biology and Bioinformatics from the University of Wisconsin-Parkside and his PhD in Cell and Developmental Biology from Harvard University. As an undergraduate, he researched the molecular control of photosynthesis, and his graduate work involved investigating the molecular and physiological control of adult blood stem cells. His findings have been presented at regional and national conferences, and have been published in peer-reviewed journals, such as Blood, Nature, and Cell. Since 2009, he has been actively researching the origin of species, both at the Institute for Creation Research and at Answers in Genesis.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 68 reviews
April 19, 2022
I’m an evolutionary biologist and pay close attention to the work that comes out of the major creationist ministries, such as Answers in Genesis, where the author, Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson, is employed.
“Traced: Human DNA’s Big Surprise” Dr. Jeansons’s new book. In Traced, Dr. Jeanson uses Y-chromosome haplotypes to argue that the Y chromosome supports a Young Earth history, specifically the AiG version.
His argument works like this:
1. Establish a Y-chromosome mutation rate based pedigree studies to calculate a Y-chromosome time to most recent common ancestor (TMRCA) approximately 4500 years ago.
2. Reinterpret the Y-chromosome phylogeny and chronology based on this earlier TMRCA.
3. Correlate historical events, like migrations, to nodes in the Y-chromosome phylogeny.
4. Overlay the Y-chromosome phylogeny onto the pedigree for Noah and his sons derived from Genesis.
5. Do (3) for Biblical events (e.g. the Flood, Babel, etc.)
6. Claim you rewrote the history of humanity and confirmed the AiG interpretation of Genesis.
There are significant problems with the case Jeanson makes.
The first, which underlies much of his analysis, is that he treats genealogy and phylogeny as interchangeable.
They are not interchangeable. Genealogy is the history of individuals and familial relationships. Phylogeny is the evolutionary history of groups: populations, species, etc. A phylogenetic tree may superficially look like a family tree, but all those lines and branch points represent populations, not individuals. This is an extremely basic error.
There are additional problems with each step of the case he makes.
In terms of calculating the Y-TMRCA (that’s time to most recent common ancestor), he uses single-generation pedigree-based mutation rates rather than long-term substitution rates, which is not a valid technique, since many mutations are lost from populations due to natural selection and genetic drift. He even references a couple of studies that indicate the consensus date of 200-300kya for the Y-MRCA, but dismisses them as low-quality, and ignores that there are many, many more such studies.
He is constrained in an extremely narrow timespan for much of the Y-chromosome branching due to its claimed occurrence after Noah’s Flood (~4500 years ago) and running up against well-documented, recorded human history (he ignores that Egyptian history spans the Flood).
In correlating his revised node dates on the Y-chromosome phylogeny with historical events, he employs extremely amateurish “analysis”, such as “the ancestral population for sister haplogroups existed along the line between the geographic homeland for the derived groups, and the descendants migrated in opposite directions”. I’m not exaggerating; this is how he explains how and where E1b1a and E1b1b descended from E1b1.
He also ignores inconvenient data that refute his model. For example, Jeanson claims haplotype R1b arrived in Europe between 700 and 1400 CE, and specifically in Italy in the 14- or 1500s. However, we have DNA from a stone age burial in northern Italy dated to about 14,000 years ago, and that individual was R1b.
Even if we take Jeanson’s young-earth timeline at face value, a stone age specimen would be pretty close to the flood, about 4kya, which also directly invalidates his model.
To overlay the Y-chromosome phylogeny (with incorrect new dates incorrectly correlated to historical events) with the pedigree of Noah and his sons and their descendants derived from Genesis, Jeanson egregiously acts as though a phylogenetic tree and a pedigree are interchangeable, treating nodes on the phylogeny as specific individuals rather than populations.
And finally, he correlates the haplotypes on the phylogeny (now incorrectly overlayed with Noah’s family tree) with Biblical groups and events.
That’s how Jeanson rewrites the history of humanity.
There’s another serious issue Jeanson ignores entire: Neanderthals. Neanderthals interbred with Homo sapiens. Most YECs have Neanderthals (and Denisovans) as descendants of Adam and Eve, living post-flood. This means that Noah is also *their* Y-MRCA. The problem is that we have Neanderthal genomes, and their Y chromosomes are highly divergent. This necessarily pushes the MRCA back far beyond the YEC timeline, even using Jeanson’s incorrect mutation rates. Jeanson completely ignores these data that directly refute his model.
So Traced doesn’t do what we’re told it does. It’s too full of basic errors and shoddy analysis.
It’s not designed to convince real biologists that AiG is actually right. And I don’t even think it’s designed to convince non-YECs, Christian or not, that YEC is right. I think this is designed to reassure people already on board with AiG’s version of Genesis that they have “science” to back up their beliefs. It’s to make a subset of YECs feel good, and not much more. There are too many errors, basic, obvious errors, for anything else.
“Traced: Human DNA’s Big Surprise” Dr. Jeansons’s new book. In Traced, Dr. Jeanson uses Y-chromosome haplotypes to argue that the Y chromosome supports a Young Earth history, specifically the AiG version.
His argument works like this:
1. Establish a Y-chromosome mutation rate based pedigree studies to calculate a Y-chromosome time to most recent common ancestor (TMRCA) approximately 4500 years ago.
2. Reinterpret the Y-chromosome phylogeny and chronology based on this earlier TMRCA.
3. Correlate historical events, like migrations, to nodes in the Y-chromosome phylogeny.
4. Overlay the Y-chromosome phylogeny onto the pedigree for Noah and his sons derived from Genesis.
5. Do (3) for Biblical events (e.g. the Flood, Babel, etc.)
6. Claim you rewrote the history of humanity and confirmed the AiG interpretation of Genesis.
There are significant problems with the case Jeanson makes.
The first, which underlies much of his analysis, is that he treats genealogy and phylogeny as interchangeable.
They are not interchangeable. Genealogy is the history of individuals and familial relationships. Phylogeny is the evolutionary history of groups: populations, species, etc. A phylogenetic tree may superficially look like a family tree, but all those lines and branch points represent populations, not individuals. This is an extremely basic error.
There are additional problems with each step of the case he makes.
In terms of calculating the Y-TMRCA (that’s time to most recent common ancestor), he uses single-generation pedigree-based mutation rates rather than long-term substitution rates, which is not a valid technique, since many mutations are lost from populations due to natural selection and genetic drift. He even references a couple of studies that indicate the consensus date of 200-300kya for the Y-MRCA, but dismisses them as low-quality, and ignores that there are many, many more such studies.
He is constrained in an extremely narrow timespan for much of the Y-chromosome branching due to its claimed occurrence after Noah’s Flood (~4500 years ago) and running up against well-documented, recorded human history (he ignores that Egyptian history spans the Flood).
