Chinese archeologists found remains in sufficient quantity to completely debunk the Out of Africa theory.
french.xinhuanet.com
Only found the article in French, this is an official Chinese newspaper.
>400 sites in Henan discovered putting man there more than 100.000 years ago
>found pre ice age tools
>remnants of paleolithic and neolithic eras
>proof of use of fire to cook meat dating back to 30 - 50 000 years
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
WE
>the timeline is wrong so everything about the theory is also wrong
not how science works abdul
except the theory is literally based on the timeline
When will they find evidence of alien genetic tamporing? Them chinese be hiding the troof! My dog be fartin!
>YFW Eastern and Wester Propaganda Science start butting heads
>:^)
Of course, africans should be classified as a seperate species but it would hurt peoples feelings.
Why does Sup Forums always post the haplogroup charts so eagerly here but never actually understand what they are?
Protip: they all have a common ancestor some 80k years ago.
nice shilling Schlomo; thankfully your kind hasn't infected China so you won't be able to bury the truth this time like you did in Europe.
Except the same thing was proven in Europe decades ago but since it's "bad science with bad results" it was buried and ignored, if they didn't straight up build shopping centers on the sites on purpose.
>Chinese archeologists
no, it's based on the concept that homo sapiens generally evolved in africa and then migrated in a second wave sometime after the homo erectus migration.
200,000 years ago is still "sometime after" a million years ago.
We already know there were ancient Sapiens in the Altai Mountains already 100k years ago and interbred with the Neanderthals there, but they didn't survive.
>austrian economics
>austrian elections
you don't know anything, look up Tobac and first hominid extiction that supposes that all proto-humans that evolved outside of Africa went extinct ~120 000 years ago to be replaced by Africans 80 000 years later.
>redditfrog
sage
>Chinese news source
>Chinese science
>non-peer reviewed
post discarded
Peer review doesnt mean shit anymore after western academia was purged of all dissent regarding races, sexes, climate, etc...
The out of Africa theory is such a progressive 'we are all the same' meme.
...
Only to retards who have no understanding of evolution, OOA basically tells us our species began in Afric, but it doesnt mean all humans are the exact same however.
BRAIN LIKE A FUCKIN ORANGE
WAZU CHING CHONG
Began in Africa about 40k years ago? LOL
Humanoids have been on earth for what 800k-millions of years?
Yet we are supposed to believe all the humanoids went to Africa like 50-100k years ago and left around 40k years ago differently evolved?
It's silly. Humanoids have been almost all over the planet far far before. Africa is not that significant.
>Chinese intellectuals
implying the world is not 6000 years old and that niggers are under the curse of ham
No began in Africa 200,000 years ago since the oldest human fossil in Africa has been dated to be that. I said humans user not hominids.
Chinks have no idea about history. We left Africa about a million years ago
that's not the thesis of the out of africa theory
the mitochondrial eve was a botched propaganda piece
>to completely debunk the Out of Africa theory.
>400 sites in Henan discovered putting man there more than 100.000 years ago
>debunk the Out of Africa theory
>100,000 years ago
Wut
I got you, user
>Homo ergaster may have been the first human species to leave Africa and fossil remains show this species had expanded its range into southern Eurasia by 1.75 million years ago. Their descendents, Homo erectus, then spread eastward and were established in South East Asia by at least 1.6 million years ago.
this, also China is bigger than all of white countries put together
that is not the out of Africa theory, why even talk about shit you don't understand ?
>We left Africa about a million years ago
Ha and where was Africa on a map that long ago laddie?
Then educate us. What is the out of africa theory?
>Chinese archeologists
that modern humans originated and spread from Africa ~80k years ago
Don't you think that the fact they base this out of Africa theory on one small collection ( two partial skulls as well as arm, leg, foot and pelvis bones) of bones is a bit intellectually lazy?
You're the one that doesn't understand basic archaeologic records, and you're pulling shit out of your ass
Yes I do but they know most regular humans are brainless idiots who cant handle complicated stuff so they say it anyway.
>that modern humans
No.
Anatomically modern humans != modern humans.
Sit next to a cro-magnon and ask someone to select the human. They'd have a hard time.
