Was Adam a Real Person? Are There Really Different Races?

click to enlarge

Human DNA Variation Linked to Biblical Event Timeline

Each person is different, and each, except an identical twin, has unique DNA differences. These differences can be traced across global populations and ethnic groups. Furthermore, recent research provides interesting insight about the approximate time that these DNA differences entered the human race.
A new study reported in the journal Science has advanced our knowledge of rare DNA variation associated with gene regions in the human genome.1 By applying a demographics-based model to the data, researchers discovered that the human genome began to rapidly diversify about 5,000 years ago. Remarkably, this data coincides closely with biblical models of rapid diversification of humans after the global flood.
The vast majority of DNA base sequences between any two humans are nearly identical, so the few differences are traceable among people groups. The human genome project has continued to analyze thousands of humans throughout the world for variation in their DNA sequence. Researchers link this variation with many human traits and heritable diseases.2
To continue article: http://www.icr.org/articles/view/6927/289/
credit: Randy Brandt and What's the Evidence Team

What if a Chinese person were to marry a Polynesian, or an African with black skin were to marry a Japanese, or a person from India were to marry a person from America with white skin—would these marriages be in accord with biblical principles?
A significant number of Christians would claim that such “interracial” marriages directly violate God’s principles in the Bible and should not be allowed.
Does the Word of God really condemn the marriages mentioned above? Is there ultimately any such thing as interracial marriage?
To answer these questions, we must first understand what the Bible and science teach about “race.”

What Constitutes a “Race”?

The evolutionary view of races
In the 1800s, before Darwinian evolution was popularized, most people, when talking about “races,” would be referring to such groups as the “English race,” “Irish race,” and so on. However, this all changed in 1859 when Charles Darwin published his book On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.
Darwinian evolution was (and still is1) inherently a racist philosophy, teaching that different groups or “races” of people evolved at different times and rates, so some groups are more like their apelike ancestors than others. Leading evolutionist Stephen Jay Gould claimed, “Biological arguments for racism may have been common before 1859, but they increased by orders of magnitude following the acceptance of evolutionary theory.”2
The Australian Aborigines, for instance, were considered the missing links between the apelike ancestor and the rest of mankind.3 This resulted in terrible prejudices and injustices towards the Australian Aborigines.4
Ernst Haeckel, famous for popularizing the now-discredited idea that “ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny,” 5 stated:
At the lowest stage of human mental development are the Australians, some tribes of the Polynesians, and the Bushmen, Hottentots, and some of the Negro tribes. Nothing, however, is perhaps more remarkable in this respect, than that some of the wildest tribes in southern Asia and eastern Africa have no trace whatever of the first foundations of all human civilization, of family life, and marriage. They live together in herds, like apes.6
Racist attitudes fueled by evolutionary thinking were largely responsible for an African pygmy being displayed, along with an orangutan, in a cage in the Bronx zoo.7 Indeed, Congo pygmies were once thought to be “small apelike, elfish creatures” that “exhibit many ape-like features in their bodies.”8
To finish article go to:  

What's the Evidence?-all rights reserved