In correlating his revised node dates on the Y-chromosome phylogeny with historical events, he employs extremely amateurish “analysis”, such as “the ancestral population for sister haplogroups existed along the line between the geographic homeland for the derived groups, and the descendants migrated in opposite directions”. I’m not exaggerating; this is how he explains how and where E1b1a and E1b1b descended from E1b1.
He also ignores inconvenient data that refute his model. For example, Jeanson claims haplotype R1b arrived in Europe between 700 and 1400 CE, and specifically in Italy in the 14- or 1500s. However, we have DNA from a stone age burial in northern Italy dated to about 14,000 years ago, and that individual was R1b.
Even if we take Jeanson’s young-earth timeline at face value, a stone age specimen would be pretty close to the flood, about 4kya, which also directly invalidates his model.
To overlay the Y-chromosome phylogeny (with incorrect new dates incorrectly correlated to historical events) with the pedigree of Noah and his sons and their descendants derived from Genesis, Jeanson egregiously acts as though a phylogenetic tree and a pedigree are interchangeable, treating nodes on the phylogeny as specific individuals rather than populations.
And finally, he correlates the haplotypes on the phylogeny (now incorrectly overlayed with Noah’s family tree) with Biblical groups and events.
That’s how Jeanson rewrites the history of humanity.
There’s another serious issue Jeanson ignores entire: Neanderthals. Neanderthals interbred with Homo sapiens. Most YECs have Neanderthals (and Denisovans) as descendants of Adam and Eve, living post-flood. This means that Noah is also *their* Y-MRCA. The problem is that we have Neanderthal genomes, and their Y chromosomes are highly divergent. This necessarily pushes the MRCA back far beyond the YEC timeline, even using Jeanson’s incorrect mutation rates. Jeanson completely ignores these data that directly refute his model.
So Traced doesn’t do what we’re told it does. It’s too full of basic errors and shoddy analysis.
It’s not designed to convince real biologists that AiG is actually right. And I don’t even think it’s designed to convince non-YECs, Christian or not, that YEC is right. I think this is designed to reassure people already on board with AiG’s version of Genesis that they have “science” to back up their beliefs. It’s to make a subset of YECs feel good, and not much more. There are too many errors, basic, obvious errors, for anything else.
August 5, 2022
I am a plant molecular geneticist by training, so understand a thing or two about population genetics and phylogenetic reconstruction using molecular data. Considering Jeanson is employed by Answers in Genesis, an organization that requires its employees to pledge to a set of beliefs that include that the universe only 6,000 years old and that a worldwide flood occurred about 4,500 years ago as a literal interpretation of Genesis suggests, I expected to be a little skeptical about some of his conclusions. What I was not expecting, however, was to see so many simple, yet profoundly devastating, errors in his understanding of population genetics, gene mutation rates, and the meaning of phylogenies (let alone the proper methods for constructing valid trees).
Suffice it to say, as a geneticist I would not recommend this book to anyone. It is so full of errors and faulty reasoning that one cannot depend on the veracity of anything he says. He also seems to have a poor grasp of world history and has no actual training in population or evolutionary genetics, which shows when he attempts to explain what his findings mean. He also grossly misrepresents the work of other legitimate evolutionary biologists doing similar kinds of research, researchers from whom he has used data since he has generated none of his own data. Besaides, most lay readers would likely not be able to make any sense whatsoever of his explanations. Even I, as a trained molecular systematist, couldn't make sense of many of his convoluted explanations, and have had to conclude that parts of this book are barely better than word salad.
Lastly, it should be noted that the research on which he based much of this book has not been published in peer-reviewed journals. Every one of his papers on the topic have been published in Answers in Genesis internal journals, which undergo no real peer review. If his results had any validity, their extraordinary conclusions would immediately be published in the likes of Nature or Science, but given the disaster his research represents, such papers would never pass peer review. Thus the reason he chose to share his work in a book like this, I assume.
Suffice it to say, as a geneticist I would not recommend this book to anyone. It is so full of errors and faulty reasoning that one cannot depend on the veracity of anything he says. He also seems to have a poor grasp of world history and has no actual training in population or evolutionary genetics, which shows when he attempts to explain what his findings mean. He also grossly misrepresents the work of other legitimate evolutionary biologists doing similar kinds of research, researchers from whom he has used data since he has generated none of his own data. Besaides, most lay readers would likely not be able to make any sense whatsoever of his explanations. Even I, as a trained molecular systematist, couldn't make sense of many of his convoluted explanations, and have had to conclude that parts of this book are barely better than word salad.
Lastly, it should be noted that the research on which he based much of this book has not been published in peer-reviewed journals. Every one of his papers on the topic have been published in Answers in Genesis internal journals, which undergo no real peer review. If his results had any validity, their extraordinary conclusions would immediately be published in the likes of Nature or Science, but given the disaster his research represents, such papers would never pass peer review. Thus the reason he chose to share his work in a book like this, I assume.
March 8, 2023
An excellent detailed book. This book is easy to understand and the color plates really help out. If you are interested in family trees, genetics, and world history, this is a must read.
September 20, 2022
Fascinating read. What great insight especially into early Native American populations, Asia, Oceania and the Pacific. I wish there was more info but as a lay person with a hobbies interest in genetics, but a degree in history, it’s probably for the best that it wasn’t too technical. I am sure there will be naysayers, as much of the mainstream science starts from a completely different set of assumptions (circular reasoning) which results in sometimes vastly different conclusions. They simply cannot help themselves. Case in point; the review that states that Egypt pre-dated the flood. Biblically, that is utterly impossible as Noah predates Egypt and other cultures. The mainstream dating methods have been challenged elsewhere but they are often silenced. Majority opinion does not necessitate that the opinion or belief is true and accurate. That being addressed, this subject fascinates me and I understand it’s only in the beginning stages. I look forward to more discoveries.
June 13, 2022
I thought this book was really interesting, but I did find myself a little skeptical. Maybe it’s because I didn’t fully understand his argument, or maybe it’s because I had just finished reading How to Lie With Statistics.
I think as more information and research is done, this will get more and more interesting.
I think as more information and research is done, this will get more and more interesting.
April 18, 2022
A bit long winded and unfocused
But when the author starts treating the story of Noah as a valid basis for a work on genetics, sorry, that’s just BS
I’m still unclear what “the big surprise” is supposed to be
But when the author starts treating the story of Noah as a valid basis for a work on genetics, sorry, that’s just BS
I’m still unclear what “the big surprise” is supposed to be
December 27, 2023
I was surprised at how much this fascinated me. I don’t have the physical book, it was audio, so I didn’t get the full experience. However, learning about how different groups were related and such was so cool!!
March 2, 2023
I don’t care for science written with an agenda. This book has an agenda to prove a young earth creation position. It fails.
