Re: On ancestry
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
No fossil or genetic evidence for such fantasies. There is no fossil sequence of Aftrican people evolving into Eurasians, not even one step in the chain. Human geneticists learned about Out of Africa and made their data fit the Recent Out of Africa hypothesis by elevating the hypothesis to axiomatic status. _________________________________________________________________________________________________They do not understand many of the causes for genetic diversity and have been consistently wrong in their predictions. They predicted Neanderthals and our main ancestry were genetically isolated from each other, wrong. They predicted the transition from hunter gatherer to agriculture would increase genetic diversity, again wrong in the several cases known. _________________________________________________________________________________________________They predicted gene flow as out of Africa and not back in. The oldest known African genome at 14kya has been within the last couple of years shown to have considerable ancestry in Eurasia. They predicted the Khoi-San have been genetically isolated from non Sub-Saharans. Not only demonstrating remarkable ignorance of history, but again shown to be wrong (such as the strong Basque inflow of genes around 5kya). ______________________________________________________________________________________________Of course their beliefs are magical, and they even use phrases like Y Adam and mitochondrial Eve. They predicted the Neanderthal Y was very distant from extant Y, again within the last year, wrong. Because of good press, being wrong makes them some how reliable with people who do not understand how they operate or generate what is incorrectly presented by the press as “facts”. ________________________________________________________________________________________________They present Africa as a magical origin place of all of humanity, where evolution takes place while all other places it either does not take place or is some how erased by local extinctions or near extinctions. Creationism is not the same magical belief system as Out of Africa. Though both schools have similar origins. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________Read “Tarzan at the Center of the Earth” to better understand where Out of Africa was between Darwin and when it came back in paleoanthropology. In the period (decades) when no paleoanthropologist accepted Out of Africa (they were all Out of Asia or multiregionalists after 1948_. Weidenreich 1948 proposes all human populations at all times have had gene flow with each other. The Out of Africa school rejected that, as did the Nazi (the Nazi were considered the best paleoanthropologists in the World by their American and British peers until WW II broke out, and openly and greatly by them). ___________________________________________________________________________________________________Out of Africa is linear evolution, with blacks the lowest and whites the highest. So naturally where the most primitive humans are, is where humans originated. In Tarzan aquiline nose Native Americans and European aristocrats were the highest forms of humanity. Of course post WW II there has been a lot of white washing, which does not conceal the racism in Out of Africa for those familiar with the fantasy and it’s history. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________Most of my adult life the Khoi-San were some how living fossils, which the San have published is offensive to them through their political representation. Romanticism aside, a fundamentally racist dogma.
Sent from Mail for Windows
From: Allan Krill
Sent: Thursday, October 7, 2021 7:51 AM
Subject: Re: [AAT] On ancestry
On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 06:07 PM, alandarwinvanarsdale wrote:
Thanks for explaining your views. Here are my thoughts on this:
Only a few creationists still think there was some sort of Garden of Eden (in Africa or elsewhere) where humans originated. And only a few racists still think that black Africans are somehow closer to apes than Eurasians are. Those old beliefs don't have any influence on modern thinking by evolutionists (including geneticists.)
Geneticists are not influenced by religion or racism. They are simply reading and interpreting the genomes of living Homo sapiens. They read the genomes to say that all living humans descended from a population of fully evolved Homo sapiens that lived in Africa. It seems clear that there was a population bottleneck in Africa (more like Noah's Ark than the Garden of Eden) about 200,000 years ago and humans who came through that bottleneck then populated the entire planet. The most significant wave of those fully evolved people came out of Africa to Eurasia very recently, only about 70,000- 50,000 years ago https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recent_African_origin_of_modern_humans. Genetics can't tell us where people evolved, or where in Africa this wave of people came from, or why there are so few fossils of humans or their stone tools or fireplaces before about 200,000 years ago.
But genetics do tell us that the human-chimp LCA was about 6 million years ago. So humans and chimps had about 6 million years to evolve (between 6,000,000 - 200,000 years), during which time there are no mammal fossils of any kind in the areas where chimps live. And genetics tell us that the chimp-gorilla LCA was about 10 million years ago. Since the gorilla and chimp are so morphologically similar and well suited to their diets and habitats, it is reasonable to think that the chimp-gorilla LCA was similar to them, and not similar to humans. The humans must have had some sort of alternative diets and habitats that made them so morphologically different. And humans must have evolved in an isolated place, with gene flow and without predators. Prehumans without large brains, tools, and weapons could not have survived early stages of their evolution if there were predators.