Stunning new study found human and all animal species today originated only 100,000 to 200,000 years ago

Research by two scientists on DNA and mitochrondria found that over 90% of animal species in existence today — including humans — had originated only 100,000 to 200,000 years ago.

While the two scientists shied away from saying it, their finding that humans and all animals date back to at most only 200,000 years ago is contrary to what evolutionists have been telling us, that the Earth and its life forms had taken millions of years to develop and evolve.

Note: DNA or Deoxyribonucleic acid carries the genetic instructions of all known living organisms. Mitochrondria are structures or organelles located in the cell’s cytoplasm outside the nucleus, responsible for energy production. All mitochondrial chromosomes are inherited from the mother.

The two scientists are:

  • Mark Young Stoeckle, Ph.D. and M.D., Senior Research Associate at the Program for the Human Environment, The Rockefeller University, New York, NY. Email:
  • David S. Thaler, Ph.D., who researches and teaches Genetics and Microbiology at the Biozentrum – Center for Molecular Life Sciences at the University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland. Email:;

Their research is published as M.Y. Stoeckle and D. S. Thaler, “Why should mitochondria define species?,” Human Evolution, Vol. 33, n. 1-2, May 2018, pp. 1-30.

Written in a technical and, for non-specialists, arcane language, the article concerns DNA barcoding — a taxonomic method that uses a short genetic marker in an organism’s DNA to identify it as belonging to a particular species. For animals, the preferred barcode regions are in mitochondria — cellular organelles that power all animal life. As the authors wrote (p. 10):

The agreement of barcodes and domain experts implies that explaining the origin of the pattern of DNA barcodes would be in large part explaining the origin of species. Understanding the mechanism by which the near-universal pattern of DNA barcodes comes about would be tantamount to understanding the mechanism of speciation.

For their study, Stoeckle and Thaler relied largely on more than 5 million mitochondrial barcodes from more than 100,000 animal species, assembled by scientists worldwide over the past 15 years in the open access GenBank database maintained by the US National Center for Biotechnology Information. The two scientists used the collection to examine the range of genetic differences within and between animal species ranging from bumblebees to birds. They found surprisingly minute or little genetic variation (between 0.0% and 0.5% variance) within most animal species — but very clear genetic distinction between a given species and all others.

The authors conclude that the surprisingly little genetic variation found within each of nearly all existing animal species can only be explained by the species all being young — no more than 100,000 to 200,000 years old.

Here is the article’s “Abstract”:

More than a decade of DNA barcoding encompassing about five million specimens covering 100,000 animal species supports the generalization that mitochondrial DNA clusters largely overlap with species as defined by domain experts. Most barcode clustering reflects synonymous substitutions. What evolutionary mechanisms account for synonymous clusters being largely coincident with species? The answer depends on whether variants are phenotypically neutral. To the degree that variants are selectable, purifying selection limits variation within species and neighboring species may have distinct adaptive peaks. Phenotypically neutral variants are only subject to demographic processes—drift, lineage sorting, genetic hitchhiking, and bottlenecks. The evolution of modern humans has been studied from several disciplines with detail unique among animal species. Mitochondrial barcodes provide a commensurable way to compare modern humans to other animal species. Barcode variation in the modern human population is quantitatively similar to that within other animal species. Several convergent lines of evidence show that mitochondrial diversity in modern humans follows from sequence uniformity followed by the accumulation of largely neutral diversity during a population expansion that began approximately 100,000 years ago. A straightforward hypothesis is that the extant populations of almost all animal species have arrived at a similar result consequent to a similar process of expansion from mitochondrial uniformity within the last one to several hundred thousand years.

And again, Stoeckle and Thaler wrote (p. 22):

More approaches have been brought to bear on the emergence and outgrowth of Homo sapiens sapiens (i.e., modern humans) than any other species including full genome sequence analysis of thousands of individuals and tens of thousands of mitochondria, paleontology, anthropology, history and linguistics [61, 142-144]. The congruence of these fields supports the view that modern human mitochondria and Y chromosome originated from conditions that imposed a single sequence on these genetic elements between 100,000 and 200,000 years ago [145-147]. (p. 22)

The authors wrote in the article’s “Summary and Conclusion” (pp. 22-23):

Mostly synonymous and apparently neutral variation in mitochondria within species shows a similar quantitative pattern across the entire animal kingdom. The pattern is that that most—over 90% in the best characterized groups—of the approximately five million barcode sequences cluster into groups with between 0.0% and 0.5% variance as measured by APD [average pair-wise distance], with an average APD of 0.2%.

Modern humans are a low-average animal species in terms of the APD. The molecular clock as a heuristic marks 1% sequence divergence per million years which is consistent with evidence for a clonal stage of human mitochondria between 100,000-200,000 years ago and the 0.1% APD found in the modern human population [34, 155, 156]. A conjunction of factors could bring about the same result. However, one should not as a first impulse seek a complex and multifaceted explanation for one of the clearest, most data rich and general facts in all of evolution. The simple hypothesis is that the same explanation offered for the sequence variation found among modern humans applies equally to the modern populations of essentially all other animal species. Namely that the extant population, no matter what its current size or similarity to fossils of any age, has expanded from mitochondrial uniformity within the past 200,000 years.