The mathematics underlying Jeanson’s dating of human origins is based on the mutation rate of Y-chromosome DNA. He assumes a steady mutation rate through human history and uses that to fit his timeline with his reading of the genealogies in Genesis. There are two problems with this. First, Jeanson’s understanding of the Genesis genealogies is simplistic. He reads them as though they were a complete record of human history when we know from other biblical texts that they are incomplete. We also know from Jewish tradition that they didn’t generally include all generations in a genealogical listing. Therefore, using the Genesis genealogies for dating is a suspect practice.
Second, a steady mutation rate is improbable. Varying conditions (e.g., cosmic radiation levels) would make the rate variable. And, as Jeanson shows elsewhere in the book, small rate changes can result in significant deviations reasonably quickly. Further, Jeanson also states that something unusual happened with the Genesis flood. The reported life spans of people plummeted. Noah had children at 500 years of age. Abraham at 25% of that age. Generation lengths changed, and something in human biology (including our DNA) changed to cause that. Unless Jeanson can account for something like the abrupt change pre- to post-flood, his DNA mutation dating is of limited value.
I cannot recommend this book, though interesting points are made throughout.
The mathematics underlying Jeanson’s dating of human origins is based on the mutation rate of Y-chromosome DNA. He assumes a steady mutation rate through human history and uses that to fit his timeline with his reading of the genealogies in Genesis. There are two problems with this. First, Jeanson’s understanding of the Genesis genealogies is simplistic. He reads them as though they were a complete record of human history when we know from other biblical texts that they are incomplete. We also know from Jewish tradition that they didn’t generally include all generations in a genealogical listing. Therefore, using the Genesis genealogies for dating is a suspect practice.
Second, a steady mutation rate is improbable. Varying conditions (e.g., cosmic radiation levels) would make the rate variable. And, as Jeanson shows elsewhere in the book, small rate changes can result in significant deviations reasonably quickly. Further, Jeanson also states that something unusual happened with the Genesis flood. The reported life spans of people plummeted. Noah had children at 500 years of age. Abraham at 25% of that age. Generation lengths changed, and something in human biology (including our DNA) changed to cause that. Unless Jeanson can account for something like the abrupt change pre- to post-flood, his DNA mutation dating is of limited value.
I cannot recommend this book, though interesting points are made throughout.
January 22, 2023
Young earth world population groups / movements
This is the first time I have had mixed feelings about how to do a review. I am a Christian, and have post-grad qualifications in Bioinformatics (proteomics / genomics). Dr Nathaniel Jeanson has written an interesting book which amongst other things attempts to prove how various genetically linked groups moved from first origins to various places around the world, Dr Jeanson works for Answers in Genesis, so it is not surprising that the book is from a YEO (Young Earth) perspective where the world is only 4-6,000 years old. This is a position at odds with the vast majority of relevant profession scientists (even Christian ones).
The author also makes a fundamental error where he directly compares individual genetic trees with population phylogenies. This is something that any statistician / evolutionary biologist would not do.
The book is written in a very accessible manner, with voluminous end notes / bibliography allowing you to go to the sources for further study.
This is the first time I have had mixed feelings about how to do a review. I am a Christian, and have post-grad qualifications in Bioinformatics (proteomics / genomics). Dr Nathaniel Jeanson has written an interesting book which amongst other things attempts to prove how various genetically linked groups moved from first origins to various places around the world, Dr Jeanson works for Answers in Genesis, so it is not surprising that the book is from a YEO (Young Earth) perspective where the world is only 4-6,000 years old. This is a position at odds with the vast majority of relevant profession scientists (even Christian ones).
The author also makes a fundamental error where he directly compares individual genetic trees with population phylogenies. This is something that any statistician / evolutionary biologist would not do.
The book is written in a very accessible manner, with voluminous end notes / bibliography allowing you to go to the sources for further study.
July 14, 2022
Oh my goodness.... so much twisting of the information about who were the first Egyptians. The author tries to present the ancestors of the first Egyptians as one of Noah's sons. It turns out, according to his story, that Egyptians can trace their lineage, as we all can, to one of Noah's 3 sons. Wow...did he not know that Egyptian history and dates are well-documented; the first kingdom was around 5000 years ago. Noah's flood happened about 4,300 to 4,700 years ago, roughly based on the time implied by the Bible.
If you are a Creationist you will have analysis that fits your myth. But, most of the book is statistics and charts gone bad.
If you are a Creationist you will have analysis that fits your myth. But, most of the book is statistics and charts gone bad.
July 16, 2022
I found much of this book impossible to understand. The author had some laudable goals and has some excellent information. It just got very complicated to explain and he admitted that the dated needed to draw more conclusions was just beginning to be collected. Perhaps in a few years this
particular use of DNA data will enable the author to give some more concrete conclusions.
particular use of DNA data will enable the author to give some more concrete conclusions.
September 24, 2022
And about time, too!
Pardon the pun but this excellent book discloses not only the story of the human race as recorded in the Y chromosome of multiple people groups but it also demonstrates fairly convincingly how relatively young the various tribes and ethnic groups really are. A true eye-opener that deserves wider readership and even multiple readings.
Pardon the pun but this excellent book discloses not only the story of the human race as recorded in the Y chromosome of multiple people groups but it also demonstrates fairly convincingly how relatively young the various tribes and ethnic groups really are. A true eye-opener that deserves wider readership and even multiple readings.
September 17, 2022
Great! It will be fascinating to see what genetics does to the study of history
May 19, 2023
I listened to this on Audible. I wish I understood more of it 😂 I might need to read a physical copy of this in the future so I can see all of the photos it references.
May 3, 2024
Good information but too much genetic detail for my brain. There was something different about the accent of the reader for the audiobook. Many words seemed to be being mispronounced or read with the emphasis on the wrong syllable: saying PRE-sent instead of pre-SENT. It turns the word into the wrong one for the context. Also pronouncing Byzantine and Pythagorean with long “i” sounds instead of short…. Maybe it’s just me. When the reader would say “patriarch” it sounded like “patriock”.
I think I wasn’t expecting so much genetic shorthand details but otherwise good.
I think I wasn’t expecting so much genetic shorthand details but otherwise good.
July 24, 2025
A READING OF GENETIC EVIDENCE BASED PRIMARIILY ON THE BIBLE
Nathaniel Jeanson has a Ph.D. in Cell and Developmental Biology from Harvard. He is working at Answers in Genesis, one of the most prominent ‘young earth’ creationist organizations.
