/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12657589
Prove to me Out of Africa is right

You mean, we didn't descend from Hyperborean giants?

Why would you talk about any race related topic on this shit site? /pol/-shills are everywhere and they’re way dumber and more biased than even social justice warriors are. it’s like discussing evolution on a creationist website

>>12659129
but /sci/ IS a creationist website, anon

>>12657589
The only problem I have with people who are anti-OOA is that they argue in bad faith, and solely want to disprove because they want to believe their race came first for whatever reason.

Isn't the only reason the out of africa theory exists is just because the oldest human fossils we've found were in africa? Was only a handful of them too. Personally I just don't think that's enough to state it as fact and dismiss all other theories as disproven.

>>12657589
All the evidence says out of Africa is true.

>>12657589
Humans arrived in Australia before they left Africa.

>>12657589
Out of africa doesn't mean we all come from the same source.

>>12659978
What a few skeletons?

whats the point of walking for thousands of kilometers when they had everything in africa ?

>>12660362
Same reasons people went to America.
Same reasons people want to go to Mars.

>>12660367
1/10 bait

>>12659897
weak bait

>>12660376
What? How do you think that's bait?
>>12660379
You too.

>>12660367
shit bait

>>12660380
they went to the americas for monetary reasons. nobody in a position of power wants to go to mars, only sci-fi obsessed zoomers

>>12660388
That is one of the reasons.
Another reason is that it was easier to start a new system than it was to reform or rip up and replace the established one.
>nobody in a position of power wants to go to mars
The richest man on Earth has dedicated his life to colonizing Mars.

>>12660396
the richest man on earth can't even land a rocket currently. Mars colonization is a delusional fantasy.

The first humans had no system to speak of, so again why would walk for thousands of kilometers when they already have everything they need ?

>>12658246
/thread
imagine making up some shit then going "well this is now true until you disprove it"
and they do it with everything

>>12660380
>a few skeletons
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_human_evolution_fossils
>only the most important are shown
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recent_African_origin_of_modern_humans
>genetics
>yes skeletons too
>archeological evidence like tools

>>12660406
>first part
Yeah alright fag. Even if you're just a shitposter from /sfg/ you're still a retard.
>second part
Do you think single groups just got up and walked that far in a single lifetime? It was much more gradual back then.
They absolutely did have societies and power structures.
>>12660412
>wikipedia
Yes, the beacon of truth. They certainly don't ignore inconvenient facts.

>>12660431
>They absolutely did have societies and power structures.

you sound pretty sure. Do you have proof that hunter gatherers and societies and power structures ?

>>12660442
Tribes are still power structures. They still have people that command and people that obey. They still have ideals and beliefs of what is right and wrong. There is still a system for people to disagree with, no matter how primitive it may be.

>>12657589
Time travelers having sex with cave people to create timelike curves in the DNA messes up the map in OP image even while it can't directly refute the out of Africa hypothesis. It is well possible that the original humans came from Africa. Since the original humans would have to eventually make it into the future somehow, that would kind of explain why I have a higher opinion of black people relative to a lot of other people, if that hypothesis was correct, which it seems to be.

>>12660412
However it is misleading as the genetic groups do not have the same root.

>>12657589
equivalent of finding a single rusty bolt and a shard of glass and stating the where the wheel was invented.

>>12658246
Far more genetic diversity in Africa than out of Africa. Human skeletal remains found in Africa earlier than out of Africa

Now present your evidence.

>>12660406
>can't even land a rocket currently
Hes landed almost 100 already, this is another successful launch with an unsuccessful landing. We will be sending cargo to mars in a few years

>>12658246
There are many skeletons that form the common ancestors between what are present day chimps and humans.
There are almost none of these skeletons found elsewhere, and when they are, it's of later ancestors and diversions of the previous in Africa.
The DNA of Europeans is closer to that of middle easterners and those of the Caucasus mountains than it is africans.

So, which is more likely? Humans descended from these animals that clearly came from Africa and made a path or a story where humans came from somewhere else, left no trace whatsoever, or one where we just popped out of nowhere from an intelligent being but somehow there is a direct line of evidence to show the complete opposite?

>>12660555
Finding the skeletons in Africa could be because of many different variables. The fact is that genetically we are not the same. Out of africa could be true and we just are different genetically and came from different regions in africa but it could be just as probable that europeans emerged from the Caucuses or the steppe and we don't have finds to prove it yet. Its hard to tell but it is pretty obvious the genetic differences between continents

>>12657589
Niggers are not human.
That is not an insult. Is a scientific fact proven by geneticists.

>>12657589
If humans originate from Africa, how come there are still niggers?

>>12660611
Okay. Where did the caucuses from the steppes originate from? Artic monkeys that just happen to be capable of evolving into things that can hybradize with the rest of the world?

>>12660769
Humans may share a common ancestor but there is a point that we say what we came from is no longer human. If the primates that humans evolved from had spread out and then groups around the areas of the Caucuses, Mongolia, and Kenya all evolved into humans then several groups of humans evolved alongside one another (in a chronological sense). And if you're willing to say that humans' common ancestor migrating out of Africa counts as humans migrating out of Africa then you may as well say that humans came up out of the oceans.

>>12657589
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/05/22/europe-birthplace-mankind-not-africa-scientists-find/

>>12660185
Some of the more robust Australians could be late javan erectus. Southeast Asia is a poor area for fossil preservation. I've heard Flores man was island dwarfed erectus bit I think someone speculated it actually looked more like habilis which supposedly had died out a million years ago. There are still a lot of missing puzzle pieces.

