My opinion is the whole theory is flawed because they don’t have enough real evidence and heavily rely on supposition and conjecture. There are several cases where they invent a “branch” of the tree based on a single bone fragment or partial skull.
Personally I have known people that would be considered “Neanderthal” if their skulls (large brow protrusion, heavy-set wide jaws, etc.) were buried and later found.
Think of the time and money spent trying to support this theory. Staggering.
I have read up a bit on this stuff and what I have come to understand is that its not so much a family tree as a tangled bush where branches split apart and then later grow back in to each other.
There were many different “breeds” of homo erectus in different locations and they mixed to some extent and one (homo heidelbergensis) seems to have largely replaced the others at some point and then homo heidelbergensis spread out and differentiated.
There were at least two major offshoots of homo heidelbergensis in africa 200,000 years ago. We are all heavily descended from one, including blacks. This is typically called early modern human. Neanderthal and Denisovan are also offshoots of heidelbergensis. There may have been others as well. It may have been difficult at certain points to differentiate between southern neanderthals and northern african heidelbergensis types. We may in fact be a hybrid of neanderthal and other african populations dating back to 200,000 year ago.
What we do know is that some of these people (proto-eurasians ) left africa and mated with some more isolated neanderthals in the last 100,000 years. Populations that stayed behind in africa (blacks) mated with more isolated african “ghost” populations that subsequently went extinct. And australoids mated with another heidelbergensis offshoot called Denisovan. We whites do not have those other mixtures.
Also SS africans are now signifcantly introgressed from neolithic migrations from the middle east and north africa. Particulatrly Somalians ans ethiopians. By causcasoids.
Tropical climates seem to promote stupidity and violence and promiscuity. And dark skin lol. Cold climates seem to promote smarter more cooperative more efficient people, and especially, better dads.
There seems to be a cycle: people/erectus move in to cold climates, learn new tricks, move back to warm climates, mix with/replace stupider previous population. This seems to have happened several times.
So to answer the question, yes and there were different subtypes of erectus, it’s a pretty broad category. But so were blacks and everyone else. Theres no pure euro lineage from an erectus living in eurasia 2 million years. Its more complicated and full of miscegenation. But there are clear trends in ancestry between groups.
I do a little reading on human origins and I doubt that you can come up with an accurate view of the origin of modern man using currently accepted sources. Everyday more and more evidence is discovered that modern man (Not counting SS Africans) developed in Eurasia as opposed to OOA. There is also recent evidence that indigenous Americans (both North & South) have been in the Americas for over 100,000 years and share more with Europeans genetically, then Asians. The fields of mainline Anthropology and Archaeology are restricted by political considerations from investigating evidence that goes against the "Approved" theology.
I hope I didn’t come off as a strict OOA person. I just think it’s like that, given y chromosomal and mtDNA haplogroup lineages its likely we share alot of common descent with africans wihin the last 200,000 yrs or so and that founding population is liable to have been in africa or near africa at that time. Im perfectly prepared to accept that some of the ancestors of that group came from somwhere else. Or maybe all.
For instance, samples have shown that mtDNA lineage in neanderthals was “replaced” with a human-like haplogroup about 200,000 years ago. So if there was a lot of human neanderthal contact at that point, I dont know why we shouldn’t think that our patrilneal descent might not be from a neanderthal subtype. But I also think the idea that we didn’t descend at all from any african populations isn’t likely. I think our evolution was multi-regional .
I read mainstream anthropology and I accept what makes sense to me and try to find other opinions and explanations for the things that don’t.
The Beringian standstill / rapid peopling theories of the Americas is one of those things that doesn’t add up. You know that they just don’t have it right. I did read something about someone digging up an erectus type in south america or something, but I didn’t like the source and I haven’t heard anything else about it. It certainly would be interesting if there were erectus in the americas.