He wrote in the first chapter of this 2021 book, “Like many students, I learned the required facts… But the experience left me unsatisfied. Where did the ancient Sumerians come from? From whom did the Egyptians arise?... My history education never answered these questions. It was as if civilizations popped into existence and then disappeared into oblivion. I knew this couldn’t be true. But I had nothing to offer in its place… In other parts of the world, large gaps in the timeline remained… We learned next to nothing about what was going on north of the Rio Grande before Europeans arrived…. Central Asia… was hardly discussed… Their history seemed a big blank slate. Again, I knew this couldn’t be true. Again, I had nothing to offer in its place. I never thought that one day I’d be personally uncovering the answers to these questions.” (Pg. 10)
He continues, “In this book, we’ll explore some of the answers I’ve begun to uncover---answers you won’t find anywhere else… The ultimate test of the conclusions of this book is … whether they successfully explain the history we know, and whether they successfully predict future historical-genetic discoveries. I’ll leave it to you, the reader, to decide whether the conclusions in this book meet this standard.” (Pg. 13)
He states, “In ancient Egypt, the Pharaohs… memorialized themselves. They did so through statues, reliefs, and other forms of art. They also depicted their non-Egyptian neighbors. One such neighbor was shown as very dark-skinned. Egyptians represented themselves as lighter-skinned. From this perspective, ancient Egyptians appear to have had features more in common with modern Arabs than with modern sub-Saharan Africans. Does this mean that Egyptians have always looked this way---never dark-skinned? In other words, if… you once bear East Asian features, do you always bear East Asian features?... Among living peoples, the Bushmen, or Khiosan… possess some of the greatest genetic diversity of any people group alive today… At first glance, you might not notice anything unusual about their physical features. While lighter-skinned than a typical Sudanese, they still have a brown skin tone. Their tightly curled hair is also unmistakably associated with sub-Saharan Africa. But their eyes… shape does not resemble the common appearance of eyes among West and Central Africans.” (Pg. 35-36)
He asserts, “A straightforward reading of the Bible leads to a specific, detailed anthropology for the entire globe… Genesis puts the date of their creation by God about 6,000 years ago… The Flood occurred around 4,500 years ago… Shem, Ham, and Japeth … inherited their Y chromosome from [Noah]… males today should be able to dial their Y chromosome difference back… to Noah---in just 4,500 years. For the remainder of the book, I’ll refer to… 4,500 years ago with Noah---as the BEGINNING… Based on these results, ’10,000 B.C.’ and ‘3050 B.C.’ must be more recent---at least 2,500 BC or sooner… the most plausible scenario at present is one in which these dates are bunched up near 2500 B.C. In other words, the supposedly separate African peoples … may have arisen within a few centuries of each other… when looking for spouses, Egyptians and other Africans would have had fewer options than today…Egyptian lineages might be found all throughout Africa.” (Pg. 69-70)
He notes, “Oceania ‘is’ one of the most physically complex and diverse places on earth. How did this sort of physical diversity arise? Why do African-looking and Asian-looking people both exist in Oceania? For the entire Pacific region, archaeology… has uncovered a critical insight… on three counts (physical appearance, archaeology, linguistics) the history of Polynesia appears to be different from that of Australia and Melanesia. So far, we’d be justified in tracing the history of the Polynesians to East Asia, and … the Australians and Melanesians to someplace else. Perhaps even to Africa. Genetics has taken this story and turned it upside down.” (Pg. 125-126)
He says, “Fifteen thousand years ago… a group of Central Asians crossed the Bering Strait to an uninhabited wilderness… When Columbus arrived in the Americas in 1492, the 15,000-year divide was finally bridged… Compared to the rest of the globe, the genetic history of the Americas is the most predictable. We can convert the 15,000-year date from mainstream science to one consistent with the Y-chromosome timeline, but the story changes little. Practically, the only difference is the length of the isolation, not the fact of it.” (Pg. 133)
He reports, “the Israelites kept some of the most detailed genealogical records of their origins. These records will allow us to trace their genetic lineage backward in time to uncover their roots. Once we do, we’ll discover that the genetic history of Israel leads us to trace more than the beginning of their story. It also takes us to the dawn of the whole world.” (Pg. 161)
He asserts, “Noah is the oldest father we have on record… Perhaps Noah passed on more than three Y chromosome mutations to his sons. But how many more than three? Unfortunately, the only published results we have at the moment revolve around mutations in the rest of the DNA---not in the Y chromosome. No one has yet published a study on the relationship between a father’s age and the number of Y chromosome mutations that he passes on to his sons. Furthermore, no one has---or will---publish empirical findings on what a 500-YEAR OLD father will pass on to his sons. No one lives this long anymore.” (Pg. 177-178)
Not surprisingly, he concludes the book with an evangelistic appeal. “I’ve … accepted God’s offer… It’s my sincere desire that you do the same. Will you?” (Pg. 204)
It’s hard to see anyone other than a ‘young-earth’ creationist finding much to appreciate about this book…
Nathaniel Jeanson has a Ph.D. in Cell and Developmental Biology from Harvard. He is working at Answers in Genesis, one of the most prominent ‘young earth’ creationist organizations.
He wrote in the first chapter of this 2021 book, “Like many students, I learned the required facts… But the experience left me unsatisfied. Where did the ancient Sumerians come from? From whom did the Egyptians arise?... My history education never answered these questions. It was as if civilizations popped into existence and then disappeared into oblivion. I knew this couldn’t be true. But I had nothing to offer in its place… In other parts of the world, large gaps in the timeline remained… We learned next to nothing about what was going on north of the Rio Grande before Europeans arrived…. Central Asia… was hardly discussed… Their history seemed a big blank slate. Again, I knew this couldn’t be true. Again, I had nothing to offer in its place. I never thought that one day I’d be personally uncovering the answers to these questions.” (Pg. 10)
He continues, “In this book, we’ll explore some of the answers I’ve begun to uncover---answers you won’t find anywhere else… The ultimate test of the conclusions of this book is … whether they successfully explain the history we know, and whether they successfully predict future historical-genetic discoveries. I’ll leave it to you, the reader, to decide whether the conclusions in this book meet this standard.” (Pg. 13)
He states, “In ancient Egypt, the Pharaohs… memorialized themselves. They did so through statues, reliefs, and other forms of art. They also depicted their non-Egyptian neighbors. One such neighbor was shown as very dark-skinned. Egyptians represented themselves as lighter-skinned. From this perspective, ancient Egyptians appear to have had features more in common with modern Arabs than with modern sub-Saharan Africans. Does this mean that Egyptians have always looked this way---never dark-skinned? In other words, if… you once bear East Asian features, do you always bear East Asian features?... Among living peoples, the Bushmen, or Khiosan… possess some of the greatest genetic diversity of any people group alive today… At first glance, you might not notice anything unusual about their physical features. While lighter-skinned than a typical Sudanese, they still have a brown skin tone. Their tightly curled hair is also unmistakably associated with sub-Saharan Africa. But their eyes… shape does not resemble the common appearance of eyes among West and Central Africans.” (Pg. 35-36)
