New Twist On Out-of-africa Theory

[Viggen]

Early humans made love, not war, according to new DNA analysis presented at a genetics conference that gives a new twist on the out-of-Africa hypothesis of human origins.

 

U.S. researcher Professor Alan Templeton of Washington University, St Louis, debunks the prevailing version of the out-of-Africa hypothesis, which says early humans migrated from Africa and wiped out Eurasian populations. Instead, they bred, he told the Genetics Society of Australia's annual conference in Melbourne this week.

 

full article at ABC

[Callaecus]

I think that both theories - humans mixing with each other or killing each other - are not correct.

In the first case, there is no evidence that any sexual contact between humans of different species would allow that children could be born and, if so, if they wouldn't also be sterile like mules. The author assumes that humans bred because

 

Instead, he said his analysis of the human genome showed prehistoric gene-swapping created a single evolutionary lineage beginning in Africa and ending where we are today.

 

He looked at mitochondrial DNA, as well as DNA on a range of chromosomes including X and Y.

 

"The genetic legacy of current humans is predominantly of African origin," he said.

 

Templeton is the first to suggest expansion out of Africa occurred in three waves: 2 million years ago, 800,000 years ago and 100,000 years ago.

Yet, this doesn't mean that all these waves mixed because groups of the first two waves also stayed in Africa (the third wave is Homo Sapiens Sapiens), and since Homo Sapiens Sapiens developped in Africa it obviously incorporates elements of groups from which it descends.

 

As for the war theory, notice that recently more and more diverse human groups have been found in the archaeological record. And the many differences among them were the result of living isolated, which means that with time they end up developing certain genetic traits. What caused the extinction of many of these groups was not war. And how could it be? The world is large and these human groups had a small number. It is calculated that 10.000 years ago there weren

[Gaius Octavius]

What about races?

 

But Templeton said this extinction never happened and a combination of movement and interbreeding meant diversification of races didn't occur.

 

"We really have to abandon the idea of race. It actually does not reflect the genetic differences we can now measure in an objective fashion."

 

Templeton said the differences between human populations today were based on geography not genetics.

 

This meant a Norwegian would be more closely related than a Fijian to someone from sub-Saharan Africa.

 

"We do see differences in different regions of the world but the best indicator of those differences is simply geographical distance and not things like skin colour."

 

Templeton said his data was inconclusive on whether interbreeding also occurred with Neanderthals.

 

But he said there was fossil evidence that this probably occurred, which would imply a bit of Neanderthal could live on in us all.

 

Australian geneticist Associate Professor Philip Batterham from the University of Melbourne said the research showed humanity was far more closely related that previously thought and that race was a cultural phenomenon.

-------------------------------------------------0-----------------------------------------------------

 

I get the odd feeling that the above is not an accurate rendition of the procedings. To me, some statements seem to contradict each other.

 

Sometimes we dig a little too deep looking for the answer when it actually is right on the surface. Why is 'race' a four letter (dirty) word? We see 'race' every day. It's a fact; politically correct or not.

[Callaecus]

Sometimes we dig a little too deep looking for the answer when it actually is right on the surface. Why is 'race' a four letter (dirty) word? We see 'race' every day. It's a fact; politically correct or not.

The interpretation of the geneticist is clearly political , assuming that biggest division among humans today is physical and if we just start mixing with each other, then one new "race" would emerge and all our problems would disapear. That's gross, ridiculous and naive, since divisions among humans are caused by cultural factors.