What's the Greatest Evidence Against the "Out of Africa" Theory?

I don't want religious tomfoolery or hocus pocus, I just want to know why some evolutionary biologists reject "Out of Africa Theory" and why other evolutionary biologists embrace it.

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    How did Aboriginals get from Africa to Australia with no knowledge of ship building technology?!?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      They had boats. So did Neanderthals and homosexual erectus.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The sea level was lower and there was really only the small gap between the landmass roughly where PNG is to cross. It wouldn’t have been the long sea journey it is today, and early humans were probably pretty ok at sailing anyway.
      OOA in the popular form, where humans evolved to modernity in Africa then went out and colonised the world is bunk, and it’s not accepted by any but the die hard leftist types these days.
      What’s probably more like the truth is that there were multiple species of hominids evolving over a large range, and a VERY distant ancestor of one type left Africa, and encountered various other groups and varying degrees of mixing and gene flow have created what we have today. What we have today is a group of related subspecies with fuzzy boundaries. So for example the Bantu are some of that ‘leaver’ with no real header or denisovan (bar some backwash) but with a lot of erectus admixture. Whatever peking man was would have been good to study. We were probably a large ‘overgroup’ with regionally differentiated and variably mixed subspecies up until the modern age, where more mixing has fuzzed the boundaries more. There were no doubt a lot of hominid subspecies we haven’t found yet (Flores cave lot for example.)
      There is no doubt that there are VERY old hominid fossils in china, and that modern humans seem to have very old roots in the Levant. Some of us think that modern humans arose in that levant region, and then migrated back down and into Africa. Then you’ve got groups like the Khoisan who are a very old branch on the tree as well. But you look at a Bantu and a Khoisan and these are very different genetically.
      It’s all very interesting and it’s a shame that politics and ideology doesn’t allow full study

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Once the west dies, I can see the Chinese finally doing the research just to distance itself from the ruined slums of Europe and the USA

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    West Eurasian dna and how the oldest modern human remains are found in Eurasia

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Wasn't there some human remains found in Sicily that are about 11,000 years old? It completely discredits our common understanding of human history.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        11,000 years old is pretty recent, anon. Every continent was already inhabited by that point.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      good to know that Morocco is now Eurasia.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jebel_Irhoud

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You're the troon schizo lol, Morrocans may be shit skins but they still are 75%+ west Eurasian rape babies

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          The earliest human remains we have were found in Morocco. The earliest human remains we've found in Eurasia aren't even close to 300,000 years old.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            And they were Caucasoid, there's no way that west Eurasians developed in Morocco since they do not have the highest levels of said DNA that Euros and Arabs have

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            The archeological record does not lie. That DNA may have been introduced from interbreeding with Neanderthals.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >China 40k years ago
            >Mfw we have a 300k year old skull that is from a person with partial homosexual Sapien ancestry in modern China
            You know Out of Africa refers to a SPECIFIC theory right?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Regardless of the true origins of the homosexual Sapiens as a species 300k years ago, anatomically modern humans, that appeared around 80k to 70k years ago are definitely from Africa, as all genetic evidence points towards. All of human population descends from 2 or 3 migration waves out of Africa around 60k years ago or a bit earlier.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Bantu’s are from the first wave out of the horn, we might be from the region Ethiopia might be in now, but we have little relation to the Blacks who have substantial pygmy dna. Even Ethiopians dont cluster with the bantu’s

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            You are right, I should have been clearer.
            >All of the [non-African] human population descends from 2 or 3 migration waves out of Africa around 60k years ago or a bit earlier.
            Fixed.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Thank you for clearing that up for me

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Jebel Irhoud wasn't related to modern Moroccans you moron.

          https://i.imgur.com/pGxbELl.png

          I don't want religious tomfoolery or hocus pocus, I just want to know why some evolutionary biologists reject "Out of Africa Theory" and why other evolutionary biologists embrace it.

          There's nothing extremely concise. The oldest fossil evidence is 300,000 years old in Africa, the oldest genetic evidence suggests modern humans evolved around 350,000 years ago, all the oldest populations of humans alive today are in isolated pockets of Africa, etc.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Future DNA is going to be insane just imagine all the Melungeons. Haplogroup e-m2 but 99.9% Anglo Saxon.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >the Greatest Evidence
    someone in trump general on /misc/ called it fake

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      i believe

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    There is no evidence. The strongest argument against Out of Africa (the multiregional hypothesis) is now basically reduced to a weaker form of Out of Africa.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Jesus(pbuh) knows best

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Out of Africa is western linear thought and an earth centric universe. You have one starting point and while that may split it will end in one point. They refuse to account for infinate points of origin on this planet and universe or others. They are sun around flat earthers

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      moron

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Neanderthals and sapiens are one species.

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    neanderthals were smarter than Black folk

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Tl;dr I think the points derived from the OoA theory don't take time scales and evolution into account.

    To expand on this a little and speak to some of the other arguments that often come up with the OoA theory, I think it's often misinterpreted by people who are trying to use it to support their own ideas that don't really hold water/are reactionary. An example of this is the common phrase, "we're all one race/species, we all have a single origin (Africa)". What they're missing is the large time scales we're playing with here. The first evidence of homosexual Erectus leaving Africa is around 1.6m years ago. They may have further refined into H. Neanderthalis. homosexual Sapiens followed around 90,000 years (or 4,500 generations) ago. That's a lot of time for people to change and evolve. When we look at taxonomy of other species, crows for instance, we see a wide range in subspecies that are all separated by small things, such as behavior or squawk, however, we don't have this with humans (probably for political reasons). I think what happened was that we all came from Africa, but at different times, and have evolved differently since then, like the Galapagos tortoise, or how african americans are significantly differently built than african africans.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      But the different races of people are homosexual sapiens, not homosexual erectus, so it's irrelevant how long ago homosexual erectus left Africa.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Correct, I didn't really connect those thoughts. I think what we're missing is further codifying of H. Sapiens, much like H. Erectus and Neanderthalis. A way to do so could be based on when they left Africa.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *