Poll! Out of Africa migration theory (origin of Humans) - Do you support it?

[Hektor12]

There could have been other human-like species that left Africa earlier than did Sapiens. What is strange is that the supposedly most advanced of them all(Sapiens) left Africa quite late.

For example, you can examine modern range of human-like creatures.

[Universe]

For example, you can examine modern range of human-like creatures.

?

[Tenma de Pegasus]

Yes

[Hektor12]

?

[Universe]

What about them should be examined? I didn't put it well, by 'human like species' I meant the homo genus : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo

[Richmondbread]

NO

Sent from my G9 PRO using Tapatalk

[Richmondbread]

I had an older thread on this: https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...nal-hypothesis


Personally, I think it has a lot of merits. We already know paternal and maternal lineages come out of Africa... and into Europe. That already encompasses thousands of years of migration. It's believed modern Humans were evolving in Africa and migrated eventually to Europe, Asia, etc. while Neanderthals were always in Europe/West Asia.

Not according to the Bible. Our origins are in the middle east, somewhere near the Tigres and Euphrates. Neanderthals were fully human and also evolution is a fable.

Sent from my G9 PRO using Tapatalk

[Gallop]

Until proven otherwise.

I read recently that it is possible that Neanderthals may have raided Africa contrary to what was believed to date, I can't find the link.

[Creoda]

I am aware this is a talking point sometimes used by SJWs, (I am not a SJW), but saying humanity originated from Africa isn't same as thinking to be African. Living in Europe for 50,000 years is enough to alter DNA. Dna tests confirm Europeans and Africans aren't genetically the same.
The problem is SJW types use this theory to say 'we're all the same so there's no problem with being replaced with Africans!', but that doesn't necessarily mean the premise by itself is incorrect.

I'm talking about the purposeful use of 'we' and 'our' with reference to archaic humans, who had not yet even picked up the Neanderthal ancestry we supposedly have.

Regardless of where the bulk ancestry of so-called humans/sub-humans evolved, Europeans are not Africans, anymore than they are Pangaean voles, or whatever.

[Cleitus]

Bearers of haplogroup A (i.e. absence of the defining mutation of haplogroup BT) have been found in Southern Africa's hunter-gatherer inhabited areas, especially among the San people.

By the definition of haplogroup A as "non-BT", it is almost completely restricted to Africa, though a very small handful of bearers have been reported in Europe and Western Asia.

Haplogroup A is a human Y-chromosome DNA haplogroup, which includes all living human Y chromosomes which do not belong to haplogroup BT. Bearers of extant sub-clades of haplogroup A are almost exclusively found in Africa (or among descendants of populations which have recently left Africa), in contrast with haplogroup BT, bearers of which participated in the Out of Africa migration of anatomically modern humans.