>>12660697
wat

>>12657589
Cosmology is a branch of philosophy and history is one of humanities, not science. We can't even prove what happened in the Dark Ages or early Bronze Age, let alone our origins. For all we know we came from the dolphins, space, Greenland or caves.

So, pretty much any human origin story is basically just going to be positivist theosophy, woo-woo or just an agenda.

>>12660464
You definitely don't have high opinion of them.

>>12660950

Bait or retarded autist

>>12659129

found the social justice warrior

>>12657589
>ukulele dad rock softly plays

>>12660804
No because there are dates that are associated with the departure from Africa and they line up with our late ancestors rather than our early ones. Also, sure there are some genetic differences which can be explained by 50,000 years of separation plus a mixing of genes with neanderthals and europeans. Humans have been separated for that long, yet it only takes 10,000 years for dogs to develop from wolves--take that into consideration when saying that africans and europeans are so different. You can chalk this up to coincidence if you like but Asians are very closely related to Native Americans which would support the Africans-->Asians-->Americans dated at only a 20k year separation.

>>12661092
Why do OOA types always have such a cross to bear about sub-africans? You know modern HSS exists only on the Eurasian landmass and Mediterranean north africa, aborigines are archaic homo sapiens remnant populations, and the "rich genetic diversity of sub-africa" is just the detritus left over from human evolution. But your always going on about "muh cradle of civilization" when modern sub Saharan Africa is objectively a retarded leftover of humanities distant past.

>>12660464
I have telepathically injected gay nigger alien cum into your anus. I use 99.999% pure AIDS as lubricant. You will soon turn into a nigger then die a nigger's death with in 100 years.

>>12659129
>no arguments
>/pol/ boogeyman is everywhere
>everyone is dumb except for me
classic 90 IQ post

>>12660514
>Human
anon... I

>>12659978
Wrong, it’s actully out of fashion

>>12659129
stop with this "go back to /pol/" or "every race realist MUST be retarded" style spamming, here discussion is free
kys and go back to plebbit, in the order that you prefer.

>>12660555
>that clearly came from Africa
the problem is when

>>12660697
well you should provide more evidence instead of the dumb post you just did. Better stay silent in this situation.
I agree though that africans and non-africans are very different.

>>12657589
>>12659978
If you mean by ooa you mean model A you are clearly wrong, which is what most posers claim when they say Ooa. model c is most likely. With model b being possiable, model a is dumb and discredited.
https://www.nature.com/scitable/content/out-of-africa-versus-the-multiregional-hypothesis-6391/

>>12661468
>model c is most likely. With model b being possiable
yes I agree on this
I would place model B first though

Your map is outdated OP. The oldest Homo Sapiens in Africa aren't sub-saharan anymore.

>>12661484
>Ethiopia
interesting... I wonder if this find is matched by Y and mT haplogroups too

>>12661468
Also see.>>12660555
>>12660826
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/jul/11/no-single-birthplace-of-mankind-say-scientists
The truth is the ooa was dropped over a decade ago by anthropologists, but some how it became taboo to talk about it Becuase so many people were taught ooa in highschool and refuse to relearn anything
Dispite out of Africa actully being the racist theory and implying blacks are the beta version and euros are the improvement.
>>12660412
Did you even look at your link? Most species of proto humans is based off of less than 5 partial pieces , it’s all a big joke really.
LOOK AT THIS FUCKING IMAGE
they are naming species off of a jaw bone and a hand sometimes.
If anything, if I was religious I could make a strong argument that most of these are just genetic freaks and creationism has far more fossil evidence, it’s far stronger than what they have for most sub species.

>>12661468
what specific publication does this come from btw?
I'm interested

>>12661488
fucking checked

>>12661468
Oceania is a continuous line to the present day, with interbreeding with other populations of course.

>>12661484
San people have up to 25% admixture with a pre-erectus ghost population (one of several archaic hominids inferred genetically but without fossil remains)

>>12661444
And what is in "fashion"?

>>12661500
Oceanian Y haplogroups came from Africa later than 300000 years ago though

>>12661509
I guess he meant in the scientific community
nobody said anything after the disproval of a full ooa theory... it was said that humans have many points of origin.

>>12660555
Here is a European, and a "modern human" (ha) from Australia. Clearly no difference.

>>12661509
>Templeton himself writes that the trellis model "posits the Homo erectus population not only had the ability to move out of Africa, but also back in, resulting in recurrent genetic interchange among Old World human populations. Here, there is no split of humanity into evolutionary sublineages, and the human race cannot be portrayed as branches on an evolutionary tree; rather, the genetic closeness or distance of various human populations reflect their amount of genetic interchange and not their time of divergence from a common ancestral population. Under the trellis model, anatomically modern traits could evolve anywhere in the range of Homo erectus (which includes Africa) and subsequently spread throughout all of humanity by selection and gene flow."
Major expansions of human populations are indicated by red arrows. Genetic descent is indicated by vertical lines, and gene flow by diagonal lines. The timing of inferences lacking resolution at the 5% level and/or not validated by more than one locus are indicated by question marks.
https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/human-evolutionary-tree-417/#
>>12661493
The publication cites are all on the bottom of this link

>>12661510
You sure about that? How big is your sample size.