The “white” genes in native americans —that don’t exist in most asians— is from ancient north eurasians. Whites, and western eurasians in general, are heavily derived from an ANE population typified by mal’ta boy. Chinks do not have many of these genes. Yet they are 20 to 40% of NA genomes. “Mainline” says asian and ANE groups mixed in Beringia before populating the Americas but that doesnt explain the huge amount of regional genetic variation you get in pre-columbian populations. It makes no sense. But I think this common ancestral component goes back about 30,000 years or less.
I think the americas were peopled in multiple waves and we now know the most recent one was polynesian about 1000 years ago. I also don’t think an atlantic migration is out of the question
I don't think we share anything with SS Africans, beside DNA drift, which is great, there's this.
A few clues that should put OOA to bed. 1) SS Africans have 20 to 30% of DNA to an unknown human that no Asian, European or Native American populations shares. 2) SS Africans have no Neanderthal or Denisovan DNA. 3) America's population being from Europe: mtDNA haplogroup X2 does not exist in Eastern Asia, but is most prevalent in Western Europe, Middle East and Eastern North America. 4) Neanderthals are extinct, in the sense that you can't point at anyone and say - 'that's a Neanderthal".
“It doesn't matter if the water is cold or warm if you're going to have to wade through it anyway.” ― Pierre Teilhard de Chardin
Well we have to share some lineage back to some point if you agree that we are descended from a great ape that diverged from chimpanzees ~4 or 5 million ya. Yes? So we are at least related within that time frame.
I think however it’s unlikely that we evolved in parallel to be reproductively compatible over that length of time. I think that we are greatly related within 1 million years is highly probable. Homos living prior to that date do not resemble us as much as modern blacks do. Not by a long shot.
Think about it this way. If you have some relatively isolated but related homo populations called A,B,Cand D, and A can only mix with B and B can mix with A or C and C can mix with B or D and D can only mix with C you will begin to get an idea of how there is really no single line of descent.
SS Africans have 20 to 30% of DNA to an unknown human that no Asian, European or Native American populations shares.
So-called african ghost population. I believe the confidence range is something like 3 to 18% admixture in yorubans. Let’s call this population A, somehow isolated from our “common” homo sapien ancestry when we lived in africa.
Lets call our mainline homo sapien lineage B and lets put it in northeast africa 200,000 years ago.
Let’s call Neanderthals of western eurasia population C and lets call the Denisovans of eastern eurasia D. ( There may have been a population E called floresiensis in Indonesia too! )
So homo.sapiens (pop. B) who left africa between 60 and 120 kya would have shared more genes with neanderthals, while the ones who stayed behind in africa eventually ran in to population A, african ghost population. That introgression is dated at 30kya, long after eurasians would have left africa.
What I propose is that our mainline homo sapien lineage (pop. B) circa 200kya could in fact be a hybrid population of neanderthal males (pop. C) and african females (pop. A) . These admixture events seem to have a strong sex bias in one direction. If our patrilineage is an early subtype of neanderthal it might be hard to identify that part of our lineage as “neanderthal” because we see it as “us”. Pehaps we are only identifying subtypes of neanderthals as “neanderthal” that are not of our lineage. It all comes down to how you define neanderthal.
The same is true of african ghost population which admixed relatively lately with blacks. If some of that population mixed with neanderthals 300kya but others did not they would have changed considerably in that time frame.
Again, I say that human descent within the last 1 milllion years or 5 million years or even just within the last 50 thousand years is a so-called “hard” math problem due to its complexity. It is not shaped like a tree. It is tangled like the gordian knot.
America's population being from Europe: mtDNA haplogroup X2 does not exist in Eastern Asia, but is most prevalent in Western Europe, Middle East and Eastern North America.
Yes, this is why I said that I think a trans-atlantic migration of europeans to N. America is not out of the question. The Solutrian civilization seems like a good candidate based on time frame and climate conditions.
There is alot of R1b in natives from that area of eastern Canada as well. Did the Solutrians have R1b? Or was this from a later Viking or Celtic crossing?