He asserts, “A straightforward reading of the Bible leads to a specific, detailed anthropology for the entire globe… Genesis puts the date of their creation by God about 6,000 years ago… The Flood occurred around 4,500 years ago… Shem, Ham, and Japeth … inherited their Y chromosome from [Noah]… males today should be able to dial their Y chromosome difference back… to Noah---in just 4,500 years. For the remainder of the book, I’ll refer to… 4,500 years ago with Noah---as the BEGINNING… Based on these results, ’10,000 B.C.’ and ‘3050 B.C.’ must be more recent---at least 2,500 BC or sooner… the most plausible scenario at present is one in which these dates are bunched up near 2500 B.C. In other words, the supposedly separate African peoples … may have arisen within a few centuries of each other… when looking for spouses, Egyptians and other Africans would have had fewer options than today…Egyptian lineages might be found all throughout Africa.” (Pg. 69-70)
He notes, “Oceania ‘is’ one of the most physically complex and diverse places on earth. How did this sort of physical diversity arise? Why do African-looking and Asian-looking people both exist in Oceania? For the entire Pacific region, archaeology… has uncovered a critical insight… on three counts (physical appearance, archaeology, linguistics) the history of Polynesia appears to be different from that of Australia and Melanesia. So far, we’d be justified in tracing the history of the Polynesians to East Asia, and … the Australians and Melanesians to someplace else. Perhaps even to Africa. Genetics has taken this story and turned it upside down.” (Pg. 125-126)
He says, “Fifteen thousand years ago… a group of Central Asians crossed the Bering Strait to an uninhabited wilderness… When Columbus arrived in the Americas in 1492, the 15,000-year divide was finally bridged… Compared to the rest of the globe, the genetic history of the Americas is the most predictable. We can convert the 15,000-year date from mainstream science to one consistent with the Y-chromosome timeline, but the story changes little. Practically, the only difference is the length of the isolation, not the fact of it.” (Pg. 133)
He reports, “the Israelites kept some of the most detailed genealogical records of their origins. These records will allow us to trace their genetic lineage backward in time to uncover their roots. Once we do, we’ll discover that the genetic history of Israel leads us to trace more than the beginning of their story. It also takes us to the dawn of the whole world.” (Pg. 161)
He asserts, “Noah is the oldest father we have on record… Perhaps Noah passed on more than three Y chromosome mutations to his sons. But how many more than three? Unfortunately, the only published results we have at the moment revolve around mutations in the rest of the DNA---not in the Y chromosome. No one has yet published a study on the relationship between a father’s age and the number of Y chromosome mutations that he passes on to his sons. Furthermore, no one has---or will---publish empirical findings on what a 500-YEAR OLD father will pass on to his sons. No one lives this long anymore.” (Pg. 177-178)
Not surprisingly, he concludes the book with an evangelistic appeal. “I’ve … accepted God’s offer… It’s my sincere desire that you do the same. Will you?” (Pg. 204)
It’s hard to see anyone other than a ‘young-earth’ creationist finding much to appreciate about this book…
January 9, 2024
Completely bogus! Ancient DNA testing had indicating lineages going back tens of thousands of years. R from which R1b was descended had been dated to about 24,000 years ago in the Altai Mountains of Central Asia. Ancient DNA results can trace migration pathways across millennia. From the Altai Mountains, Irish with R1b1a2a1a.... got to Ireland but moving westward to the steppes, up the Danube River, down the Rhine, and across to Ireland. Some went to Spain and then to Ireland. R1b descendant Celts were in France and England when the Romans got there. Complete waste of money.
August 1, 2023
To anyone who's read real genetics books, like David Reich, or even second hand science like Tony Joseph, this is appalling. Nothing really makes sense, the threads remain somewhat random, there's no overarching point. Not to mention the bulldrop Biblical nonsense shoehorned into the barest possible imitation of genetics or even modern science.
February 29, 2024
Honestly such a terrible writer. Lol it is so bad. Not to mention dude is a quack and the reviews are just boosted by religious people who don't want to believe in real peer reviewed science. This book is just another tool the Answers in Genesis people are peddling to try and pass off their creationist beliefs. It's always important to research the author to see what their motives could be.
October 19, 2022
I give us a five star rating because it’s encyclopedic nature and I think I can use it as a reference later on. But it’s definitely not a great book to listen to as there’s a lot of information. I greatly appreciate the Christian perspective that this book brings.
March 31, 2022
A work featuring extensive, and often technical, DNA language and DNA/Haplogroup-based migration research findings. "Genetics has taken this story and turned it upside down." A good source if you are interested in the topic and/or need background details for school, court cases, critical thinking, etc. This work also contains other interesting historical information which highlights the technical side of this book's content, including sufficient details on Italian Y chromosome haplogroups; we also read information concerning the "famous Scottish explorer and missionary, David Livingstone, in a book published in 1857, memorialized his encounter with Victoria Falls. While he modestly confessed to being the first European to witness the site, his discovery may have been much more far-reaching. It is likely that he was, not just the first European, but the first person outside of sub-Saharan Africa to see the Falls. Thousands of years earlier and about 3,000 miles to the north, the Pharaohs made no mention of Victoria Falls." 'Color Plate' instructive illustrations abound.
Massive cultures and large populations throughout Central and South America flourished, as we have observed from countless archaeological excavations, including extensive Radar and LIDAR data: "The pre-Columbian world was populous — especially in regions thought to have been otherwise untouched wilderness, such as the Amazon... (where the) Jungles in the Americas have also buried the evidence of earlier political activity... archaeologists may misinterpret history by not considering all lines of evidence available... How does this genetic history align with the pre-Columbian history of the Americas? In short, it rewrites it... Primitive appearances can belie complex histories."
This work and its appendixes, as well as current archaeological research examinations and early explorations, dispels the former mythical science and fantasy-fiction historical speculations which dominated the 'accounts' of the near past. "This book has identified only a handful of lineages from the innumerable people groups of history."
If you possess your own DNA sequencing information, "you can use Color Plate 235 as a guide to figure out your history. Color Plate 235 gives you a quick overview of your history, and then points you to the relevant chapters where you can dig deeper." I found this fairly easy once I included an internet search for information displayed on my DNA sequencing chart.
- Excerpts:
"Trees of survivors don't have branches that lead to peoples who went extinct. They also don't reveal every instance of population growth. When populations decline, the number of branches on the family tree declines."
"The second major forced African diaspora was the Islamic slave trade. This lesser-known slave trade differed from the Trans-Atlantic on nearly every point — except in sheer numbers.4 In total, around 11.5 million Africans were taken from their homes and shipped to faraway Muslim lands over the duration of this foul practice. The Islamic slave trade lasted much longer than the Trans-Atlantic. It didn't begin in the a.d. 1500s. Instead, it commenced in the a.d. 600s and lasted into the 1800s."
"When Genghis Khan subjugated a people group, he would enlist the soldiers from the conquered peoples in his own army. But not as an ethnically distinct subdivision. Instead, he would deliberately divide the conquered soldiers among his military branches to strip these conquered people of their ethnic loyalties and thereby turning their loyalties instead to him. As a result, in one instance, Khan's commander Muqali led a 100,000-strong troop in which 77% were not ethnically Mongol."