>>12661523
>The publication cites are all on the bottom of this link
you're right, I'm retarded and didn't read until the end
thanks

>>12661525
This is NOT an anatomically modern homo sapiens sapiens btw

>>12661525
according to these publications:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_haplogroups_in_populations_of_Oceania
there's a lot of haplo C. This of course assuming that C is actually a descendant of haplos B and A. Anyways I suspect that the connection between haplogroup BT and C is somewhat obscure...

>>12661525
also maybe a bunch of african Y haplo males emigrated to Australia and gave their DNA to the whole population, with this one remaining phenotypically what was before. Like the Y-R group blacks in Africa.

A problem here is that these are mostly small sample sizes of modern populations. A lot of the hyper robust aboriginals were killed off in the 1800s, the last full blooded Tasmanians died in the 1930s and all modern Tasmans are biracial with at least 50% European admixture. Aboriginals from the north coast have a lot of Polynesian admixture, Polynesians are very modern HSS. Look up Kow Swamp and Mungo Man for articles about the recent survival of late erectus/archaic homo sapiens in Australia.

>>12661531
see>
>>12661549
forgot to link

>>12661531
Gene research uses circular reasoning to prove its conclusions

>>12661537
I'm too lazy to find a link, but some of the early anthropologists to study Australia thought along these lines. The aboriginal population was composed of a fusion of "negritos" of relatively recent African origin, and older hominid remnants of the hyper robust Kow Swamp variety.

>>12657589

>>12660925
What I said

>>12660362
Because nomadic cultures follow where the food and water is and landscapes change and droughts happen.

>>12660362
>of walking for thousands of kilometers
They walked for like 50 kilometers each generation. It was just to get away from weird uncle Grug.

This part is strange. Why are those the only paths that converge instead of diverging ? Shouldn't the arrow to nigeria and chad point the other way ?

>>12659086
No, we did descend from Hyperborean cuties!

>>12661556
then why can't we have better gene research?
I'm sure that there's skilled geneticists out there that care for truth more than politically correct alterations of reality

>>12661484
You map is outdated. In Germany they found a missing link of apes to humans.
So Germany is clearly the origin of humans.

>>12661732
Don't take it so literally. The latest finds seem to show that there several times people left Africa and via differing routes.

>>12657589
>>12658246
>prove or disprove this thing that is uncontroversial outside /pol/
Threads like these should be deleted.

>>12661779
he said the oldest Homo Sapiens, strawmanning retard
interesting find anyway, did they sequence its DNA?

>>12661784
>things that are outside my narrative should be deleted WITHOUT any discussion, even if they present significant evidence
kys

>>12661785
It is just the old problem, when is it a homo sapiens? And what if this ape originated in Germany but we dont find any other similar link? Maybe Lucy and all other Homo Sapiens are just traveling specimen that were forced out of Europe? Do we know that all fossils are related and evolved out another? You can find skeletons from pirates on an island, but does this mean it they are all related? Or were it just waves that all happened to die there.
Fossils dont give that much informations how something is related. Why would an humanoid ape move to africa, if they just can stay in the mediterrean?
At this moment it is just all interpretations. The truth is somewhere in the middle. Somewhere in the middle east in my opinion and every thing we find is a wave or a line that divided and than remerged with other humanlines again.

>>12660514
>Human skeletal remains found in Africa earlier than out of Africa
Not true, and hasn't been for years. Please keep up.

>>12659129
MONKEY

>>12661819
Because there is no evidence for hominid remains older than those found in Africa. It's not a complicated situation with zero logic to disagree with it unless its for /pol/ reasons.

>>12661840
>there is no evidence for hominid remains older than those found in Africa
for now, maybe we didn't search in the correct places
Scholarly accepted genetic analysis seems to mostly confirm the out of Africa theory... but I suspect that some results are being censored.

>>12661840
>hominid remains
by the way the bornean orangutan is an hominid but is in Borneo, still today

>>12661863
So because you want to believe something else you ignore all the evidence? That sounds kind of dumb anon.

>>12661840
>>12661876
Weren't there older hominid remains recently found near Bulgaria or something?
If just a few old fossils were enough to declare it as fact then a few older fossils should be enough to disprove it.

>>12661885
> Weren't there older hominid remains recently found near Bulgaria
Those were only 45000 years old. That is still relatively modern and doesn't change anything.

>>12661863
I dont think there is any censored stuff, but what if they dont tested the families that.
Or some gens get replaced. The mitochondrial genesequence can be traced back to 60,000 years ago. But we have here >>12661484 much older fossils. What about the missing 100,000 years to Herto, Ethiopian findings? How accurate it that if you cant trace it back to them? What if at some point most mitochondrial genome got replaced by one from africa?

>>12661840
Sure, if there is non found, the best is to use it as current theory.
But you could say that Germany is the region were all apes come from. They found one possible link in Germany between apes and mammals. Than a missing link between apes and human. But this doesnt really mean it is so. What if this species just spread over the world, but was just found in Germany? So all african homo sapiens could just be some spread out population. We just found them there, because the preservation was possible and the site was good for digging.

>>12662134
Can someone explain to me what is happening in Kazachstan? Suddenly there is a new gen from nowwhere?

>>12661070
Just an autist, but it's true: human origins can never be truly scienced. It will remain at best a hypothesis.

>>12657589
This man alone causes panic and confusion in Africanists. Their reckoning is long overdue, their future memories—if any—bound to be of pity and disdain.

