Out Of Africa

E

Eflex tha Vybe Scientist

Registered Senior Member
ok, from what I know, based on mitochondrial DNA,
Homo Sapiens Sapiens arose from Africa circa 120,000 years ago and migrated/populated the planet.

There's always been some alternate hypothesis, such as seperate pockets of hss arising on different parts of the planet etc....
But Ive never seen any genetic evidence that disproves the Out Of Africa theory.

I mean, the oldest artifacts, bones, and other acheological evidence point to Africa as the birth of humanity.
http://www.warmafrica.com/index/geo/9/cat/1/a/a/artid/244

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3814

So, my question is, has anybody seen a string of studies that disprove this theory?
 
My World Almanac depicts that artifacts were also found in Germany, some evidence also point to Mesopotamia in Asia.
" Homo sapiens neandertalensis lived in Europe and the Mideast between 150,000 and 35,000 years ago. Neandertals coexisted with H.sapiens (archaic) and early H.sapiens sapiens. It is not known whether he was of the same species and disappeared into the H.sapiens sapiens gene pool or he may have been crowded out of existence (killed off) by the H.sapien sapien. Recent DNA studies have indicated that the neandertal was an entirely different species and did not merge into the H. sapiens sapiens gene pool. Brain sizes averaged larger than modern man at about 1450cc but the head was shaped differently, being longer and lower than modern man. His nose was large and was different from modern man in structure. He was a massive man at about 5'6" tall with an extremely heavy skeleton that showed attachments for massive muscles. He was far stronger than modern man. His jaw was massive and he had a receding forehead, like erectus".
http://www.onelife.com/evolve/manev.html

Nobody can really say for sure, I have read many books saying different things but I bet they lived between Africa and North East Euroasia. By the way Homo sapiens sapiens lived 200,000 yeras ago till present but not sure idf secluded only to Africa.However since their ancestors were present in Euroasia it possible some lived there as well. What has this really got to do with anything?
 
I think the out of africa theory is currently adjusted to incorporate the aspect of interbreeding with local populations. Also there is some slight confusion about mentioning out of africa because it is also used for hominin evolution.
 
The "Out of Africa" model of HSS' origins has won out (over Multireginalism) on a superior evidentiary basis. Only the uniformed or habitually illogical try to keep propping MR up; usually in defense of "racialist" views.

Cheers.
 
Last edited:
New kids don't decide their ancestry, however... it's the other way around. In that regard, MR had it's place.
 
Read this then if you think you are up to date with the newest things:

Dennell R, Roebroeks W. Related Articles, Links
An Asian perspective on early human dispersal from Africa.
Nature. 2005 Dec 22;438(7071):1099-104. Review.

You will also notice there is a difference between popular use of out of africa and scientific use.
 
Last edited:
The article requires Nature subscriber access, and the article discusses Homo Erectus era hominid development anyway (1.8m - 0.5m years ago). Here's what one anthropology enthusiast who did have access had to say about it though:

[...] Robin Dennell and Wil Roebroeks had a provocative paper exploring the possibility that early humans (i.e. Homo erectus) originated in Asia rather than Africa.

The paper is all speculation of course; there is no evidence of any earlier hominid in Asia.
Click to expand...
01/09/06 essay here.
 
The "Out of Africa" model is where WE, Homo Sapiens Sapiens came from; OUR ancestors, not a miscellany of other irrelevant hominids evolving elsewhere.

I suggest that whatever you were inferring I had once not grasped was, and still is, well beyond your ability to articulate.

=/
 
It seems to me that you are telling me that one of the top journals in biology doesn't have capable editors that know what the proper usage of the 'out of africa' theory is. But you apparently do.
 
No, I'm telling you that this "new kid on the block" article which you directed me to read (but which I have no access to) is thought to be insubstantial by someone who has access to it, and, that you do not know me so you are in no position to make judgements of me, or comparisons to others who you likely do not know.

If you are not simply confused, you are making an extraordinary effort to have it appear to be so.

All the best to you, anyway.
 
qwerty mob said:
The "Out of Africa" model of HSS' origins has won out (over Multireginalism) on a superior evidentiary basis. Only the uniformed or habitually illogical try to keep propping MR up; usually in defense of "racialist" views.

Cheers.
Click to expand...

exactly.

im not gonna debate online with someone who simply disputes the Out Of Africa theory with a couple of artifacts in Germany or with some vague early hominin findings.

lets stick to the facts and then, perhaps the truth will emerge
 
qwerty mob said:
No, I'm telling you that this "new kid on the block" article which you directed me to read (but which I have no access to) is thought to be insubstantial by someone who has access to it, and, that you do not know me so you are in no position to make judgements of me, or comparisons to others who you likely do not know.

If you are not simply confused, you are making an extraordinary effort to have it appear to be so.

All the best to you, anyway.
Click to expand...


I have access to it also. I assessed it as being quite interesting. As a matter of fact I used to think that Out of Africa was the standard until I started reading up on the literature last week. It isn't the only article to be found. Try pubmed. Try doing a search.

I was a week ago were you are now. Now forget about the arrogance and just read. That's all. Don't be afraid to open your mind.
 
I enjoy laughing at how some people think the Out of Africa theory has "won" simply because it has been repeated so many times, while the Multi-Regional theory is less well known but explains the rapid diversity and recently discovered fossil records. This is sort of like saying that Britney Spears is a great composer simply because many people have heard her music, and Mozart is inferior because fewer know his work and appreciate it.
 
firecross said:
This is sort of like saying that Britney Spears is a great composer simply because many people have heard her music, and Mozart is inferior because fewer know his work and appreciate it.
Click to expand...

yes that is a perfect analogy.
:bugeye:

firecross said:
the Multi-Regional theory is less well known but explains the rapid diversity and recently discovered fossil records.
Click to expand...
do you care to elaborate? you continue to state info about these "fossil records"
and yet I see no links, studies or proof.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top