Guardian partially admits Out-of-Africa outdated

OOA for short. It’s fun watching them scrabble to keep the narrative ‘we’re all African’.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jun/07/oldest-homo-sapiens-bones-ever-found-shake-foundations-of-the-human-story
“Fossils recovered from an old mine on a desolate mountain in Morocco have rocked one of the most enduring foundations of the human story: that Homo sapiens arose in a cradle of humankind in East Africa 200,000 years ago.  Archaeologists unearthed the bones of at least five people at Jebel Irhoud, a former barite mine 100km west of Marrakesh, in excavations that lasted years. They knew the remains were old, but were stunned when dating tests revealed that a tooth and stone tools found with the bones were about 300,000 years old.
“My reaction was a big ‘wow’,” said Jean-Jacques Hublin, a senior scientist on the team at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig. “I was expecting them to be old, but not that old.” 
Hublin said the extreme age of the bones makes them the oldest known specimens of modern humans and poses a major challenge to the idea that the earliest members of our species evolved in a “Garden of Eden” in East Africa one hundred thousand years later.”

Yeah yeah, sequence the genome.
No excuse.

““This gives us a completely different picture of the evolution of our species. It goes much further back in time, but also the very process of evolution is different to what we thought,” Hublin told the Guardian. “It looks like our species was already present probably all over Africa by 300,000 years ago. If there was a Garden of Eden, it might have been the size of the continent.” [DS: were*]
Jebel Irhoud has thrown up puzzles for scientists since fossilised bones were first found at the site in the 1960s. Remains found in 1961 and 1962, and stone tools recovered with them, were attributed to Neanderthals and at first considered to be only 40,000 years old. At the time, a popular view held that modern humans evolved from Neanderthals. [genetics confirms this in all non-Africans] Today, the Neanderthals are considered a sister group [wtf is that in science] that lived alongside, and even bred with, our modern human ancestors.”

Our?

I love it when The Guardian repeats the science I’ve been saying for years. They’re still clutching at straws.

“Other fossils and genetic evidence all point to an African origin for modern humans.”
Or outright lying.
“The most striking difference was the shape of the braincase which was more elongated than that of humans today. It suggests, said Hublin, that the modern brain evolved in Homo sapiens and was not inherited from a predecessor.”
No it does not. That’s distinctive to Cro Magnon man. Stop lying. Test for the characteristic R1 haplogroup of Cro Magnon man.
“The tools they brought with them have been resharpened, resharpened, and resharpened again. They did not produce new tools on the spot.”
Obviously they stole them. So, probably not Cro Magnon.
They died in a mountain. A mine of materials. Therefore, they couldn’t make those tools.
“But he finds the theory compelling. “The idea is that early Homo sapiens dispersed around the continent and elements of human modernity appeared in different places,”
That’s called the multi-regional hypothesis (MRH) and all the forensic evidence of Neanderthals proves it definitively. That is also why they say every race was actually Homo Sapiens except for them btw, they don’t want to count it.
“and so different parts of Africa contributed to the emergence of what we call modern humans today,” he said.”
No, that’s literally the opposite. Africa wasn’t the centre. There was no centre. There was NO Eden, there was no singular unified group, that is a Victorian myth.
And also, how can ‘Africa’ be the centre, but also different parts of it >1? OOA is limited to one source!
““One of the big questions about the emergence of anatomically modern humans has been did our body plan evolve quickly or slowly. This find seems to suggest the latter.”
Sampling bias?
“It seems our faces became modern long before our skulls took on the shape they have today.””
That is physically impossible if you ask a neuroscientist. The skull forms around the brain. Hell, ask a forensic anthropologist, if you can hear the reply through the laughter.
“Does the new find imply there was more than one hominin lineage in Africa at this time? It really stirs the pot.”
-more than one
-but in Africa
….Pangea isn’t Africa.
“Lee Berger, whose team recently discovered the 300,000 year-old Homo naledi, an archaic-looking human relative, near the Cradle of Humankind World Heritage site outside Johannesburg, said dating the Jebel Irhoud bones was thrilling, but is unconvinced that modern humans lived all over Africa so long ago. “They’ve taken two data points and not drawn a line between them, but a giant map of Africa,” he said.”
Cookie for you, Lee. Salty delivery, I like it.
“adding that stone tools can move around in cave sediments and settle in layers of a different age.” John is right but fails to mention that has limits based on the soil composition.
“For me, claiming these remains are Homo sapiens stretches the meaning of that term a bit,” Shea added. “These humans who lived between 50,000-300,000 years ago are a morphologically diverse bunch. Whenever we find more than a couple of them from the same deposits, such as at Omo Kibish and Herto in Ethiopia or Skhul and Qafzeh in Israel, their morphology is all over the place both within and between samples.”
Better, so close to the r-word, or at least sub-species?
“It really does look like in Africa especially, but also globally, our evolution was characterised by numerous different species all living at the same time and possibly even in the same places.

