The Geographical Origins of Modern Humans

In a recent discussion with Mikemikev I made the argument that modern humans originated in Africa with minimal to no interbreeding with archaic humans in various regions. Mikemikev challenged this notion postulating a Multiregional model of human origins that saw modern humans evolving in various places and interbreeding with archaic humans to create separate races.

I cited several sources backing up my argument:

Mikemikev made the following argument:

He claimed that Chris Stringer, one of the sources I cited from Wikipedia, now agreed with him based on personal communication:

Mikemikev asked me to contact Stringer myself to see if his claims were true. I did so and posted the following exchanges:

I'm giving Mikemikev the opportunity to provide his personal exchanges with Chris Stringer as well as provide sources that he believes back up his arguments. The purpose of this thread is to continue that debate with a new direction.

I maintain the following arguments:

1. Modern humans evolved in Africa.

2. Interbreeding with archaic humans was minimal.

3. There wasn't enough time for major differences in intelligence to develop.

4. Modern human genetic variation does not partition in to races.

 

cool post bro

- - - Updated - - -

I already responded to this. Do I have to repeat myself again and again? Why do you copy paste the same question and not the answer you were given? That's propaganda not debate.

 

You didn't provide a source supporting your argument and you didn't provide your email exchange with Chris Stringer. I linked to our other conversation and quoted you. I see nothing for you to complain about.

 

It seems to me that i see alot of research being done to prove race supremecy(white and black)at least we know you have one commonality

 

Really?!And we wonder why theres so much hate in the world.Everyone's trying to prove how much better they are than someone else.Intelligence takes many forms and many shades it even takes the form of poor people.Life experiences make us who we are.We are taught to believe many things from the time we are born,that doesn't mean new things cant be learned and new ideas formed.Seeing someone elses point of view and rethinking our own doesn't make us weak it makes us smarter.

 

I disagree that modern Humans evolved in Africa. This does not mean that people in Africa did not evolve. They did but on a slower pace due to their environment than the ones that evolved outside of Africa. The evidence is that people outside of Africa were able to easily manipulate the African population into slaves. This would not have happened if modern humans did originate in Africa.

 

Enough political correctness already......time for some twuth!


'Every person is a product of the times he lives in. We all believe that our values are objective and moral, but that cannot be true because every generation believes that, yet they have vastly conflicting values. Only a few hundred years ago our ancestors found nothing objectionable about owning and selling other people, and some millenniums prior to that the main course at dinner might be a member of a neighboring tribe. Had we lived then, there is little doubt we would not have objected. Several hundred years from now a future generation is likely to consider our values to be as ignorant and barbaric as we consider those of our predecessors.
    I mention this to encourage the reader to jettison, or at least rein in, the opinions, attitudes, and beliefs that he has picked up during his life, because in this book many of them will be disputed. Step out of your times, as though you had just arrived on this planet, and weigh the evidence and reasoning presented. It is nearly impossible to arrive at the truth by listening to only one side of the story, and you are about to hear another side.
    Much of what people are told in schools and in the media today just isn’t so. There are knowledgeable people who know it isn’t so, but they dare not say anything. The rest of us live in this sea of misinformation. Since almost everyone believes the prevailing misinformation, we assume it must be true. So we act on it, making important decisions about our lives, decisions that all too often are disastrous.
    Now, in my waning years, I can see no contribution I could make to the next generation more important than to challenge what I believe to be at least some of these erroneous beliefs. To encourage the dissemination of this book, it is being published without royalties and may be copied, with attribution, without liability to the author. I hope to make it available on the internet without charge, as I have done with my other books.
    Very little is held back in this book. 2 An effort was made to avoid unnecessary insensitivity, but shocking facts, even facts that some will find offensive, are displayed right out in the open where they cannot be missed. I have tried to be as accurate as possible, though I would be amazed if there were no mistakes, as so much ground is covered and speculation was required to fill in gaps in the evidence. Technical language is avoided where possible and explained where used. Large amounts of additional material could have been included, but after working on this almost full time for about four years, I’ve decided it’s time to call it quits.' Richard D. Fuerle

http://erectuswalksamongst.us/

 

People were enslaved all around the world. That has nothing to do with the Out of Africa theory of modern human origins.

That website is nothing but racist garbage. There is no element of truth to it.

These webpages are much better.

http://www.understandingrace.org/about/

http://www.pbs.org/race/000_General/000_00-Home.htm

 

Thought it was pretty well known that our ancestors were from Africa, and that is actually where there is the greatest genetic diversity, but there were multiple migrations out of Africa with subspecies and species development (e.g. neanderthals, homo floresiensis). I think it's pretty well genetically documented that we interbred with neanderthals and some of us have genes from that subspecies. As far as interbreeding with archaic humans, not sure what you mean. I'm fairly certain people (*)(*)(*)(*)ed everything they could catch with an orifice at one point or another, knowing how people are, but strictly speaking other species shouldn't produce viable fertile offspring so they wouldn't contribute to contemporary gene pools.