Slice them open and any decent anthropologist will tell you the difference.
literally gonna quote wikipedia now because you're pissing me off
>In paleoanthropology, the recent African origin of modern humans, also called the "Out of Africa" theory (OOA), the "recent single-origin hypothesis" (RSOH), "replacement hypothesis," or "recent African origin model" (RAO), is the most widely accepted model of the geographic origin and early migration of anatomically modern humans.[1][2][3][4][5] The theory argues for the African origins of modern humans, who left Africa in a single wave of migration which populated the world, replacing older human species.[6][7][8]
>A first dispersal took place between 130,000-115,000 years ago via northern Africa, but died out or retreated,[9][10][11][12][13] though Chinese researchers question this extinction and claim the presence of modern humans in China at least 80,000 years ago.[14] A second dispersal took place via the so-called Southern Route,[15] which followed the southern coastline of Asia, and colonized Australia by around 50,000 years ago. Europe was populated by an early offshoot which settled the Near East and Europe (post-Toba hypothesis).[16][7][8][9]
>The major competing hypothesis of the single origin theory is the multiregional origin of modern humans, which envisions a wave of Homo sapiens migrating earlier from Africa and interbreeding with local Homo erectus populations in multiple regions of the globe.[17][18]
What are the implications of this?
>~80k years ago
Incorrect, even if the out of Africa theory were true.
"Other fossils include the proposed Homo sapiens idaltu from Herto in Ethiopia that are almost 160,000 years old[8] and remains from Skhul in Israel that are 90,000 years old."
en.wikipedia.org
And these are just a small amount of fossils that have been found so far.
O-Okay? None of that proves your argument.
There are none. Chinese "anthropologists" have been pushing this narrative for decades. It has been proved conclusively false numerous times.
Somehow, for reasons I can't explain, they also take issue with multi-origin.
There was interbreeding on a scale we are only beginning to understand once humans left africa, and, potentially, while they still were in Africa. There are larger implications of this.
Same place it is now
>It has been proved conclusively false numerous times.
Check out the counter-studies, they are all botched unscientific jobs that were then counter proven by any serious person checking the methodology.
>There was interbreeding
That throws any relevance of the mitochondrial eve out of the window though because the basis of the proposition is that isolated human groups without contact would be related.
Ethopia is in africa. 90k is within the margin of error for 80k. OP seems to confirm what we all already know though. Speciation occurred in the 800,000 years between erectus leaving africa and sapien sapien evolving in Africa. The humans who'd left africa a million years ago went of in a slightly different direction, one that required more smarts and changes in the body for survivability.
Sub saharah africans = pure sapien sapien
everyone else = admixture
>Check out the counter-studies
I have.
Multi-origin can be debated. Chinese origins are 100% wrong.
>That throws any relevance of the mitochondrial eve
No, no it doesn't. All modern mt-dna have been mapped and origins found.
Further, did I say how the breeding took place?
So can we take the african continent now that they provably came out of Asians.
Based Xinzhi Wu.
no read the israel part man
>Wu is known for his criticism of the Out of Africa hypothesis
Okay.
>with ... he developed the alternative Multinational hypothesis
I, actually, am a proponent of it.
>Wu however confines his palaeoanthropological research to China
into le bin.
Out-of-Africa is still valid, but it's based on haplogroups. The multiregional theory is the current one since Eurasians have Neanderthal and/or Denisovan admixture as well. Out-of-Africa doesn't take aDNA into account.
How do you know what genetic relations they even have? You can't assume everyone is related to everyone. There are countless of extinct lineages.
OBVIOUSLY BECAUSE ARYANS ARE ALIENS WHO INTERBRED WITH HUMANS RESULTING IN THE MASTERRACE WHICH OWNED THE WORLD
Both the Y-DNA and mtDNA accumulate mutations. We can see that the most basal forms of the chromosomes are in Africa, particularly in the San people. Everyone else went through bottlenecks and had founder effects which created new mutations to the chromosomes. Only Eurasians have these new mutations, which means we are the latest branch, Africa the oldest.
The part about 90k years ago? That's what I was referring to when I mentioned margin of error.
ah fair play.
just a thing to remember with these fossils, it is a very small amount. it would be a bit presumptuous to jump to the out of africa theory due to them
bampt.
No, fuck you.
It's just a matter of whether humans all evolved in Africa or whether groups left Africa and evolved into humans afterwards. Africa is the ultimate origin in both scenarios