The cognitive dissonance is strong.

Couldn’t even make it a single logical sentence.

While, if you look at a link at the bottom of that very article:
They admit the African skull they claimed as sub-human is actually just African human, modern African.
People think I’m shitting them with how much race reality the Guardian admits but they don’t know it’s leaking out. Never attribute to malice….

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/oct/17/skull-homo-erectus-human-evolution
“The Dmanisi fossils show that H erectus migrated as far as Asia soon after arising in Africa.”
trans. We found them in Asia and need to cover this up.
“The latest skull discovered in Dmanisi belonged to an adult male and was the largest of the haul. It had a long face and big, chunky teeth. But at just under 550 cubic centimetres, it also had the smallest braincase of all the individuals found at the site.”
“They found that while the Dmanisi skulls looked different to one another, the variations were no greater than those seen among modern people and among chimps.”
If those African skulls weren’t human, they were sub-human, some maintain this.
“Everything that lived at the time of the Dmanisi was probably just Homo erectus,” said Prof Zollikofer.”
Here’s the photo:

“If you found the Dmanisi skulls at isolated sites in Africa, some people would give them different species names. But one population can have all this variation. We are using five or six names, but they could all be from one lineage.”
So close to admitting it.
So damn close.
“Some palaeontologists see minor differences in fossils and give them labels, and that has resulted in the family tree
accumulating a lot of branches,” said White. “The Dmanisi fossils give us a new yardstick, [no?] and when you apply that yardstick to the African fossils, a lot of that extra wood in the tree is dead wood. [your opinion is not proof] It’s arm-waving.”
Translated from academese: let’s lower the standard for Africa because it makes them look like chimps and not fully human.
Some are honestly skeptical of this proposition
“I think they will be proved right that some of those early African fossils can reasonably join a variable Homo erectus species,” said Chris Stringer, head of human origins at the Natural History Museum in London. “But Africa is a huge continent with a deep record of the earliest stages of human evolution, [note: not the only record] and there certainly seems to have been species-level diversity there prior to two million years ago. So I still doubt that all of the ‘early Homo’ fossils can reasonably be lumped into an evolving Homo erectus lineage. We need similarly complete African fossils from two to 2.5m years ago to test that idea properly.”

trans. They’re modern, just fucking admit it.

“This is a fantastic and important discovery, but I don’t think the evidence they have lives up to this broad claim they are making. They say this falsifies that Australopithecus sediba is the ancestor of Homo. The very simple response is, no it doesn’t.”

10/10

Are humans meant to be monogamous?

Articles like these are always PC, they’re trying to defend the ‘sex positive’ line.

At least it didn’t mention bonobos (red herring) on such a loaded question.

http://www.livescience.com/32146-are-humans-meant-to-be-monogamous.html

This comment is better than the article.

I disagree with the premise. If you look at Chimps… the females sleep around so that no one can be sure of paternity and they entire group will be invested in protecting the progeny. But in those societies males aren’t invested in parenting and they themselves sleep around.

However, human males have evolved to be invested in parenting. That’s why they develop biological changes such as increasing prolactin to help them bond with the child. The greater the paternal investment in rearing the offspring the greater the necessity to ensure paternity.

Any man irrationally terrified of cuckoldry in the age of DNA testing is flashing beta (anxious-avoidant attachment style) like a neon sign, why else would he think it’s possible that a woman would want to cheat on him?
[notable exception: rape]

Nature only has two options for that– either you become a lot bigger like male Gorillas so you can fight off other males to protect your harem or you invest in monogamy. If you compare humans to Gorillas we are lot less sexually dimorphic with only about a 10% difference compared to 50% difference. For monogamy, of course it makes sense that we have developed the biology to feel romantic love. When human males fall in love their testoterone actualy decreases and female testosterone increases. Making us more similar to each other. Both males and females feel jealousy at their mate with another person. Humans have actually evolved for monogamy compared to our closest relatives.

All true. Mate guarding is proof positive of monogamy in humans.

