Why, then, do 4000 yo mummies show no signs of …

Comment on The Adventist Accrediting Association is Still Reviewing LSU by Andy Svrcek.

Why, then, do 4000 yo mummies show no signs of superiority? They weren’t taller or stronger than we are today and suffered from the same maladies we suffer from. The famous Iceman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96tzi) even carried a gene causing a higher risk of arteriosclerosis (if I remember correctly). Fortunately, his presumable lifestyle should have offered some protection.

Andy Svrcek Also Commented

The Adventist Accrediting Association is Still Reviewing LSU
@Sean Pitman: I didn’t state any hypothesis (except,maybe, the bushmen-statement). As far as I’ve seen, there’s simply no archaeological or paleontological evidence showing our ancestors had a better genetic equipment. Neanderthals were stronger and well adapted to living in a harsh environment, but payed a price by burning a lot more calories. Is there any direct archaeological evidence that people, say, 4000 years ago were noticeably superior to us?


The Adventist Accrediting Association is Still Reviewing LSU
@Sean Pitman: I wonder about the evidence of these accumulated near-neutral detrimental mutations. Mummies (from only some centuries after the flood, if one accepts YEC chronology) were no different form us – as far as I’ve read. And I’d bet that bushmen still following their traditional way of life are just as healthy as any Neanderthal or Cro-Magnon clan. To keep our gene pool clean we’d have to resort to some strict eugenics policy, which nobody wants (hopefully).