Is this another nail in the lid of the 'recently out of Africa' theory?

Question

Joncom, I've read genetics papers that date the 'out of Africa' split between Europeans/East Asians and Australoids at 120k years or so, and the split of Europeans and Asians at 60k. Half of my reading is chasing up haplotype research.

Answer 1

I don't think in and of itself it disproves Out of Africa theory. We've long known that intelligent hominids spread throughout the globe. We also know Neanderthals were quite intelligent--they buried their dead with ornamentation, and had hyoid bones, indicated they could likely speak. The multi-regional hypothesis supporters have long asked the question of how modern humans could kill off all of the Homo erectus individuals all over the globe--a species that had been around for hundreds of thousands of years. Since we don't know who made these shells, they could have been made by early modern humans in Morocco, or Homo erectus, or Neanderthals. No matter which group, it doesn't change our understanding too much about those other groups. Each side can use it as support for its own arguments.

Answer 2

No. Speaking as a biologist to a social scientist; we have the evidence. Two convergent lines of genetic evidence that social science disputes because, frankly, they do not have the training to appreciate it.

Answer 3

I've been watching this with some interest as I see evidence from both sides of the arguement that need clairification & more investigation. Both the OOA & regional hypothesis need more investigation.  I don't find nearly the open mindedness I'd like to see from either side of the arguement.

The human genome contains many mysteries that need to be investigated in detail & both sides tend to grasp the slightest straw that "may" support their hypothesis.  

I personally "suspect" 3 & possibly 4 large migrations out of Africa extending back to 100,000 + yrs ago.  In addition I suspect a much larger migration from Asia to Europe than do either of the sides.  I do not doubt that the OOA group is influenced by political correctness & the desire to foist a "no difference" philosophy on the World, but they do have some supporting evidence.

Until we are able to examine Homo erectus & Homo neandertal DNA in detail, we will not know if they did have any gene(s) introgression to & from sapien.  Many claims from both sides need vetting & more study.  I think scientific disagreement is a good thing for both the fields of biology & anthropology, as it will push further inquiry.  Face it, we'd not be sequencing ancient neandertal DNA if not for these arguements. I look forward to the day we start to work on H erectus DNA.  I suspect some breakthroughs in the near future will allow us to do that.

I also suspect the tribes in Southern & South Western Africa will be a good control group for determining what genes were  "picked up" outside of Africa... I see no evidence of large migrations back to sub saharan Africa from Asia or Europe.

Answer 4

There is as yet no positve date for the emergence of Modern Human.

The last I read was that we emerged from the Great Rift Valley in Africa before the last Ice Age, and that the Congo Basin was our 'Home Base'.

From skulls found, it appears that the original Modern Man (Homo Sapien Sapiens) was indistinguishable from us now and indeed get a time machine and bring one forward, put him in a suit and you would not know the difference.

We would originally have had to be black or we would not have survived, and indeed there is residual skin melanine in white people, as there is a denser melanine in black peoples.

The indicators too are that the full formation of Modern Man happened almost at once (theories are that the Rift Valley is Radio Active, thus speeding up possible mutations).

The onset of the Ice Age meant that the African Continent literally dried up. No Congo Basin just Desert (smacks of the Garden of Eden Story).

As the sea level dropped because of the formation of 2 mile thick ice (north and south of the tropics) it follows that Modern Man would migrate.

They migration would follow three routes:

1. Exposed Straits of Gibralter (dry cliff land with an atlantic scarp slope and dry mediteranean valley dip slope. 2. What is now Sinia, Jordan and Israel. 3. Across the dried up Red Sea to Yemen (Island Hopping).

Modern Man had exactly the same mental capacities as now, and indeed knew very well how to handle tools and materials available, so boats are very possible.

My thoughts are that we were already venturing into Europe although tribal pressures would have been small.

However, The great drought that lasted throughout the last Ice Age would have forced survival migration.

Spain and Sinia would have been intractable desert; the only way out would be via Yemen.

Bear in mind too that there would have been years of famine, and Modern Man forced to live on the African Coast.

The escape across to Yemen would have been the last fling of a truly desperate endangered species (call it the tribe of Adam, on the Eve of the massive expansion).

Neanderthals were too a clever species, but trusting. They got in our way!.

So the beads are quite possibly ours, and frankly could be anywhere in Africa, the islands and Iberia.

Answer 5

I don't think it is a nail because those that believe it, believe it for narrowly defined reasons and seem to refuse to look at the subject objectively IMO.  They want Out of Africa to be true, it seems to me.   I personally don't care that much beyond a scientific interest but can't help but wonder if there is some Eurasian influence that seems to get ignored by the "Out of Africa" ferver.

The Out of Africa Theory has irritated me for decades because it pretends there is a one way gate at the Sinai where nothing can move back from Asia.  Geneticists may have evidence of a certain population from Africa that moved 120,000 years ago but they have to assume they understand the migration of previous people as well as other times that were important in our species development are ignored.  The predominance of fossils from the African Rift has more to do with geology than anything else.  As a geologist, I understand that fossils of land animals are very rare.  If an animal dies in an area of deposition, it tends to buried continuously for millions of years.  If it dies in an area of erosion, it might get buried for a while but eventually its remains will be washed downstream, dispersed and destroyed.  The rift is very unusual becuase there are relatively recent exposures of suitable soil of suitable age.

Answer 6

Theories come and theories go, and where they come from nobody knows.

Answer 7

I would think that since the Iberian Peninsula was connected to Northern Africa long ago, and Tunisia was connected to Sicily until more recently, these painted shell beads were made by Neanderthals. Neanderthals made jewelry, musical instruments, and rather complex tools...

Additionally, I have seen rock-art from Tata, Hungary that has been carbon-dated to 100,000 BP, and as we know, Cro-Magnon hadn't entered Europe until 45,000 BP, at the earliest. So it would have to have been produced by Neanderthals, since they were the only ones that we know of, that lived in the European/North African region at that time...

Answer 8

Just because it was carbon dated doesn't mean it was painted then. Was the paint carbon dated?