Bravo and good tidings

Why guard when you have others and don’t care?

Infidelity would lead to tribal ostracisation, the man would probably die a genetic death if he wasn’t bludgeoned to death by the genuine spouse (rightly, crime of passion) but the female would be left either with children and no provider or the children would remain behind without a carer and fall prey to a wolf or something, those remaining wouldn’t really care for the children.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinderella_effect

Women have more to lose from cheating and the current law corrects this. Anyone in a committed relationship who cheats is scum anyway, who cares what happens to them?

http://www.livescience.com/www.myhealthnewsdaily.com/2428-cheating-unsafe-sex-open-relationship-%20std-risk.html

Bring on antibiotic resistance.

OT: So-called ‘dread game’ actually attracts anxious women and makes them act out, not the secure ones who care. When you pull away, they let you. It keeps the crazies.

New human “species”: Homo naledi

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/11855405/Homo-naledi-a-new-species-of-human-discovered-in-a-cave-in-South-Africa.html

They’re terrified of saying race. Wonder why.

this is awkward

At least 15 skeletons of the species – named Homo Naledi – were found hidden deep in a cave dubbed the ‘Star Chamber’ in which is thought to be the earliest form of ritual burial ever discovered.

The early humans stood just five foot tall and weighed 100 pounds. Their hips were similar to our earliest ancestor, the hominid Lucy, but their shoulders were well designed for climbing but legs and feet were human like. Their skulls are like early humans, but their brains are tiny, just the size of an orange.

I’ll take the high route and say this is consistent with another human racial group. Too much similarity for another species.

Before the discovery scientists believed that only Homo sapiens had enough compassion and self awareness to bury the dead.

……Neanderthals don’t exist then, bitch?
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/12/131216-la-chapelle-neanderthal-burials-graves/
We learned how to bury and care for the dead from them. From modelling them.

“We are also left with the idea that they did not live there. There is no archaeology. That has led us to the rather remarkable conclusions that we have just met a new species of human relative that deliberatley disposed of its dead inside of the chamber in cradle of mankind.

Like a Missing Link of sorts?

Their deliberate ignorance of evidence is astounding. Confirmation bias much?

“Overall, Homo naledi looks like one of the most primitive members of our genus, but it also has some surprisingly human-like features, enough to warrant placing it in the genus Homo.”

THANK YOU.

H. naledi’s teeth are described as similar to those of the earliest-known human relatives, as are most features of the skull but the shoulders are more similar to those of apes.

Dr Tracy Kivell of the University of Kent, in the UK, said: “The hands suggest tool-using capabilities.

……

“Surprisingly, H. naledi has extremely curved fingers, more curved than almost any other species of early hominin, which clearly demonstrates climbing capabilities.”

*looks at own hands*
I am a monkey? They look like mine. Longer thumb though but bone curvature is normal variance.

“The feet, combined with its long legs, suggest that the species was well-suited for long-distance walking,” he said.

Make your sodding mind up.

Neanderthals’ DNA legacy linked to modern ailments

Full from http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2014/01/neanderthals-dna-legacy-linked-to-modern-ailments/ ;

Remnants of Neanderthal DNA in modern humans are associated with genes affecting type 2 diabetes, Crohn’s disease, lupus, biliary cirrhosis, and smoking behavior. They also concentrate in genes that influence skin and hair characteristics. At the same time, Neanderthal DNA is conspicuously low in regions of the X chromosome and testes-specific genes.

The research, led by Harvard Medical School (HMS) geneticists and published Jan. 29 in Nature, suggests ways in which genetic material inherited from Neanderthals has proven both adaptive and maladaptive for modern humans. (A related paper by a separate team was published concurrently in Science.)

“Now that we can estimate the probability that a particular genetic variant arose from Neanderthals, we can begin to understand how that inherited DNA affects us,” said David Reich, professor of genetics at HMS and senior author of the paper.

In the past few years, studies by groups including Reich’s have revealed that present-day people of non-African ancestry trace an average of about 2 percent of their genomes to Neanderthals — a legacy of interbreeding between humans and Neanderthals that the team previously showed occurred between 40,000 to 80,000 years ago. (Indigenous Africans have little or no Neanderthal DNA because their ancestors did not breed with Neanderthals, who lived in Europe and Asia.)

Several teams have since been able to flag Neanderthal DNA at certain locations in the non-African human genome, but until now, there was no survey of Neanderthal ancestry across the genome and little understanding of the biological significance of that genetic heritage.

