Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2002-12 > 1040960767

From: "john flinn" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] Genetic Bottleneck and World Populations.....
Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 20:46:07 -0700
References: <000701c2ad20$765e85a0$550aa8c0@PBAILEY>

The tone of your 3rd question would infer that you may be considering all those jillions of people to have been alive in the year 687 AD. Consider that, even today, all your great great grandparents are dead, plus all your ancestors beyond them. So at any given period of time, the odds are that all your ancestors back from your gggrand parents are dead. It would appear that your numbers are correct, even the 206 million alive in the year 600.
Look at it this way: If the 3rd generation back did not die. the world population would at least double every generation. That would make your number 140,737,488,355,328 seem pretty reasonable. But most of the people who ever lived are now dead. The counting is probably correct.
John Flinn
----- Original Message -----
From: Bailey
Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2002 1:50 PM
Subject: [DNA] Genetic Bottleneck and World Populations.....

Continuing from yesterdays email about my questions on
"genetic threshold" which was the wrong choice of words...
Chalk it up to memory loss after 55...

The correct term should have been "evolutionary bottleneck"
and my question was addressed for an explanation in this
area. And if this phenomenon was discussed in the book Seven
Daughters of Eve that Sibley has recently published.....about
the theoretical first Eve.

I found "evolutionary bottleneck" explained briefly at
these three sites (below), but my question was still not answered in
regard to DNA inheritance and human populations that we
find today.......

Second part of this question involves the world population....
My rough math shows that in my 47 great grandparents generation
in about the year 687 A.D. (28 year estimated generation time),
I had 140,737,488,355,328 male and female great grand-parents...
However, at this date (site below) there were only 206 million
estimated folks in the year 600 on the planet in ......

So can someone explain the difference in billions of the theoretical and
estimated world populations so I can understand it......Unless
these estimate are incorrect, we are "counting" folks many more
times than necessary...or there was a lot of intermarriage
Or there is some other explanation that escapes me..


To join and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to:

This thread: