Out-of-Africa versus Multiregional hypothesis.

[Luso]

Which do you think? Obviously more evidence is pointed to the Out-of-Africa theory, however, it isn't 100% confirmed.

Simply put, in the Out-of-Africa theory there is clear evidence exists that all humans originated from a small population in Africa around 200,000 years ago. The theory says, as our population expanded we migrated to new places. In these new areas we find new environmental stressors affecting behavior and physiology. This is evolution-related. Over time, our communities practically developed to meet local environment needs. Since the human population at the time was very small and without any means of quick long-distance travel, various populations were more or less separated from each other. This means the low gene flow between populations and that certain traits, whether sexually selected or naturally selected for, become more concentrated within those populations. That's why different people look so different from one another.

All haplogroups derive from one haplogroup A which is African which is why the theory is so prominent. We know all Y-haplogroups derive from Africa. All the R haplogroups derive from R that is found in Eurasians in Serbia area, mammoth hunting people (most likely) Mal'ta boy was the ancient sample that had that haplogroup. So... both R1a and R1b are associated with indo-european people from eurasian steppe, these initial mutations all started from the same region. However, not exactly as there is a 14,000 yr old Western hunter-gatherer found before indo-europeans even existed.

Many theories like Modern Human's Multiregional Roots have a few more gaps in them, and significantly less evidence to support them. Proponents of this theory essentially argue that humans are not as young as genetic evidence suggests, but we are a continuous species of H. After erectus. Notice that we weren't the first Homo people to move from Africa. H. First evolved in Africa, erectus was the first Homo species to move from Africa to S.E. Asia and China (and elsewhere) about 1 Mya ... hundreds of thousands of years before humans evolved. Multiregional origin proponents say that fossil types are minor variations over time of the same species and that H. Erectus, H. Sapiens are the same. For most scientists in this area, however, the morphological and behavioral evidence left behind in fossils and objects clearly points to distinct species, not one continuous group.


I'm wondering which one you think is correct, and why?

[Luso]

bump

[Dr_Maul]

Maybe there were other hominids already around which contributed to the gene pools of individual races but I see no reason to not believe the out of Africa theory

[Luso]

Maybe there were other hominids already around which contributed to the gene pools of individual races but I see no reason to not believe the out of Africa theory

Yeah, although the timing is uncertain genetic data-- both nuclear and mitochondrial-- indicate that modern human populations all have their origins in a single lineage that came from Africa.

[Luso]

bump

[alnortedelsur]

Multiregional theory makes more sense. Only 200,000 years are not enough to explain the considerable differences in all aspects between human groups like Europeans or East Asians with Sub Saharian Africans.

[Ülev]

yes, if it means "out" of Africa and destroying Neanderthal civilisation

[lei.talk]

if there are any japanese or chinese here,
they can present an articulate explaination of the separate evolution
of the major races

as they were taught from early school through doctoral levels.

they are certain
they did not evolve from negroes.

[Luso]

if there are any japanese or chinese here,
they can present an articulate explaination of the separate evolution
of the major races

as they were taught from early school through doctoral levels.

they are certain
they did not evolve from negroes.

Yeah I get that... however-- I feel that a good deal of the hypothesis is based on Chinese bias (and highly financed work to prove) that they are special snowflakes that did not come out of Africa just like the other homo sapiens. On the contrary, it would not surprise me a bit if many different species were scattered across Eurasia of primeval hominid species which survived a long time before modern human beings emerged and wiped them (and fucked them) from existence. That is how I see it.

[Luso]

Multiregional theory makes more sense. Only 200,000 years are not enough to explain the considerable differences in all aspects between human groups like Europeans or East Asians with Sub Saharian Africans.

I have read a lot about the Multiregional Theory, but it is hard for me, personally, to accept that the genetic evidence combined with hominine fossils has evolved concurrently and identically across the globe. For instance, how do you explain that all haplogroups originated from one place in Africa?