>>12662434
>In an interview at the CBC News, researchers claimed that while they were trying to publish their work about the footprints at high-profile publications they got "ferociously aggressive responses", criticism and rejection from reviewers and editors. According to the researchers “Basically, it wasn't a true peer review process at all,” “They were just trying to shut us down.”[3] After multiple rejections from other publications, the study was eventually published in the journal, "Proceedings of the Geologists' Association."[3][1]

>>12661468
>05/08/2013
With the advent of ancient DNA the models look more like this:

>>12662443
So much for science being unbiased.

Homo Sapiens as well ancestor of all Homos (:D) evolved in Africa and thus in the simplest sense OOA is correct.

HOWEVER, Neanderthals, Denisovans and floresiensis all evolved out of Africa and mixed with Sapiens that had migrated out of Africa. Modern non-African humans have traces of these other archaic humans that evolved outside Africa.

>>12662174
That is R1/R-M173, descending from R-Y482. The map is a huge abstraction.
https://yfull.com/tree/R1/

The oldest R is from Mal'ta. About 24 KYA. The individual represents the early form of Ancient North Eurasians whom contributed to the formation of East European Mesolithic and Native Americans.
https://yfull.com/tree/R/

>>12660185
>abos
>human

I'm trying to simplify the overload of information in this thread and it seems to me that if, and I mean if, we are going to toss the Out-of-Africa theory outside the window, we need to consider the possibility that humanity had distant ancestors that crossed the Mediterranean Sea. It's a big walk to go around this puddle of water and we haven't found relevant hominin remains (yet) speckled along that path. We have very limited information but for now it looks like they jumped. If we focus on the geographical factor alone, could these archaic humans have crossed this puddle of water? The Strait of Gibraltar seems like a key location here given that Morocco is directly south.

>>12662849
This map from Wikipedia also shows these vague green lines of europeans people going to Africa, the same scenario just with different dates. We are lead to believe they had very limited tools or cognitive capacity so I find it difficult to imagine them with boats. I looked it up and found no evidence that the Strait of Gibraltar back then was a convenient land bridge, but maybe I looked wrong.

>>12662864
Iberomaurusians were a remnant of an Upper Paleolithic population and I believe they descend from Eurasian related people whom merely stayed within Africa.

>>12662864
As for how Europe was initially settled, Aurignacians and Oase related people came from the Near East, whilst Ancient North Eurasians were formed deep in Siberia by Eastern reaches of this Aurignacian related population. Do note that modern Europeans do not entirely descend from these Upper Paleolithic Europeans and their ancestors definitely weren't there during the Ice Age.

>>12660514
you forgot mitochondria tracing

>>12662897
Iberomaurusians do not belong to the correct time period to be relevant in any way to the post you quote.

>>12662949
Iberomaurusians descend from Aterians judging by their low Eurasian shift.

>>12663083
Alright. One step at the time. What is the time period associated with Iberomaurusians and what is the time period associated with the posts you quote?

>>12663105
It's still up in the air whether or not Iberomaurusians (25 KYA - 11 KYA) descend from the Aterians (150 KYA - 20 KYA) but it would make sense.
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/360/6388/548.full

>>12657589
Can't disprove something that is obviously right

Sapiens came out of Africa. All human-like non-sapiens (Deni, Nean, Erectus) also came out of Africa before that.

It is possible that there were geographically constrained traits from millions of years ago that still persist in today's populations. But the core of the migrations all came from Africa until the recent (last 30,000 years) back migration of Eurasian sapiens into Africa.

The only people who disagree with this are seething polggers.

>>12660406
try killing yourself

>>12662864
>This map from Wikipedia also shows these vague green lines of europeans people going to Africa
That's after the initial migrations of humans, and completely irrelevant.

Literally everyone knows that North/East Africans have Asian mixture.

>>12663164
You have answered half, let's look at the other half. What is the time period associated with the post you quote? The Homo Sapiens remains identified at Jebel Irhoud are between 300 000 and 400 000 years old. If they are issued from europeans hominins who settled southward, that european population belongs to the likes of 400 000 years ago. The Iberomaurusians from 25 000 years ago are in a completely different time period. They need to be 300 000, 400 000 or even 500 000 years old to be the trace of ancient hominins of european origins moving towards Morocco.

>>12663221
I mention that wikipedia map because I find it interesting that even a mainstream explanation of Out of Africa involves movements across the Mediterranean Sea. I personally find it difficult to understand how any map of early human migrations could involve arrows that jump over large bodies of water. The oldest boat is 8 000 years old, that is excruciatingly recent.

>>12663253
There's a gap in between the Aterians and Iberomaurusians, but Aterians do not descend from Jebel Irhoud individuals. There's a clear mitochondrial signal indicating that OoA of Homo Sapiens began from East Africa, and I believe the Aterian population is the first branch of the proto-Eurasian population. Aterians would have gained some excess Eurasian related ancestry around 30 KYA indicated by the appearance of U6, but the Iberomaurusians would have formed out of the native late Aterian population.

>>12663305
*there's a gab between Jebel Irhoud and Iberomaurusians.

>>12662897
>>12662949
And there is no indication of WHG related ancestry in Iberomaurusians anyways.

You'll never be allowed to disprove it, or at least get mainstream acceptance. As the global intelligentsia use out of Africa to further their racial propaganda.

>>12660453
That is simply not true. There are numerous hunter-gatherer societies that function without power structures and such that are specifically organized to deter anyone from explicitly or implicitly pursuing positions of power.
E.g. egalitarian societies such as the Piraha, Hadza, or Maniq.

>>12663360
Find a Pleistocene Homo skull from Spain or something, if you're lucky sequence it's mitochondrion and you are set. It will most likely be a late Erectus or Denisova-Neanderthal related.