Dr. Thaler observes: “Our paper strengthens the argument that the low variation in the mitochondrial DNA of modern humans also explains the similar low variation found in over 90% of living animal species — we all likely originated by similar processes and most animal species are likely young.

All this is reinforced by The Rockefeller University’s Press Release about Stoeckle and Thaler’s journal article:

Researchers report important new insights into evolution following a study of mitochondrial DNA from about 5 million specimens covering about 100,000 animal species.

Mining “big data” insights from the world’s fast-growing genetic databases and reviewing a large literature in evolutionary theory, researchers at The Rockefeller University in New York City and the Biozentrum at the University of Basel in Switzerland, published several conclusions today in the journal “Human Evolution.” Among them . . .

* The mass of evidence supports the hypothesis that most species, be it a bird or a moth or a fish, like modern humans, arose recently and have not had time to develop a lot of genetic diversity. The 0.1% average genetic diversity within humanity today corresponds to the divergence of modern humans as a distinct species about 100,000 – 200,000 years ago — not very long in evolutionary terms. The same is likely true of over 90% of species on Earth today.

* Genetically the world “is not a blurry place.” Each species has its own specific mitochondrial sequence and other members of the same species are identical or tightly similar. The research shows that species are “islands in sequence space” with few intermediate “stepping stones” surviving the evolutionary process.

In other words, Stoeckle and Thaler did not find the “missing links” — the intermediate forms that, according to the theory of evolution, developed when one species evolved into another distinct species. As Dr. Thaler notes, “Darwin struggled to understand the absence of intermediates and his questions remain fruitful [i.e., unanswered].”

Allow me to rephrase Stoeckle and Thaler’s stunning study:

  1. When a species began, its members are characterized by genetic sameness (“mitochondrial or sequence uniformity”).
  2. In the natural course of time, members of a species would develop genetic differences (“mitochrondrial variation”) at a rate (“molecular clock”) of 1% variation per million years.
  3. Using a data base of the DNA barcodes of more than 100,000 animals species, the two scientists found very little genetic variation — between 0.0% to 0.5% variance — within each species. The average intra-species genetic variation is only 0.2%. The genetic variation within the human species is even less — 0.1% — which means the human species is about 100,000 years old, younger than most other animal species.
  4. Appealing to Occam’s Razor, a simple explanation for the paucity (0.0% to 0.5%) of intra-species genetic variation is that all animal species, including humans, are very young — no more than 100,000 to 200,000 years old — and therefore did not have the millions of years to develop genetic divergence or variation.
  5. If the theory of evolution is true, we would expect to find a wide range of points-of-origin of animal species — from 100,000 years to millions of years. Instead, Stoeckle and Thaler found that all existing animal species date back no more than 200,000 years ago, which means that they share a similar originating point-in-time — “the extant populations of almost all animal species have arrived at a similar result consequent to a similar process of expansion from mitochondrial uniformity within the last one to several hundred thousand years”.
  6. Lastly, the scientists found that each species is distinct from other species, but could not find intermediate forms (“stepping stones” or missing links) between species.

Note that points 4, 5 and 6 all contradict the theory of evolution, but support the Theory of Creation —

  • That there was a point in time when God created all living things as distinct species (“after their kind” – Genesis 1:21).
  • That man was the last living thing to be created and therefore the human species is younger than other species.
  • All of which means humans and other species had not evolved over the course of millions of years;
  • Which would explain why there are no intermediate forms or missing links.

Genesis 1

21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness


22 responses to “Stunning new study found human and all animal species today originated only 100,000 to 200,000 years ago

  1. Norman L. Wherrett, Jr.

    Well, I’ll be a monkey’s uncle!

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Interesting-suggests the “Astronaut Theory”

    Liked by 2 people

  3. What a profound, and incredibly wonderful thought, that life began just as those who have read the Word of God were taught! Congratulations to both of these scientists.

    Liked by 3 people

  4. Well you won’t get an argument from me. I’m not so sure about “Hattey”. He thinks we’re descended from Basset Hounds.

    Liked by 3 people

  5. Wow, I didn’t know I was that old! Scares me!

    Liked by 2 people

  6. That is an excellent post, but much of it is over my head. However, I can cite it to explain to those who ask that that is why I am the way I am.

    Liked by 3 people

  7. Before I even got to the end of this article, I was already thinking, “So, evidence that Genesis is true!” Then…..we can go on to discussing Noah and his Ark. ……….did the 100,000-200,000 years of this reference start in Genesis….or with the Ark? I say, with the Ark…which eliminates those “intermediary links” that people are always hunting for…….it became a “new world” a “new promise” from God…..a starting point that jetisoned us into today. Maybe sounds simplistic….but I am not alone in this thought. One of our premier scientists of the day…an astronaut for the USA…believes so and has been searching for the historic ark for decades now b/c of his belief in this.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Interesting, CalGirl.