"Effectively, in the Americas, mainstream genetics plays second fiddle to mainstream archaeology. Mainstream science doesn't use genetics as an independent check on archaeology. Instead, it assumes the archaeology-based chronology to be correct, and then stretches a sequence of genetic events over it."
"The trouble with this explanation is that the overall timeframe doesn't fit genetics. The rate at which copying errors are introduced into the Y chromosome is much too fast to support a narrative spanning hundreds of thousands of years, let alone millions of years."
"In a perfect world, we would have access to DNA from people all throughout history. In the real world, however, we usually reconstruct our family trees based on the DNA from living people. Living people are the survivors of the rises and falls in human population sizes over the millennia. Their DNA-based family tree reflects the minimum human population size over the years."
* Another related work that may be of interest to you:
-The Discovery of the Amazon According to the Account of Friar Gaspar de Carvajal and Other Documents, Gaspar de Carvajal, American Geographical Society, 1934
Massive cultures and large populations throughout Central and South America flourished, as we have observed from countless archaeological excavations, including extensive Radar and LIDAR data: "The pre-Columbian world was populous — especially in regions thought to have been otherwise untouched wilderness, such as the Amazon... (where the) Jungles in the Americas have also buried the evidence of earlier political activity... archaeologists may misinterpret history by not considering all lines of evidence available... How does this genetic history align with the pre-Columbian history of the Americas? In short, it rewrites it... Primitive appearances can belie complex histories."
This work and its appendixes, as well as current archaeological research examinations and early explorations, dispels the former mythical science and fantasy-fiction historical speculations which dominated the 'accounts' of the near past. "This book has identified only a handful of lineages from the innumerable people groups of history."
If you possess your own DNA sequencing information, "you can use Color Plate 235 as a guide to figure out your history. Color Plate 235 gives you a quick overview of your history, and then points you to the relevant chapters where you can dig deeper." I found this fairly easy once I included an internet search for information displayed on my DNA sequencing chart.
- Excerpts:
"Trees of survivors don't have branches that lead to peoples who went extinct. They also don't reveal every instance of population growth. When populations decline, the number of branches on the family tree declines."
"The second major forced African diaspora was the Islamic slave trade. This lesser-known slave trade differed from the Trans-Atlantic on nearly every point — except in sheer numbers.4 In total, around 11.5 million Africans were taken from their homes and shipped to faraway Muslim lands over the duration of this foul practice. The Islamic slave trade lasted much longer than the Trans-Atlantic. It didn't begin in the a.d. 1500s. Instead, it commenced in the a.d. 600s and lasted into the 1800s."
"When Genghis Khan subjugated a people group, he would enlist the soldiers from the conquered peoples in his own army. But not as an ethnically distinct subdivision. Instead, he would deliberately divide the conquered soldiers among his military branches to strip these conquered people of their ethnic loyalties and thereby turning their loyalties instead to him. As a result, in one instance, Khan's commander Muqali led a 100,000-strong troop in which 77% were not ethnically Mongol."
"Effectively, in the Americas, mainstream genetics plays second fiddle to mainstream archaeology. Mainstream science doesn't use genetics as an independent check on archaeology. Instead, it assumes the archaeology-based chronology to be correct, and then stretches a sequence of genetic events over it."
"The trouble with this explanation is that the overall timeframe doesn't fit genetics. The rate at which copying errors are introduced into the Y chromosome is much too fast to support a narrative spanning hundreds of thousands of years, let alone millions of years."
"In a perfect world, we would have access to DNA from people all throughout history. In the real world, however, we usually reconstruct our family trees based on the DNA from living people. Living people are the survivors of the rises and falls in human population sizes over the millennia. Their DNA-based family tree reflects the minimum human population size over the years."
* Another related work that may be of interest to you:
-The Discovery of the Amazon According to the Account of Friar Gaspar de Carvajal and Other Documents, Gaspar de Carvajal, American Geographical Society, 1934
December 4, 2022
First, several disclaimers: 1) I am not very scientifically minded, having struggled greatly in any science class I ever took, thus; 2) Some of what the author writes is out of my league for indepth understanding; 3) One's worldview will greatly determine one's reaction to this book: If you believe in evolution and have rejected any form of design by a Designer, this book will provoke one's ire. If you believe in a Creator and the design of mankind, you'll find this book much more enjoyable. I land in this second category. It was tremendously enjoyable to read.
A casual reading of the reviews of this book demonstrate the wide range of perspectives on it. On one extreme you'll find the evolutionist who spews mockery and rejection of the content. Rather than stopping and pondering the material and contemplating the possibilities, it seems like such reviewers simply reject the theories outright, thus hurting their cause. On the other extreme one might find people who simply embrace what is presented without giving thought to possible exceptions, other studies, etc. I don't want to be in either extreme.
The discovery of and intense studies of human DNA over the past decades has been phenomenal. Much has been derived from these studies. In relation to this book, Dr. Jeanson has provided a thought provoking theory about DNA and how his theory and studies show how we humans across the globe are related. Jeanson explores the DNA of family trees of people groups across the globe, looking at the Y Chromosone (men) in the various groups. It is fascinating to see what all has been discovered and Jeanson seeks to demonstrate, really, how all of humanity can be traced back to one man-Noah, and his three sons. Jeanson offers his theory in a humble way, which I believe even should win an audience with the evolutionist, since science is structured around proposed theories. I appreciated Jeanson's proposal and his openness to further studies, his acknowledgement of limitations within his study (for example: he provides a challenge to Native Americans who may have an interest in studying DNA because of unanswered questions regarding the Native American populace), and his confidence in some of his assertions. I found his sections on Native Americans, Samoans (and other Pacific Islands), and Jewish people all to be very helpful and insightful.
I highly recommend this book. If one has a mathematical mind or a scientific mind, this book will probably be a great read. Even for those of us who possibly aren't mathematical or scientific minded will probably find Traced to be a really good read.
A casual reading of the reviews of this book demonstrate the wide range of perspectives on it. On one extreme you'll find the evolutionist who spews mockery and rejection of the content. Rather than stopping and pondering the material and contemplating the possibilities, it seems like such reviewers simply reject the theories outright, thus hurting their cause. On the other extreme one might find people who simply embrace what is presented without giving thought to possible exceptions, other studies, etc. I don't want to be in either extreme.