Neanderthals are extinct, in the sense that you can't point at anyone and say - 'that's a Neanderthal".
[ + ] PygmyGoat
[ - ] PygmyGoat 0 points 3.0 yearsJul 3, 2022 11:23:49 ago (+0/-0)
Personally I have known people that would be considered “Neanderthal” if their skulls (large brow protrusion, heavy-set wide jaws, etc.) were buried and later found.
Think of the time and money spent trying to support this theory. Staggering.
[ + ] UncleDoug
[ - ] UncleDoug 0 points 3.0 yearsJul 2, 2022 14:16:42 ago (+0/-0)
It's probably related to monkeys and niggers, not homo-sapien sapiens.
[ + ] NumbDigger
[ - ] NumbDigger 1 point 3.0 yearsJul 2, 2022 11:48:33 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 3 points 3.0 yearsJul 2, 2022 10:20:51 ago (+3/-0)*
There were many different “breeds” of homo erectus in different locations and they mixed to some extent and one (homo heidelbergensis) seems to have largely replaced the others at some point and then homo heidelbergensis spread out and differentiated.
There were at least two major offshoots of homo heidelbergensis in africa 200,000 years ago. We are all heavily descended from one, including blacks. This is typically called early modern human. Neanderthal and Denisovan are also offshoots of heidelbergensis. There may have been others as well. It may have been difficult at certain points to differentiate between southern neanderthals and northern african heidelbergensis types. We may in fact be a hybrid of neanderthal and other african populations dating back to 200,000 year ago.
What we do know is that some of these people (proto-eurasians ) left africa and mated with some more isolated neanderthals in the last 100,000 years. Populations that stayed behind in africa (blacks) mated with more isolated african “ghost” populations that subsequently went extinct. And australoids mated with another heidelbergensis offshoot called Denisovan. We whites do not have those other mixtures.
Also SS africans are now signifcantly introgressed from neolithic migrations from the middle east and north africa. Particulatrly Somalians ans ethiopians. By causcasoids.
Tropical climates seem to promote stupidity and violence and promiscuity. And dark skin lol. Cold climates seem to promote smarter more cooperative more efficient people, and especially, better dads.
There seems to be a cycle: people/erectus move in to cold climates, learn new tricks, move back to warm climates, mix with/replace stupider previous population. This seems to have happened several times.
So to answer the question, yes and there were different subtypes of erectus, it’s a pretty broad category. But so were blacks and everyone else. Theres no pure euro lineage from an erectus living in eurasia 2 million years. Its more complicated and full of miscegenation. But there are clear trends in ancestry between groups.
[ + ] SturmUndTrinker
[ - ] SturmUndTrinker 1 point 3.0 yearsJul 2, 2022 10:44:43 ago (+1/-0)
Everyday more and more evidence is discovered that modern man (Not counting SS Africans) developed in Eurasia as opposed to OOA.
There is also recent evidence that indigenous Americans (both North & South) have been in the Americas for over 100,000 years and share more with Europeans genetically, then Asians.
The fields of mainline Anthropology and Archaeology are restricted by political considerations from investigating evidence that goes against the "Approved" theology.
[ + ] Deleted
[ - ] deleted 1 point 3.0 yearsJul 2, 2022 15:46:54 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 3.0 yearsJul 2, 2022 17:02:23 ago (+0/-0)*
For instance, samples have shown that mtDNA lineage in neanderthals was “replaced” with a human-like haplogroup about 200,000 years ago. So if there was a lot of human neanderthal contact at that point, I dont know why we shouldn’t think that our patrilneal descent might not be from a neanderthal subtype. But I also think the idea that we didn’t descend at all from any african populations isn’t likely. I think our evolution was multi-regional .
I read mainstream anthropology and I accept what makes sense to me and try to find other opinions and explanations for the things that don’t.
The Beringian standstill / rapid peopling theories of the Americas is one of those things that doesn’t add up. You know that they just don’t have it right. I did read something about someone digging up an erectus type in south america or something, but I didn’t like the source and I haven’t heard anything else about it. It certainly would be interesting if there were erectus in the americas.