“The story of early human evolution is captivating in itself, yet it also has far-reaching implications for understanding the organization of the modern human genome,” said Irene A. Eckstrand of the National Institutes of Health’s National Institute of General Medical Sciences, which partially funded the research. “Every piece of this story that we uncover tells us more about our ancestors’ genetic contributions to modern human health and disease.”

Deserts and oases

Reich and his colleagues — including Svante Pääbo of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Germany — analyzed genetic variants in 846 people of non-African heritage, 176 people from sub-Saharan Africa, and a 50,000-year-old Neanderthal whose high-quality genome sequence the team published in 2013.

The most powerful information the researchers used to determine whether a gene variant came from a Neanderthal was if it appeared in some non-Africans and the Neanderthal, but not in the sub-Saharan Africans.

Using this and other types of information, the team found that some areas of the modern non-African human genome were rich in Neanderthal DNA, which may have been helpful for human survival, while other areas were more like “deserts” with far less Neanderthal ancestry than average.

The barren areas were the “most exciting” finding, said first author Sriram Sankararaman of HMS and the Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT. “It suggests the introduction of some of these Neanderthal mutations was harmful to the ancestors of non-Africans and that these mutations were later removed by the action of natural selection.”

The team showed that the areas with reduced Neanderthal ancestry tend to cluster in two parts of our genomes: genes that are most active in the male germline (the testes) and genes on the X chromosome. This pattern has been linked in many animals to a phenomenon known as hybrid infertility, where the offspring of a male from one subspecies and a female from another have low or no fertility.

“This suggests that when ancient humans met and mixed with Neanderthals, the two species were at the edge of biological incompatibility,” said Reich, who is also a senior associate member of the Broad Institute and an investigator at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. Present-day human populations, which can be separated from one another by as much as 100,000 years (such as West Africans and Europeans), are fully compatible with no evidence of increased male infertility. In contrast, ancient human and Neanderthal populations apparently faced interbreeding challenges after 500,000 years of evolutionary separation.

“It is fascinating that these types of problems could arise over that short a time scale,” Reich said.

A lasting heritage

The team also measured how Neanderthal DNA present in human genomes today affects keratin production and disease risk.

Neanderthal ancestry is increased in genes affecting keratin filaments. This fibrous protein lends toughness to skin, hair, and nails and can be beneficial in colder environments by providing thicker insulation, said Reich. “It’s tempting to think that Neanderthals were already adapted to the non-African environment and provided this genetic benefit to humans,” he speculated.

The researchers also showed that nine previously identified human genetic variants known to be associated with specific traits likely came from Neanderthals. These variants affect diseases related to immune function and also some behaviors, such as the ability to stop smoking. The team expects that more variants will be found to have Neanderthal origins.

The team has already begun trying to improve their human genome ancestry results by analyzing multiple Neanderthals instead of one. Together with colleagues in Britain, they have developed a test that can detect most of the approximately 100,000 mutations of Neanderthal origin they discovered in people of European ancestry; they are conducting an analysis in a biobank containing genetic data from half a million Britons.

I VOLUNTEER.

“I expect that this study will result in a better and more systematic understanding of how Neanderthal ancestry affects variation in human traits today,” said Sankararaman.

As another next step, the team is studying genome sequences from people from Papua New Guinea to build a database of genetic variants that can be compared to those of Denisovans, a third population of ancient humans that left most of its genetic traces in Oceania but little in mainland Eurasia.

How did I find this story? Funny story.
A moron on tumblr who doesn’t understand evolution. For lolz;

SJWsdon'tdoDarwinwtfhowfacepalmingsrsly
No one told them Neanderthals had high IQs and ginger hair. Hush. Don’t spoil it for them.
Let them drone on about discredited Afrocentrist ‘racial purity’ pipedreams. And evolution is a constant process for the record. “We are changing the main narrative. Neanderthals were just as adaptable and in many ways, simply victims of their own success.” How’s Africa doing on the global scale compared to every other country? Still rape and murder capital of the world? Hmm.

Oldest stone tool ever found… in Turkey

https://www.royalholloway.ac.uk/aboutus/newsandevents/news/newsarticles/scientistsdiscoveroldeststonetooleverfoundinturkey.aspx

…Scientists have discovered the oldest recorded stone tool ever to be found in Turkey, revealing that humans passed through the gateway from Asia to Europe much earlier than previously thought, approximately 1.2 million years ago.