      But the Flood does not explain why all existing animals species today are no older than 200,000 years because Noah saved a pair of each species. After the Flood, presumably those animals repopulated the world. Which means their DNA barcodes would show they’re older than before the Flood, i.e., older than 200,000 years, going by the wholly-unproven assumption that the Flood took place 200k years ago.

      Liked by 3 people

  8. “…the surprisingly little genetic variation found within each of nearly all existing animal species can only be explained by the species all being young…”

    Yeah, that also kinda shoots another round of holes in the whole THEORY of evolution. Again. As the rest of the article then nicely airs out. Excellent post!

    Liked by 3 people

  9. I like science and don’t believe that it and religion should be mutually exclusive. The thing with science is that it is full of theories that we’re demanded to believe as truth.
    And more and more in this modern day I feel like science is actually proving the bible (as was mentioned recently on FOTM).
    As embarrassing as it is to admit… I’ve dabbled in the flat Earth theory. I know, I know- it’s crazy and I can see many flaws with it. However it does make me wonder- some of the most intriguing things to me have been the flight paths, and Admiral Byrd. But the new most intriguing thing to me is that I can’t find the most compelling youtube videos that I found on this about a year ago. The videos may be gone or may just be buried under all the newer contradictory videos (not unlike what’s happening with Q Anon videos- not that I necessarily believe in that either- but you can’t help but notice that we’re being flooded with videos/articles/search results trying to say it’s fake). In fact I’ve come across a video saying that 3 million flat Earth videos have been deleted (or buried) overnight.
    Anyways, the video I really liked correlated flat earth with God and the Bible. Wish I could find it to post a link here.
    If you love ‘conspiracy theories’ like I do, then check it out the flat Earth theory 🙂 If nothing else it’s a bit of fun.

    Liked by 2 people

  10. I have always believed in the ” new earth” theory, and this doesn’t change a thing. Only I believe that the earth is not hundreds of thousands of years old, but rather approximately 6-8,000 years old. This is based upon tracing back known dates and ages of people and times from the Bible and information extant that are known.
    And science is always making new discoveries that only confirm my beliefs. I am confident in my belief about the new earth, and that God told us that He created everything in 7 days and that they were literal 24 hour days.
    When He said the morning and the evening were the first day, that tells me that God understands time, and so 7 days is 7 days.

    Liked by 3 people

  11. As a Christian with a strong science background, I have no problem with this finding, assuming it is all relatively true. The reason for this is we have no comprehension of the vastness of Eternity as understood by Godhead. The truth is this was shown to me in a series of three Mystic Revelations when I was 17 years of age, when I was half-day through my first year of college. This experience eventually culminated in a poem, ‘What we learn to see’.

    Liked by 3 people

  12. Existing ‘species’ on average 100,000 years old or less, given the assumptions. These are, of course, descended from prior ‘species,’ descended from prior ‘species,’ etc.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. I am like marblenecltr, a little over my head on a lot of that, but what I can see is it all sums up to The Bible’s explanation so they just proved it. Now they will be kicked to the curb and scorned by the scientists on the left and all the non believers. Maybe not but anything that promotes God is chastised in public so I figure they will get a share of it.

    Liked by 2 people

  14. Yet more scientific “proof” of Creation, which goes to show that they’re not mutually exclusive

    But the scientists can never bring themselves to admit God created the earth and all life upon it.

    Evolution has always been bunk, because the natural “order” of things has been to DEvolve (or degrade), not evolve. Anything that’s “evolved” had to have some outside factor help, or interfere. Even man used to live 600-900 years, and with the help of supplements and modern medicine, can barely make it to 80 years today (all the centenarians you hear about, seem to do okay without it).

    And I’m still waiting to see evidence of fish that can walk on two feet (mermaids don’t have feet), or big furry animals that can fly (there should be more than just bats).

    Liked by 1 person

  15. According to the Bible, the Earth and all it contains was created 6,000 years ago.

    Any test that shows otherwise is false science.

    Honest science supports the creation totally. Dishonest science is merely trying to support Darwin’s theory, which was put together because Darwin DIDN’T WANT TO BELIEVE IN GOD. Most science is not objective, it is merely anti-God.

    Liked by 1 person

    • What so many people fail to consider is that perhaps God created a world that already had a history. Also, in the book of Job, it speaks of leviathon and behemoth. Many have translated that to mean whales and elephants, but there is a rather large number of scholars who believe those creatures to be dinosaurs, and that mankind actually lived at the same time as the dinosaurs. I have read their explanations about how it all fits together, and they make a reasonable argument for it. I also am not a scientist, but I am a Christian, and so if God tells me one thing and the world’s scientists tell me another, there is little doubt as to whom I am going to believe.
      It does seem like the more the scientists dig, the more of God’s involvement they confirm.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s