>>12660442
Hunter gatherers were organized into groups that were either nomadic or sedentary if the area allowed it.That...requires structures of society.

>>12663370
Power differentials are inherent to human identity. You think these guys don't have authority figures that lead? Like at the very least the elders?

>>12663416
>You think these guys don't have authority figures that lead? Like at the very least the elders?
I know for a fact they don't because I have studied them for years.

It's an old article but gives a good introduction:
https://libcom.org/files/EGALITARIAN%20SOCIETIES%20-%20James%20Woodburn.pdf

The closest thing to having elders is that elder men are more likely to be followed by others when they are looking for new settlements. However that does not constitute a power structure by any definition of the term, because every individual is completely autonomous in their decision on where to move and live with no repercussions or objections from anyone else.

>>12663407
Yes nobody denies that there are structures, but not all structures are power structures.

oldest hominid found is Sahelanthropus tchadensis, found near lake Chad, and seven million years old. Yes, it looks like we do come from Africa at least it was there where humans split off from apes. Retards twist this argument using later species and conveniently forget hominids.

>>12663370
Among the San they have practice of always talking down the person who bags a nice kill as well as encouraging humility in those who gather or hunt. Thus us to prevent people from going all "look at me I'm hot shit, everything revolves around me!!!!".

>>12663458
Yes, in time societies will put up stuff like that but in these tribes that, at the end of the day, relied heavily on violence there would be a power structure. We are not that distant from great apes and we most definitely have not abandoned their social structures.

Sentience made us generate a lot of cope on top of that, ways to blunt the obvious conclusions to ease social tensions but we have always been highly hierarchic species and remain so today.

>>12663305
>Aterians do not descend from Jebel Irhoud individuals.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aterian
>The Aterian is associated with early Homo sapiens at a number of sites in Morocco.
To be more specific, the Jebel Irhoud specimens are archaic Aterians. They were misidentified at first.
>While the Jebel Irhoud specimens were originally noted to have been similar to later Aterian and some Iberomaurusian specimens, further examinations revealed that the Jebel Irhoud specimens are similar to them in some respects but differ in that the Jebel Irhoud specimens have a continuous supraorbital torus while the Aterian and Iberomaurasian specimens have a discontinuous supraorbital torus or in some cases, none at all, and from this, it was concluded that the Jebel Irhoud specimens represent archaic Homo sapiens while the Aterian and Iberomaurusian specimens represent anatomically modern Homo sapiens.
Either your data is outdated, either you disagree that the oldest Homo Sapiens are positively identified at Jebel Irhoud. I cannot see any middle ground on this issue.

>>12663370
>>12663458
I am wary of any alleged tribal custom that supports the "noble savage" myth. The only evidence that could potentially sway me is undetected 24/7 video evidence of a tribe's behavior.

>>12660804
>Humans may share a common ancestor
Thats not been proven

>>12663469
>We are not that distant from great apes and we most definitely have not abandoned their social structures.
Reminder that humans did not evolve from apes but merely share a common ancestor.
Not that
>muh human nature
isn’t a fallacy in and by itself already.

>>12663516
>I’m wary of any empirical evidence that doesn’t support my preconceptions which are based on literally nothing instead.
Uh ok.

>>12663544
>Reminder that humans did not evolve from apes but merely share a common ancestor.
and that invalidates what I said?

>>12657589
What? Are Uigurs from India via Tibet? I always heard they were descendent from Silk Road traders.

>>12663561
Say what? I asked for very strict evidence in order to believe something. What exactly is your strategy for twisting this around to make it sound like I believe things without evidence?

>>12663600
Uyghurs are Turkic Mongoloids who conquered and mixed with Aryan tribes in the Tarim Basin.

>>12663814
Are they the true masterrace? Is that why the Han Chinese hate them?

>>12663600
That map is utter bullshit and a joke. East Eurasians came fron Sundaland to Beijing and then spread to the Amur rivervalley and Baikal.

>>12663488
Interesting, but if that's the case late Aterians must have received OoA ancestry.

>>12663836
No, the Han Chinese are the ones that displaced them from Siberia in the first place, such that they had to invade whiteoids.

>>12663275
>I personally find it difficult to understand how any map of early human migrations could involve arrows that jump over large bodies of water.
can't tell if baiting

lots of water was land
lots of deserts were green
lots of green places were ice

>>12657589
Atlantis was a real continent in the Atlantic whose peopkes migrated to South America and Egypt and North America, how is it that South America tribes have very similiar hieroglyphs and pyramids to the egyptians

>>12663950
I might be mistaken but I think the wikipedia link I supplied is not enough to reach that conclusion by itself. The remains identified at Jebel Irhoud are older than Aterians but for all we know humanity could have started right there, in Morocco, which doesn't change much of anything we know about Aterians prior to this discovery. The same voids in history remain. However the consequences of recognizing the more controversial Graecopithecus and Danuvius would lead to what you describe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graecopithecus
>If this classification is correct, Graecopithecus would be the oldest known representative of the human lineage after the human-chimpanzee split, in 19th-century terminology, the "missing link" between human and non-human primates.
>if the premise of the study is correct, Graecopithecus, after evolving in Europe, would have migrated back to Africa about 7 million years ago where its descendants would eventually evolve into the genus Homo
This is what motivated me to make the crude map as seen here >>12662849 to try to understand how the puzzle can fit together. The third map would give OoA ancestry to Atarians (or any humans in Africa for that matter) by virtue of the alleged existence of an even older human ancestor in Europe. Coincidentally the oldest Homo Sapiens are situated closest to Europe, completely at the top of Africa. There's just the remaining problem that swimming 13 kilometers of open water is no small feat for a primitive ape and there's little hope of boats being involved. The geographical layout of the terrain might have been different thought.