The discovery of and intense studies of human DNA over the past decades has been phenomenal. Much has been derived from these studies. In relation to this book, Dr. Jeanson has provided a thought provoking theory about DNA and how his theory and studies show how we humans across the globe are related. Jeanson explores the DNA of family trees of people groups across the globe, looking at the Y Chromosone (men) in the various groups. It is fascinating to see what all has been discovered and Jeanson seeks to demonstrate, really, how all of humanity can be traced back to one man-Noah, and his three sons. Jeanson offers his theory in a humble way, which I believe even should win an audience with the evolutionist, since science is structured around proposed theories. I appreciated Jeanson's proposal and his openness to further studies, his acknowledgement of limitations within his study (for example: he provides a challenge to Native Americans who may have an interest in studying DNA because of unanswered questions regarding the Native American populace), and his confidence in some of his assertions. I found his sections on Native Americans, Samoans (and other Pacific Islands), and Jewish people all to be very helpful and insightful.
I highly recommend this book. If one has a mathematical mind or a scientific mind, this book will probably be a great read. Even for those of us who possibly aren't mathematical or scientific minded will probably find Traced to be a really good read.
October 3, 2024
In Traced, Nathaniel Jeanson dives deeply into genetics to explore migration and genealogy of ancient humans. The primary focus of the book is on haplogroups from the Y chromosome, chosen because Y chromosome genes are solely inherited from fathers and all alleles are inherited together, reducing the mixing of paternal and maternal lineages that can dilute signals from other chromosomes.
The ultimate punchline of the book is three-fold:
* We can track the mutation rate of the Y chromosome in the present by comparing differences between fathers and sons. When we project this rate backwards toward the original Y chromosome of all human ancestors, we find that the most recent common male ancestor of all humans lived approximately 4,500 years ago, not hundreds of thousands of years ago (p. 68).
* Y chromosome haplogroups can be divided into three primary lineages: I-J, which is common among Indo-European peoples; the large KLMNOQRT group, scattered throughout Asia, Australia, and the Americas; and the ABCDEFGH lineage, in Africa and Asia.
* These findings correspond with the Biblical narrative of Noah, wherein all men except Noah and his three sons were killed in a global flood, making Noah the most recent ancestor of all living men, and his three sons as progenitors of different lineages and Y haplogroups.
Frankly, some of the genetics of the book are beyond me, and I'm still working to confirm Dr. Jeanson's interpretations of the Y chromosome mutation rates. The conclusions fit my preconceptions, so I'm trying to interrogate them more before passing judgment on the factual accuracy.
From a communications perspective, Traced would be greatly strengthened if Dr. Jeanson provided the punchline up front, and then built up the evidence for it through the rest of the book. Instead, we don't get the conclusion until very close to the end of the book. This makes it tedious to wade through many highly similar chapters ("Now let's look at the genetics of the O1b2 haplogroup in Korea and Japan!") where the importance (or even relevance) of the findings is unclear. You basically have to read the whole book, and then go back and read it again to understand how most of the chapters and analyses fit into the point Dr. Jeanson is trying to make.
The ultimate punchline of the book is three-fold:
* We can track the mutation rate of the Y chromosome in the present by comparing differences between fathers and sons. When we project this rate backwards toward the original Y chromosome of all human ancestors, we find that the most recent common male ancestor of all humans lived approximately 4,500 years ago, not hundreds of thousands of years ago (p. 68).
* Y chromosome haplogroups can be divided into three primary lineages: I-J, which is common among Indo-European peoples; the large KLMNOQRT group, scattered throughout Asia, Australia, and the Americas; and the ABCDEFGH lineage, in Africa and Asia.
* These findings correspond with the Biblical narrative of Noah, wherein all men except Noah and his three sons were killed in a global flood, making Noah the most recent ancestor of all living men, and his three sons as progenitors of different lineages and Y haplogroups.
Frankly, some of the genetics of the book are beyond me, and I'm still working to confirm Dr. Jeanson's interpretations of the Y chromosome mutation rates. The conclusions fit my preconceptions, so I'm trying to interrogate them more before passing judgment on the factual accuracy.
From a communications perspective, Traced would be greatly strengthened if Dr. Jeanson provided the punchline up front, and then built up the evidence for it through the rest of the book. Instead, we don't get the conclusion until very close to the end of the book. This makes it tedious to wade through many highly similar chapters ("Now let's look at the genetics of the O1b2 haplogroup in Korea and Japan!") where the importance (or even relevance) of the findings is unclear. You basically have to read the whole book, and then go back and read it again to understand how most of the chapters and analyses fit into the point Dr. Jeanson is trying to make.
January 22, 2023
Overview: I have a sneaking interest in genetics. I also have a less-sneaking interest in theories pointing towards a young earth. And I furthermore have a great interest in genealogies. So when I heard about this book that shares a genetical approach to providing evidence for a young earth by tracing genealogy through the Y chromosome, I naturally had to buy it. This was a fascinating read that, while sometimes over my head, has given me much to think about and has taught me things I never knew I didn’t know.
Writing: The author is a Harvard graduate, so he’s pretty sinking smart. Yet he also possesses the ability to make complex subjects simple—or at least, as simple as possible. He does an admirable job of keeping the text at a lay person’s level, but some topics are just too complex to avoid getting into the technical side of things. There’s also just a lottttt of information to unpack, and at times I would just have to nod and move on, having gleaned the basics of what I needed to know from the summary at the end of each chapter. Taking notes throughout would have helped, but I didn’t think about it until I was halfway through, and by that point, what would have been the use?
Summary: This book is exciting. It takes our ideas about where people came from and turns them on their heads. The book is written from an unabashedly young-earth, biblical-authority perspective, and it sheds an intriguing light on how genetics points to a common ancestor with three sons. I highly recommend this to those interested in learning more about these fascinating new studies and who will enjoy wrestling with the complexities presented.
Writing: The author is a Harvard graduate, so he’s pretty sinking smart. Yet he also possesses the ability to make complex subjects simple—or at least, as simple as possible. He does an admirable job of keeping the text at a lay person’s level, but some topics are just too complex to avoid getting into the technical side of things. There’s also just a lottttt of information to unpack, and at times I would just have to nod and move on, having gleaned the basics of what I needed to know from the summary at the end of each chapter. Taking notes throughout would have helped, but I didn’t think about it until I was halfway through, and by that point, what would have been the use?
Summary: This book is exciting. It takes our ideas about where people came from and turns them on their heads. The book is written from an unabashedly young-earth, biblical-authority perspective, and it sheds an intriguing light on how genetics points to a common ancestor with three sons. I highly recommend this to those interested in learning more about these fascinating new studies and who will enjoy wrestling with the complexities presented.
Read
November 30, 2024This book has some positives: the 235 colour plates showing hapalogroup distributions are great and the simplistic historical accounts at the beginning of each chapter are nice (but not necessarily accurate) summaries.
Then the author tries to show how hapologroups from the Y chromosome support or contest those accounts or histories. Hapalogs are mutations in the DNA that get passed along from generation to generation and act as markers to trace lineages, in this case focusing on those of the Y chromosome, indicative of males.
