Jump to content

No single birthplace of mankind, say scientists


surajmal

Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, Tibarn said:

Multiregionalism within Africa seems like an interesting hypothesis on the origin of Humans. 

BTW, do you know why OOA is sometimes called theory and other times hypothesis? Those don't even have the same meaning... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Moochad said:

BTW, do you know why OOA is sometimes called theory and other times hypothesis? Those don't even have the same meaning... 

I don't know really; it always seemed fishy to me that OOA alternatively has a couple of different names including theory or hypothesis depending on the version. I am just guessing, but it seems like OOA Theory is just a colloquial name. It doesn't seem to be supported enough to be a theory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Moochad said:

BTW, do you know why OOA is sometimes called theory and other times hypothesis? Those don't even have the same meaning... 

 

3 hours ago, surajmal said:

The Multi regional genesis does not really contradict Out of Africa theory. 


Please look at the sentences of the article which states 

Quote

Instead, the international team argue, the distinctive features that make us human emerged mosaic-like across different populations spanning the entire African continent. Only after tens or hundreds of thousands of years of interbreeding and cultural exchange between these semi-isolated groups, did the fully fledged modern human come into being.

 

So, this article only speaks of discarding the existing notion that only "one origin, one population" theory that is being held is incorrect. It does not contradict the overall fact that humans did come out of Africa (albeit in a more complicated way than thought before). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, sarcastic said:

 

The Multi regional genesis does not really contradict Out of Africa theory. 


Please look at the sentences of the article which states 

So, this article only speaks of discarding the existing notion that only "one origin, one population" theory that is being held is incorrect. It does not contradict the overall fact that humans did come out of Africa (albeit in a more complicated way than thought before). 

It's a bit different, FWIU

https://www.nature.com/scitable/content/out-of-africa-versus-the-multiregional-hypothesis-6391

10[1].1038_35038565_full.gif

Quote
Out-of-Africa versus the multiregional hypothesis
Broadly speaking, there are two competing hypotheses on the origin of modern humans: the Out-of-Africa hypothesis and the multiregional hypothesis. Both agree that Homo erectus originated in Africa and expanded to Eurasia about one million years ago, but they differ in explaining the origin of modern humans (Homo sapiens sapiens). The first hypothesis proposes that a second migration out of Africa happened about 100,000 years ago, in which anatomically modern humans of African origin conquered the world by completely replacing archaic human populations (Homo sapiens; Model A). The multiregional hypothesis states that independent multiple origins (Model D) or shared multiregional evolution with continuous gene flow between continental populations (Model C) occurred in the million years since Homo erectus came out of Africa (the trellis theory). A compromised version of the Out-of-Africa hypothesis emphasizes the African origin of most human populations but allows for the possibility of minor local contributions (Model B).

What is accepted is that Homo erectus is from Africa, but the question is where are Homo sapiens sapiens from, which isn't conclusively from Africa, as both are hypotheses as of now.

 

What I think @Tibarn was mentioning was another hypothesis on top of OOA and multiregional known as "multiregionalism within Africa" So now there are 3 different hypotheses on where modern humans originate from.   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@sarcastic 
I google searched it, it seems to be a mixture of the 2

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/07/the-new-story-of-humanitys-origins/564779/

Quote

There is a decades-old origin story for our species, in which we descended from a group of hominids who lived somewhere in Africa around 200,000 years ago. Some scientists have placed that origin in East Africa; others championed a southern birthplace. In either case, the narrative always begins in one spot. Those ancestral hominids, probably Homo heidelbergensis, slowly accumulated the characteristic features of our species—the rounded skull, small face, prominent chin, advanced tools, and sophisticated culture. From that early cradle, we then spread throughout Africa, and eventually the world.

But some scientists are now arguing that this textbook narrative is wrong in its simplicity, linearity, and geography. Yes, we evolved from ancestral hominids in Africa, but we did it in a complicated fashion—one that involves the entire continent.

 

I think this is what @Tibarn was getting at. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Moochad said:

@sarcastic 
I google searched it, it seems to be a mixture of the 2

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/07/the-new-story-of-humanitys-origins/564779/

 

I think this is what @Tibarn was getting at. 

Right

 

This came out a few days ago

https://www.cell.com/trends/ecology-evolution/fulltext/S0169-5347(18)30117-4

Dh18NYHX4AI18G4.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...