 

By archaic humans I'm referring to subspecies descended from hominids such as Neanderthal. There was some interbreeding with modern humans but not much, certainly not enough to be of evolutionary significance.

 

Race identity was created to cause seperation among people.people are so dependent on others thinking so the majority went along with it.slaves were black because they tried white slaves but white slaves blended in with that society too well,making it easier for them to run. My opinion is once the slaves were freed there were devils who felt it was and still is their duty to rid dociety of this "impure" race brfore they could populate.

 

I am not saying any race is anymore pure then the other.we as humans decide how pure or impure we are as people.how much brain chemical,what area of the world we come from,what we eat,IQ,or the color of our skin does not determine purity.if that were the case then priests wouldnt be molesting little boys.its a fact that priests are molesting little boys.WAKE UP PEOPLE IN THIS WORLD!!we are sometimes our own worst enemy which in turn makes others our enemy as well.

 

Africa has the greatest genetic diversity because so many of them die per year. Moist of us have Neanderthal DNA, not some of us.

 

The squalid hell hole of Africa...............http://www.snouts-in-the-trough.com/archives/13175

Not quite the paradise that we allegedly stole slaves from so long ago.....it is and always has been a hell hole....the (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*) of the world.

BTW.......Why do the people of Japan have some of the longest average lifespans despite being one of the least genetically diverse, most homogenous nationalities?

 

Mitochondrial DNA is a DNA that is only inherited from mother to child, and it tracks back to the most recent common female ancestor of all humans (Mitochondrial Eve).



Ages of the major Haplotypes.

These are the estimated dates, some of the oldest could be as much as 17,000 years out, the youngest a couple of thousand. It also varies from study to study.

L0 170,000 years African, Mitochondrial EVE
L1 142,000 years African
L2 92,000 years African
L3 100,000 years African, out of Africa haplogroup.
N 63,300 years Europe (100k, my estimate)
M 64,800 years S W Asia into Asia, East Africa (100k, my estimate)
A 32,300 years Asia
R 61,000 years Near East
HV 50,000 years Europe
H 40,000 years Europe into the near East
V 13,600 years Europe
T J 50,000 years
J 34,400 years Near East into Europe
T 11,000 years Near East into Europe
U 51,700 years Eurasia, now mostly in North Africa
CZ 47,000 years Eurasia
C 28,300 years Asia into America
D 33,300 years Asia into America
K 15,000 years Europe
I 30,000 years Eurasia
E ? South Asia and Pacific
G ? East Asia
Q 50,000 years South East Asia and Pacific
Z ? Central Asia
S ? Aborigines
W ? Northern Eurasia, rare in S E Asia
X 30,000 years Europe into America
Y ? Asia

https://mathildasanthropologyblog.wordpress.com/2008/06/16/mitochondrial-dna-haplotypes-for-dummies/

 

MtDNA is not population history since its not a neutral marker:

Hawks, 2006

 

Homo sapiens had an exclusive African origin, but anatomical modernity didn't because there was gene flow connecting all Old-World populations throughout the Pleistocene. So this means Neanderthals contributed to AMH.

 

"Racist garbage". Have you ever read the book to say that it's "racist garbage"?

 

To what extent does the Neanderthal ancestry exhibit phenotypic expression in Anatomically Modern Humans though?

 

Yes, I have. The author cites Rushton 16 times in its references. Rushton's pseudoscience has been refuted.

There are several other racists cited in the book including Arthur Jensen, Richard Lynn, Steve Sailer and Carleton Coon.

I am getting Stringer's book Lone Survivors tomorrow. That's a real book on human evolution from a credible scholar.

 

Brace has covered a lot on dental-size reduction. Teeth first started becoming smaller in Europe 100,000 years ago. What palaeo-anthropologists call anatomical modernity is basically just reduction in robusticity.

- Brace, C. Loring. (1995). "Biocultural Interaction and the Mechanism of Mosaic Evolution in the Emergence of 'Modern' Morphology". American Anthropologist. 97(4). pp. 711-721.

 

What does that have to do with Neanderthal though? I'm asking specifically about neanderthal ancestry contributing to the anatomy of modern humans. As far as I know the interbreeding with Neanderthal did not result in any evolutionary changes in non-Africans.

 

"Modern" traits appeared in different places at different times and then spread through gene flow and cultural practises. A lot of these modern traits first show in the African fossil record, but some show first in West Eurasia, East Asia etc. A Neanderthal example is reduction in dental-size - which later spread to other areas across the globe from West Eurasia during the Late Pleistocene.

- Caspari, R., Wolpoff, M, H. (2013). "The Process of Modern Human Origins: The Evolutionary and Demographic Changes Giving Rise to Modern Humans". In: Smith, F. H & Ahern, J. C. M. (eds.). The Origins of Modern Humans: Biology Reconsidered. New York: Wiley.

 

They're smart, practical, disciplined, non-violent and ultra-hygienic. In short, they don't overeat and they don't kill each other.They are THE longest living people with 50,000 over 100 years old in a population less than 2 and 1/2 that of the U.S.

 

I mean their population is less than half ours