According to research published in the journal Quaternary Science Reviews, the chance find of a humanly-worked quartzite flake, in ancient deposits of the river Gediz, in western Turkey, provides a major new insight into when and how early humans dispersed out of Africa and Asia…

and Asia now?
They’re trying so hard to keep OOA alive.

The evidence has literally nothing to do with Africa but hey, let’s ignore that.

The researchers used high-precision radioisotopic dating and palaeomagnetic measurements from lava flows, which both pre-date and post-date the meander, to establish that early humans were present in the area between approximately 1.24 million and 1.17 million years ago. Previously, the oldest hominin fossils in western Turkey were recovered in 2007 at Koçabas, but the dating of these and other stone tool finds were uncertain.

“The flake was an incredibly exciting find”, Professor Schreve said. “I had been studying the sediments in the meander bend and my eye was drawn to a pinkish stone on the surface. When I turned it over for a better look, the features of a humanly-struck artefact were immediately apparent.

“By working together with geologists and dating specialists, we have been able to put a secure chronology to this find and shed new light on the behaviour of our most distant ancestors.”

The paper ‘The earliest securely-dated hominin artefact in Anatolia?’ is available online.

Modern humans still bred with Neanderthals

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn26435-thoroughly-modern-humans-interbred-with-neanderthals.html

(And killed, and ate.)

The oldest DNA of a modern human ever to be sequenced shows that the Homo sapiens who interbred with the Neanderthals were very modern – not just anatomically but with modern behaviour including painting, modern tools, music and jewellery.

Some previous estimates had placed the first interspecies liaison much earlier, before the emergence of these features. The new DNA sequence shows it actually happened in the middle of an age called the Initial Upper Palaeolithic, when there was an explosion of modern human culture.

– because of them. They taught us.

About 2 per cent of many people’s genomes today is made up of Neanderthal DNA, a result of interbreeding between the two species that can be seen in everyone except people from sub-Saharan Africa. The so-called Ust’-Ishim man, named after the town in western Siberia where he was found, carries a similar proportion of Neanderthal DNA in his genome as present-day Eurasians, and a combination of radiocarbon and genetic dating shows he died only about 45,000 years ago.

…The Initial Upper Palaeolithic was a period around 50,000 years ago when complex stone and bone tools appeared across Eurasia, along with body ornamentation like pierced shells and animal teeth, pigments and even musical instruments, says team member Tom Higham of the University of Oxford. It is unknown which human-like species made these sophisticated artefacts, but the finding that Ust’-Ishim man was in Siberia at this time means that it could have been modern humans, he says.

It isn’t. You know it isn’t.

“This is very exciting research that shows again the remarkable power of ancient DNA analysis to help solve seemingly intractable questions in human evolution science,” says Darren Curnoe from the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia.

By comparing Ust’-Ishim’s genome to various groups of modern and ancient humans, the researchers are filling in gaps in the map of initial human migrations around the globe. They found that he is as genetically similar to present-day East Asians as to ancient genomes found in Western Europe and Siberia, suggesting that the population he was part of split from the ancestors of both Europeans and East Asians, prior to their divergence from each other.

Uhuh…

“He represents a group that settled Siberia and then disappeared without leaving descendants,” says Curnoe. “This tells us that as early humans left Africa and settled Eurasia they weren’t all successful. There were more populations than we thought, some making no contribution to living people at all.” He notes this could make it difficult to interpret human fossils found in Eurasia, since we cannot assume that they are our ancestors.

Fuck. You.
There’s no reason to bring Africa into this at all, yet you do. There is negative evidence that Africa was NOT involved. Fuck. You.

But while Ust’-Ishim man does not appear to have any modern-day direct descendants living today, he is more genetically similar to present-day East Asians than to present-day Europeans. This finding is consistent with a recently proposed theory that present-day Europeans may have got some of their ancestry from later groups that weren’t part of the initial migration into the area. “It supports that very strongly,” says Reich, one of the researchers who developed the idea.

Yes, Europe is special.
See all our culture for further information.

Homo sapiens is believed to have taken on Neanderthal DNA from at least two bouts of interbreeding. While sub-Saharan Africans have no Neanderthal DNA, Asian populations have more than Europeans. [DS: cough cough IQ]

Exactly, the Africa comment was wrong. There is a LACK of evidence, a definitive NO.

“We know that there are likely to have been at least two admixture events into the ancestors of present-day people – the shared event early during modern human migration out of Africa, and a second event into the ancestors of present-day Asians,” says Kelso.