>>12663214
doesn't the genetic evidence suggest the exact opposite sapiens/neanderthal pairing as in that picture?

>>12664175
I looked up the depth of the Strait of Gibraltar and the historical variation in sea level and unfortunately it doesn't fit with the pieces of the puzzle. The depth is 900 meters at the best location, I don't see a -900 meters sea level modification on the graphs. Maybe I'm seeing wrong. If there used to be a dry passage and there isn't one today, I'd rather believe a seismic landslide is to blame, although I lack geological knowledge to be confident that any occurred in the region.

>>12660514
Human skeletal remains found out of Africa from earlier than in Africa. Indians look like white people but with brown skin.

>>12662849
Depends on when humans traveled. The coastal zone was much bigger in the iceage

>>12662849
>>12664477
Or about 5 million years ago when the mediterrenean was nearly empty. Which is speculated to be the reason for the ark myth.

>>12657589
clothing doesn't have meaning

>>12663370
>there are certain tribes without power structures
>therefore everyone in Africa lacked power structures for hundreds of thousands of years
This is like saying lightbulbs don't work because some lightbulbs are duds right out of the box.
Also even if that was completely true it doesn't counter what I said. If people decided they did want power structures then that would still give them reason to leave so that they could have power structures.

>>12664480
so the idea is these monkeys played a telephone game for five million years using only grunts and gestures to remember a dry lake all the way until it could get written down in the bible and make it historically accurate, damn I'm impressed

>>12659129
>muh /pol/

fuck off retard

>>12664853
Nice strawman.
Your argument specifically was that *all* hunter-gatherers have power structures.
And that is factually untrue.

In return, I NEVER claimed that *no* hunter-gatherers have power structures, only that not all of them do, so your rebuttal is moot.

>>12665061
I never said all tribes had power structures. I said there were still power structures back then for people to want to escape from and you just said that was wrong. While you didn't explicitly type out that none did that is what you said anyways. If that's not what you meant then you should have made that clear.
Either way, the main point that the people of back then still had plenty of reason to get up and leave still stands.

>>12664511

>>12660697
>>12660925
>>12661455

someone post the vsauce pasta NOW

>>12665081
>While you didn't explicitly type out that none did that is what you said anyways.
No I did not and I explicitly typed out what I wanted to say:
>There are numerous hunter-gatherer societies that function without power structures
You need a lot of projection to read that as *all* hunter-gatherers. I even named the specific examples.

Whereas you absolutely did make an absolute statement:
>[...] no matter how primitive they may be.
>>12660453 #

>>12665493
I said that the people of many thousands of years ago still had plenty of reason to want to leave. One potential reason I gave was them deciding they don't like the power structures they lived in.
You responded by saying that there are certain tribes that don't have power structures and that as a result my assertion was false. The only way for that to be the case (in any way related to what we're speaking of right now) would be if tribal societies themselves lacked power structures. You stating that there have been tribes observed to lack power structures does not in any way show that people in ancient Africa had no power structures to want to leave.
Yes. That is exactly what I said.
Nothing in
>There is still a system for people to disagree with, no matter how primitive it may be.
speaks of power structures at all, let alone says that every single one must have them.
Even if a system lacks power structures people can still not like said system and feel compelled to leave it as well.

>>12664988
We dont know if they only grunted. Maybe they had already developed tradition and started to tell stories about dangers in the world.
If you compare the skull and brain capacity of chimpanzees and the Australopothecus, you get a brain size somewhere in the middle. We know chimpanzees use tools, manage huntings and can build sentences after humans teached them. So it is not unbelievable that they told to stories about things that were important to their lives.
If you consider normal flooding by heavy rain or rivers, like the nile or now in italy, as a constant happening, it is not so far that they teached their children about a floof like we know in the bible. Kinda like "if rain, much water, go higher, once all land flooded".
And this story gets renewed everytime humans see a flood. Thats why you can find in many myths a flood myth.

>>12665864
And we dont know how much humanlike these humanoids were. But around 4-5 millions of years they were already somewhere in the middle of apes and humans.

>>12664467
Indians are genotypically a mix of Baloch and Negrito.

>>12665868
And this picture to show that maybe we got some increasement in the seas after the ice age. But since floodings go away, happens once a year and the rise of the waterlevel isnt like the biblical, there seems to be a traditional story about a flood which affected the whole world. Kinda like a fear of snakes and spiders that is rooted deep in our brain that cant be just xenophobia.

>>12664202
The problem of an European origin is thst Sima de los Huesos remains from 430 KYA were proto-Denisova.

>>12657589
people in nigeria & chad are black, europeans are white

>>12665868
Isn't that diagram totally out of date?

>>12665864
>If you consider normal flooding by heavy rain or rivers, like the nile or now in italy, as a constant happening, it is not so far that they teached their children about a floof like we know in the bible.
Of course that would happen. Ancient humans could certainly spin a tale based on a natural disaster they witnessed. We were previously talking about speculation concerning a five million years telephone game to pass one particular story inspired by one particular flood. The fact that a lot of floods can happen in five million years is not helping that speculation. It might also be worth pointing out that the story of Noah's Ark is about a flood caused by unending rain. The end of the messinian salinity crisis was caused by the collapse of a land barrier located at what is current day the Strait of Gibraltar. Ocean water just flooded in.

