Why can't S.E. Asians who survived the Toba Explosion 75,000 BP, be considered descendents of H.erectus?

Question

...Putting aside the iron-clad "Out of Africa" theory for the moment!

After all, wasn't "Java Man" (27,000 BP) a H.erectus?

This would imply that H.sapiens could cross mate with H.erectus, and still produce viable offspring...

Why not?

Answer 1

Please explain why this would imply H.sapiens could cross mate with H.erectus?

----

I get that... ok, my mistake in language. I meant, how does it imply that they could mate and still produce viable offspring? There's a far wider divergence there than between sapiens sapiens and neanderthals (for the sake of argument).

Answer 2

If your point is to cast doubt on the "out of Africa" theory, your example points to the fact that different branches of the hominid family migrated at different times. There could be many reasons for these migrations - finding better food sources, better climates come to mind. Maybe they were just curious, like the  bear that weInt over the mountain.

I see no reason to doubt that all living humans are descended from a single human ancestor, which means we are descended from a single ancestral pair (but they weren't named Adam and Eve and lived more than 6,000 years ago!).

Answer 3

When it would happen that from time to time species would interbreed, the result would be hybrids that couldn't. The genetic markers, although similar in quantity, just aren't the same. In the primate kingdom, the chimpanzee has the largest testicles and the human has the longer p***s. Both having developed by natural selection, are still definitive differences among many that really are just a small part of the picture. Bonzo still has one less piece on the nuclear level than we do and the ones he has are just too different to be compatible even with a xenodocheionologist working the splice kit. Zoopery, as Johnathan Brandmier will state as a ambitious objective from his reports and music in the 80's can be dangerous on the physical level and disastrous on an not so incredible number of others. Didymitus generally is not an indication of micronoetic levels. But it can be the result of luctferous lifestyles and behavior. Or a deftly placed size 14 shoe for that matter. Still, all the answers as you might suspect are found in the genes (jeans;)

Answer 4

Because anything before Jock Tampson was an Ape, as you well know. Homo erectus, was, Pithecanthropus erectus, until someone decided it would be alright to change his name and slot him in as a missing link. no matter what you or anyone says, without proof, anything before human is Ape.

Answer 5

H. erectus is thought to have occupied Java from about 1,500,000 to 500,000 years ago.? So where's the 27k from.

Don't get me started on Out of Africa...

There's what looks like ancient human remains in China over 110k years old. Since they are trying to tell us we left Africa 60k years ago... I am sure one of the reasons they keep giving a late date is religious, the whole OOA fits well with the whole 'Adam and Eve' bollocks.

The current OOA theory is BS. It's remarkably easy to loose a  Mitochondrial line, and just as easy to loose a Y chromosome type. The estimate is that as many as a third of haplotypes are now extinct. Any minority contributors would be easily lost.

Out of Africa is looking pretty dodgy now after the DNA in Mungo man turned out to be so different. It will persist for a long time though, because it neatly fits the current 'see how closely related all humans are, and therefore all the same' political sentiment. And religious dogma too. To go with multi regionalism would give the people who think racial differences are real something to work with. And put more distance between Genesis and evolution.

Im my Paleoanthropolgy group, the general sentiment is that the current OOA theory is dead in the water. We are much older, about 130k years is the favourite (Levantine exodus). The 'low level of interbreeding' multi regionalism also pretty popular.

Look at Chinese (Sinodontic) teeth. They are the same shape as the Chinese Homo Erectus... rant.

After thought.

I did some reading on the survival of the native Americans in the South American countries, it was a DNA study into Mt DNA and Y chromosomes to see how much of the population had native blood. Well, in one country they found absolutely no native Y chromosomes, even though the Mt DNA survived in a fairly large amount. So, it's easy to loose a whole haplotype then.

Answer 6

Mathilda is right,  Asians typically have latter day Homo erectus teeth & of course Mungo man (found in Australia) , while appearing to be a modern sapien, doesn't have the MtDNA of what OOA proponets like to call Eve. The OOA group have circled the wagons & are currently attacking & obscuring information that suggests some degree of gene introgression from both neandertal & erectus into the sapien line.  The later erectus was considerably more evolved than the ones that left Africa.

No one has adequately explained the sudden appearance of MCPH1 in chromosome 8 ~ 37,000 yrs ago (a gene that is at least 1.1 million yrs old) in the sapiens migrating out of Africa.  This gene is very rare in sub Saharan Africa.  Another is... where did RH negative blood type come from?

I have to give Mathilda credit for raising that question in a previous post.  

After thought:

The RHD silent allel (Rhesus factor) occurs among ~ 45% of the Basque & is common among most of the European population. However only 1 in 10,000 non Europeans have this gene.  The Basque are among the earliest sapien settlers of Europe.

Neandertal with the "A" shaped rib cage & extremely robust muscle structure is considered an evolved Homo erectus as is Sapien... I see no reason to suggest they could not interbreed. Other than skull shape, the erectus can easily be mistaken for a modern sapien.

Jack: many currently existing species have been determined to be hybrids. See "gene introgression." DNA is a wonderful tool.