The Y chromosome is made of about 60 million base pairs, of about which 45 are functional genes. By one estimate, the human Y chromosome has lost 1,393 of its 1,438 original genes over the course of its existence. [Makes one wonder what those lost or defunct genes were for.]
a
Things that I found annoying or incorrect included:
· dozens of usage of the term Mayans for the Maya (where Mayan is the language only). It has been so commonly misused it has become acceptable English but still not respectable in a scholarly document. The author finally gets it right on page 196, when he refers to the Maya of Guatemala.
· suggesting the Niger-Congo populations have been around as long as the Khosian (Bushmen), when the latter have been in southern Africa around 40,000 years and tse former just a few thousand.
· using one instance of a father son mutation descrepancy (which the author says is ten times expected) when there should have been sampling of hundreds of such pairs (for averaging and confirmation). He then uses this compressed time frame to claim human life is just ~6,000 years on the planet (and not 60,000) and that his research coincides with biblical records.
· there were some other "errors" i forget just now.
The 121 five star ratings on GoodReads are telling in that none of those have a photo associated nor a review (suggesting just one time raters). For a better discourse check out some of the three star reviews.
Then the author tries to show how hapologroups from the Y chromosome support or contest those accounts or histories. Hapalogs are mutations in the DNA that get passed along from generation to generation and act as markers to trace lineages, in this case focusing on those of the Y chromosome, indicative of males.
The Y chromosome is made of about 60 million base pairs, of about which 45 are functional genes. By one estimate, the human Y chromosome has lost 1,393 of its 1,438 original genes over the course of its existence. [Makes one wonder what those lost or defunct genes were for.]
a
Things that I found annoying or incorrect included:
· dozens of usage of the term Mayans for the Maya (where Mayan is the language only). It has been so commonly misused it has become acceptable English but still not respectable in a scholarly document. The author finally gets it right on page 196, when he refers to the Maya of Guatemala.
· suggesting the Niger-Congo populations have been around as long as the Khosian (Bushmen), when the latter have been in southern Africa around 40,000 years and tse former just a few thousand.
· using one instance of a father son mutation descrepancy (which the author says is ten times expected) when there should have been sampling of hundreds of such pairs (for averaging and confirmation). He then uses this compressed time frame to claim human life is just ~6,000 years on the planet (and not 60,000) and that his research coincides with biblical records.
· there were some other "errors" i forget just now.
The 121 five star ratings on GoodReads are telling in that none of those have a photo associated nor a review (suggesting just one time raters). For a better discourse check out some of the three star reviews.
August 3, 2025
Jeanson provides a fascinating history of genetic lineage for the development and dispersion of the human race from Central Asia to the far reaches of the globe. Tying linguistic history to genetic history seems to lend more credibility as well as the archeological finds he presents. Based on genetic evidence the history of ancient civilizations we’ve all been taught in school is not entirely accurate, especially in regard to pre-columbian North America. In other cases it is interesting to see historical events documented in ur genes. The entire middle section of the book is charts, which he extensively refers to throughout the are very helpful although at times are a little difficult to understand for the non-geneticist layperson. Overall an intriguing book and I can’t wait to see how future studies in genetics reveal more information and history about our ancestors.
October 31, 2022
This is a great book for anyone not wanting to be swayed by emotional arguments, but open to the plain, humble science as it stands. Jeanson does a phenomenal job of this in my opinion, unveiling what’s there while humbly connecting the dots and inviting the reader and critics to verify or falsify for themselves. This the gist of science and should be encouragement to anyone interested in checking this title out, even if the claims are fantastical to you at this time.
I’ve heard (or read) that a claim should be validated on it’s own merit, not because of “who” makes it—and in this case the “who” is a biblical creationist. I believe the author achieves that here as best as anyone could. An enlightening read, to say the least!
I’ve heard (or read) that a claim should be validated on it’s own merit, not because of “who” makes it—and in this case the “who” is a biblical creationist. I believe the author achieves that here as best as anyone could. An enlightening read, to say the least!
May 23, 2023
Compelling evidence based on Y-chromosome sequencing among men living now that we all come from a common ancestor approximately 4500 years ago. Although this disagrees with 'mainstream' science's estimates, it aligns well with the Biblical narrative. Even detailed aspects of the initial 'branches' of this genealogical 'tree', using a few reasonable assumptions, correspond to the patriarchs listed in Genesis 10. Assuming the historical accuracy of the story in Genesis 11:1-11 adds further details to early human history. Fascinating!
An additional implication is that everyone on earth is actually quite closely related - separated by only 150 generations at most - give or take a few. Therefore, in Rodney King's memorable words, "Why can't we all just get along?"
An additional implication is that everyone on earth is actually quite closely related - separated by only 150 generations at most - give or take a few. Therefore, in Rodney King's memorable words, "Why can't we all just get along?"
April 21, 2024
This book was just the right amount of technical for me. I enjoy genetics and basic mathematics, so I found this book to be exciting and very interesting.
A few thoughts: It's weird to think that the human population was 95% smaller than it is today only 600 years ago! The ancient peoples (from about 2000-4000 years ago) were very migratory, based on just the small pool of data that Dr. Jeanson was working with.
My only complaint is that books published by Master Books always have typos in them. This is easily fixed by a good copyeditor/proofreader. I don't understand why New Leaf Publishing Group doesn't seem to prioritize this, and I have read many of their books published over the last 20-ish years.
A few thoughts: It's weird to think that the human population was 95% smaller than it is today only 600 years ago! The ancient peoples (from about 2000-4000 years ago) were very migratory, based on just the small pool of data that Dr. Jeanson was working with.
My only complaint is that books published by Master Books always have typos in them. This is easily fixed by a good copyeditor/proofreader. I don't understand why New Leaf Publishing Group doesn't seem to prioritize this, and I have read many of their books published over the last 20-ish years.
February 12, 2025
I found this book a useful insight to some possible investigative tools for the age of humanity.
The author talks about the mutation rate of the y-chromosome, only found in males, and how it shows the age of Humanity matches the biblical claims.
I enjoyed the book, BUT I think there is a crucial flaw in it. The author seems to dip into sensationalism quite often to move his point forward. This isn’t my favorite way to make an intellectual argument because you rely more on emotional excitement from your reader than the strength of your argument.
Over all I’d say it’s worth a read if you’re interested in possible evidence for a young humanity. For the reason listed above I would avoid reference to it in a discussion with someone who is adamant about the evolutionary origin of man.
The author talks about the mutation rate of the y-chromosome, only found in males, and how it shows the age of Humanity matches the biblical claims.
I enjoyed the book, BUT I think there is a crucial flaw in it. The author seems to dip into sensationalism quite often to move his point forward. This isn’t my favorite way to make an intellectual argument because you rely more on emotional excitement from your reader than the strength of your argument.
Over all I’d say it’s worth a read if you’re interested in possible evidence for a young humanity. For the reason listed above I would avoid reference to it in a discussion with someone who is adamant about the evolutionary origin of man.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 68 reviews