>>12657589

>>12659129

>>12666808
It is more reasonable that the flood myths are associated with the latter sea level increases.

>>12666835
Are we talking about any sea level increase or specifically the rise of water in the Mediterranean basin after its temporary desication five million years ago? It looks like it filled up pretty fast.
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/03/mediterranean-nearly-dried-up-cataclysmic-flood-revived-it/
>As the water mounted, it scoured out a deepening path that allowed still more water to pass. At its peak, the flow may have gushed at 100 million cubic meters per second, filling the sea in two years or less.
The event still requires a five million years telephone game to inspire a story that we know today.

>>12665884
Can you explain further the problem? It seems these proto-denisovans are at the right place for contributing their DNA to proto-humanity.

>>12660697
I dont think any geneticist has ever said that in the history of science

>>12666821
I have my doubts towards the OoA theory but the information in that picture is presented all fumbled up. The only thing this says is that pure Africans don't have Denisovan or Neanderthal DNA which is something we've known for a while, it doesn't raise objections or cause controversy.

>>12659129
well this guy is kind of right,
i regularly post on /pol/ but this an inconvenient topic for retarded wanna be nazis. it may be unproven but OOA just makes a lot of sense considering that africa had some really big rain forests there. never heard of a species of apes wandering through cold regions.

>>12667060
>never heard of a species of apes wandering through cold regions.
Because you didn't look it up. The notion that apes only existed in Africa has been disputed by modern archeological evidence.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/bipedal-ape-danuvius-guggenmosi-1.4637336
This guy walked around on two legs in Germany 13 million years ago.

>>12666502
>2007
Kinda, but did it change that much?

>>12664265
you're wasting time on a non-issue. Africans can invade Eurasia via Arabia and vice versa.

I don't know why this is worth even talking about.

>>12659129
there's still worthy conversation. Just hide the wigger comments.

>>12667103
everyone knows this, it still doesn't disprove anything. I only serves as wigger cope.

>>12657589
ice ages /thread

>>12667120
There is the not so minor matter of Denisovans, and hybridisation between homo sapiens, Neanderthals and Denisovans and possibly a fourth as yet unnamed group.

>>12667045
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-51508616

>>12661446
yes you're retarded and no "race realism" is not a valid ideology or scientific theory

>>12667661
They can but the archeological evidence doesn't say they did. The oldest Homo Sapiens are in Morocco, not in a trail going through Eurasia and Arabia.

>>12667848
Explain further.

>>12667854
Living up to the meme I see. There's a point where you should realize you're not standing on the right side of an argument and that's when you start saying that reality is not acceptable.

>>12667907
>Reddit
You have to go back.

>>12659129
look at how fast all the /pol/tards pounce on this perfectly reasonable anon. This board is long lost.

>>12667969
>>Reddit
>You have to go back.
>MOM I POSTED IT! LOOK I REALLY POSTED IT!

>>12667969
I think you may have read a bit too fast, the post is making fun of reddit

>>12666986
>>12666808
Yes, and? In Europe you dont have deadly spiders still it much more common to fear spiders. Dont say, because they look so different. Insects always look different, still we dont have a phobia that common. Crabs look very different, still we hunt and eat them. So we have a telephone game of arachnophobia in europe from when europa was a jungle or our ancestors came from regions with deadly spiders.
And a telephone game is rather easy, when you have a species that saw the mediterenean flooding, maybe communication to tell their kids when it rains, there can be a deadly flood.
Now we have the rising waterlevel or river flooding. These humanoids and later homo sapiens start to tell their kids "this rain reminds me of the big flooding, kids be carefull and go up when the world sink".
And when you keep in mind that suddenly homo sapiens start to tell stories and create myths, it is even easier to keep certain stories alive.
We see a similar telephone game in nature. Birds build nests. Who told them to do so. Their parents dont teach them to do this. Still they are able to build nests. Just by hatching in one and see that other birds build them the next year.

>>12667060
There are some like the Japanese Macaque or the Golden Snub-Nose Monkey. But these kind of monkeys are rather rare, but possible.

>>12667763
But it doesnt change that much since when we have human ancestors. As long the are not much older as the ones we knew in 2007 about.

>>12669889
I have difficulties parsing what you write, but my point is that the diagram is missing tons. And since I am no expert I asked, it was not a rhetorical question.

>>12661396
but africa is genetically diverse, like europe and asia. its not a leftover either.

>>12661396
I hear Chinese authorities didn't like the idea of OOA so they invented a parallel development in Asia. It is possible the OOA-deniers have been drinking Chinese Koolaid.

>>12661488
chext

>>12669873
Arachnophobia is not caused by a telephone game. Birds do not build nests because of a telephone game. This conversation has gone from amusing to sad.

>>12666994
The problem is that they had already diverged from Homo Sapiens Mitochondrially 200 thousand years prior. That means Europe was occupied by a group not ancestral to Homo Sapiens, but their now extinct cousins.

>>12657589
Is nobody else gonna comment on the obvious pajeet bias in OP's map?