The “white” genes in native americans —that don’t exist in most asians— is from ancient north eurasians. Whites, and western eurasians in general, are heavily derived from an ANE population typified by mal’ta boy. Chinks do not have many of these genes. Yet they are 20 to 40% of NA genomes. “Mainline” says asian and ANE groups mixed in Beringia before populating the Americas but that doesnt explain the huge amount of regional genetic variation you get in pre-columbian populations. It makes no sense. But I think this common ancestral component goes back about 30,000 years or less.
I think the americas were peopled in multiple waves and we now know the most recent one was polynesian about 1000 years ago. I also don’t think an atlantic migration is out of the question
[ + ] SturmUndTrinker
[ - ] SturmUndTrinker 0 points 3.0 yearsJul 3, 2022 22:46:57 ago (+0/-0)
A few clues that should put OOA to bed.
1) SS Africans have 20 to 30% of DNA to an unknown human that no Asian, European or Native American populations shares.
2) SS Africans have no Neanderthal or Denisovan DNA.
3) America's population being from Europe: mtDNA haplogroup X2 does not exist in Eastern Asia, but is most prevalent in Western Europe, Middle East and Eastern North America.
4) Neanderthals are extinct, in the sense that you can't point at anyone and say - 'that's a Neanderthal".
“It doesn't matter if the water is cold or warm if you're going to have to wade through it anyway.”
― Pierre Teilhard de Chardin
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 3.0 yearsJul 4, 2022 00:49:38 ago (+0/-0)
I think however it’s unlikely that we evolved in parallel to be reproductively compatible over that length of time. I think that we are greatly related within 1 million years is highly probable. Homos living prior to that date do not resemble us as much as modern blacks do. Not by a long shot.
Think about it this way. If you have some relatively isolated but related homo populations called A,B,Cand D, and A can only mix with B and B can mix with A or C and C can mix with B or D and D can only mix with C you will begin to get an idea of how there is really no single line of descent.
So-called african ghost population. I believe the confidence range is something like 3 to 18% admixture in yorubans. Let’s call this population A, somehow isolated from our “common” homo sapien ancestry when we lived in africa.
Lets call our mainline homo sapien lineage B and lets put it in northeast africa 200,000 years ago.
Let’s call Neanderthals of western eurasia population C and lets call the Denisovans of eastern eurasia D. ( There may have been a population E called floresiensis in Indonesia too! )
So homo.sapiens (pop. B) who left africa between 60 and 120 kya would have shared more genes with neanderthals, while the ones who stayed behind in africa eventually ran in to population A, african ghost population. That introgression is dated at 30kya, long after eurasians would have left africa.
What I propose is that our mainline homo sapien lineage (pop. B) circa 200kya could in fact be a hybrid population of neanderthal males (pop. C) and african females (pop. A) . These admixture events seem to have a strong sex bias in one direction. If our patrilineage is an early subtype of neanderthal it might be hard to identify that part of our lineage as “neanderthal” because we see it as “us”. Pehaps we are only identifying subtypes of neanderthals as “neanderthal” that are not of our lineage. It all comes down to how you define neanderthal.
The same is true of african ghost population which admixed relatively lately with blacks. If some of that population mixed with neanderthals 300kya but others did not they would have changed considerably in that time frame.
Again, I say that human descent within the last 1 milllion years or 5 million years or even just within the last 50 thousand years is a so-called “hard” math problem due to its complexity. It is not shaped like a tree. It is tangled like the gordian knot.
Yes, this is why I said that I think a trans-atlantic migration of europeans to N. America is not out of the question. The Solutrian civilization seems like a good candidate based on time frame and climate conditions.
There is alot of R1b in natives from that area of eastern Canada as well. Did the Solutrians have R1b? Or was this from a later Viking or Celtic crossing?
Are you sure?