>>12670757
I see what you mean, in that case they didn't contribute ancestry. It remains to explain why there are bones related to the enigmatic Denisovans in that place since Denisovan genes are usually found farther away. However, there's one sentence in your post that sounds off.
>That means Europe was occupied by a group not ancestral to Homo Sapiens
These particular proto-Denisovans didn't occupy the continent of Europe, they occupied a very small region as far as we know. Europe is a large place and the presence of one ape doesn't precludes the presence of another. We have modern humans with traces of Denisovan and Neanderthal DNA, therefore we know that at some point these big old monkeys lived in the same time period in the same geographical region and interbred.
https://phys.org/news/2016-03-world-neanderthal-denisovan-ancestry-modern.html
https://www.discovermagazine.com/planet-earth/interbreeding-surprise-more-denisovans-in-our-family-tree
Things would get confusing quickly if whenever we found trace of one of these monkeys we decided there couldn't be any other nearby.

>>12670994
Yes, they also claim every single haplogroup because they have traces of the basal forms. The thing is India has those because they have so many people. F is from West Eurasia and K2b is from Northeast Eurasia.

Prove to me NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER is wrong

>>12659129
Nobody likes you and there has to be enforcement to make people even associate with you

>>12657589
>All the smart niggers left Afr*ca and became white
>The dumb niggers remained niggers

>>12657589
Niggers come from Nigeria, asians from Kenya and whites from Chad.

neanderthal and denisovans

>>12671560
don't know why I laughed

>tfw just discovered that Neanderthals basically had no chin
The mainstream depiction of the Neanderthal as a hairy caveman chad was built on a complete lie. No wonder these chinlets were destroyed by the modern humans and their superior pointy face bone.

>>12672077
>just discovered that Neanderthals basically had no chin
That is hardly news. In fact it was used decades ago as an argument that Neanderthals were incapable of speech.

>>12672207
That conclusion seems a bit fast, there are people today who have speech and virtually no chin. Prairie dogs can communicate a surprising amount of information and they have the face of a chipmunk.

Holy shit this thread is so full of misinformation and people pretending they know more about anthropology than they obviously know.

Fucking hell. Out of Africa has so much evidence that to believe anything else is literally the equivalent of flat Earth and geocentrism.

No. Humans did not evolve outside Africa. The problem you people are suffering from is definitional, not scientific. Before I go further; people in Africa are human just like anybody else. Homo Sapiens sapiens and Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis are sub species of the same species, same with Denisovians. Saying 'but muh Neanderthals evolved outside Africa' or 'but muh Denisovans!' These are not distinct species of humans and even if they were, they came out of Africa too. They did not suddenly spring into existence from Homo Erectus on their own completely separate from everyone else.

You see, the problem is we have too many human bones. We have far more human remains than any other animal because whenever anybody digs up a human bone we treat it as a sacred treasure. We have fucking warehouses full of human remains and all that human remains gets cataloged and numbered and examined again and again and again and then we sit around and try and figure out when exactly humans separated from Erectus.

The debate you people are having is not 'did humans evolve in Africa' like you think you're having it's 'when do we call something Homo erectus and when do we call it Homo sapiens? Hint, it was Homo sapiens first in Africa before migrating anywhere else.

You would know this if you ever sat through a university anthropology class which is obvious none of you dumb fucks have. Now stop with your racist fanwank 'ohh but I'M not from Africa boo hoo hoo!' You are, live with it.

>>12672392
What is your opinion on the Graecopithecus, do you agree or dispute that the Graecopithecus is a distant ancestor to modern humans?

>>12670748
>sad
because you cant disproof it? Why isnt birds nest a telephonegame? Why isnt arachnophobia no telephonegame?
Instead of giving up, you could provide the conversation with your ideas or knowledge. That is the sad part here.

>>12671560
Because it is just like adding insults in a conversation or discussions. It seems like you cant disproof the other, so you start to get angry or want to dehumanize the talking points. Or you just want to make them angry, because you felt insulted by their arguments.

>>12672301
Guess it was more like "they look more animalistic, therefore their capability of thinking must be lower than us, homo sapiens"

>>12672392
For me the question is, when do we call humanoid apes humans. Would the Erectus count as a human? Should we call humanoid apes as the starting point of the human species? I mean does the ape found in Germany count as the starting point of Homo Sapiens? We never found any similar legs in the animal kingdom, nor in fossils.

>>12672301
>That conclusion seems a bit fast
Indeed. And that idea is now reversed. Few have undergone a restitution in reputation as the Neanderthals have, from subhuman brutes without voice or reason to artist capable or abstract art with larger brains than modern humans. Indeed the capacity for abstract art caused a huge controversy and we ended up with a messy case of reverse racism.
All in all it seems many of the researchers were never in doubt but frequently wrong.

>>12673466
Probably. Add to this that shaky race theories predates Nazism more than many still are comfortable with.

>>12657589
Atlantis

>>12673458
>Why isnt birds nest a telephone game?
Because birds make a nest without being told. Instinctive behavior, like common phobias, are unrelated to a conversation about oral tradition. A telephone game is a common children's game where orally transmitted information is quickly deformed. It comes under many names, it can be found on wikipedia under Chinese Whispers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_whispers

>>12668009
my thoughts exactly

>>12673471
If the question is "where is the starting point of Homo Sapiens" I'd say the answer is strictly Africa. The oldest Homo Sapiens were found there so I think it's safe to say that particular lineage "started" there. The german ape can't really be called the starting point of Homo Sapiens if he isn't one.

If the question is "what are the origins of the Homo Sapiens" then the question is more subjective. Someone might interpret that the question still asks where Homo Sapiens were first found, in which case the answer is still Africa, someone else might interpret that the question asks about the mysterious predecessors of the african Homo Sapiens, in which case the recent discovery of european apes might enter the conversation.