How are you so fucking stupid to keep dragging Out of Africa into this?
We have proof for the latter. Genomic proof.
There is negative evidence for the former. No genetic ties whatsoever. And still, you cling.

Because there are only a few of these longer stretches, they were unable to precisely date when this later interbreeding may have happened. But whatever the date, it seems humans and Neanderthals found each other irresistible, or at least mated with each other fairly commonly, whenever we inhabited the same areas. “The timing is most likely simply a result of the fact that this is where the two groups overlapped geographically and temporally,” says Kelso.

Rather fair-skinned, aren’t they? Didn’t they have red hair? Isn’t that a recessive trait?
So, if these guys came from Africa AT ALL, they couldn’t possibly have that many recessive traits.

Out of Africa has been repeatedly demonstrated as false because they keep having to add to it. It’s now Out of Africa more than once, which defeats the core of theory, a single migration pattern!
Multi-regional Hypothesis is supported by all the evidence! All of it! It predicted all these ‘surprising’ migration flows and multiple forms of ‘human’ genome!

In 2000, the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequence of “Mungo Man 3” (LM3) of ancient Australia was published indicating that Mungo Man was an extinct subspecies that diverged before the most recent common ancestor of contemporary humans. The results, if correct, supports the multiregional origin of modern humans hypothesis.[27][28]

and from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recent_African_origin_of_modern_humans#Competing_hypotheses

The multiregional hypothesis, initially proposed by Milford Wolpoff, holds that the evolution of humans from H. erectus at the beginning of the Pleistocene 1.8 million years BP has been within a single, continuous worldwide population. Proponents of multiregional origin reject the assumption of an infertility barrier between ancient Eurasian and African populations of Homo. Multiregional proponents point to the fossil record and genetic evidence in chromosomal DNA.

You mean, actual science.

One study suggested that at least 5% of the human modern gene pool can be attributed to ancient admixture, which in Europe would be from the Neanderthals.[74] But the study also suggests that there may be other reasons why humans and Neanderthals share ancient genetic lineages.[75][76]

All this new evidence into Neanderthals show these doubters of MRH are wrong.

The bones of contention in anthropology

A wide swathe of our understanding of human and human-like origins is limited by practical factors. Chief among those is excavation permissions. London has full layers of history underneath it, but when any new site is found it is usually kept a secret to keep renovation costs down (no need to bring in experts for removal). It used to be that the first modern archeological digs were in Africa, because the land is so undeveloped anyway, it was cheap, and later in the Middle East (primarily the Victorian’s obsession with Egypt).

Scientific theories follow the evidence, or they should do, in theory.

Due to this constraint, OOA, which stands for the Out of Africa model was developed. This theory called Africa the Cradle of Life for all of humanity, long before we had a proper knowledge of genetics. It was useful to the Victorians (yes, it’s a Victorian theory) to support their practice of slavery and the expansion of the Empire to assist the ‘devolved’, later “noble savages”, as part of the Christian mission, which held all peoples to be worthy of help as long as they accepted God’s word.

The tribes and small villages encountered were backward in many ways. Witchcraft, cannibalism, torture, gang-rape…

When the passage to the Orient (Asia) was fully opened and easily accessible, archeology began in full there too. Denisovans were discovered, a highly advanced race on par with Neanderthals. We’d now call them Eurasian, geographically. No one is certain what happened to them, a combination of war and outbreeding (miscegenation). To this day, plenty of Europeans and Asians carry traces of Denisovan DNA, as non-Africans tend to carry traces of Neanderthal. The latter was different enough from modern humans, Homo Sapiens to merit classification as a distinct species, although given new knowledge of interbreeding with Europeans primarily, this is incorrect. You see, the species/racial divide is created by fertility potential. As Neanderthals could and did interbreed with us, they could not correctly be considered a separate species, but a race of humanity. The same goes for Denisovans, and they seem as advanced in some ways as Neanderthals, despite the scant information we have on them. Recently, Denisovans have been inaccurately subsumed into the Homo Sapiens classification because they raised uncomfortable questions about intelligence and their carbon dating, which contradicts the OOA model.

OOA has been rewritten a number of times by frauds now in an effort to retain exorbitant foreign aid funding to Africa with the excuse that we owe Africa our existence as the Cradle of Life. The facts no longer support this. In fact, the negative evidence of non-African DNA at all completely refutes OOA to any true scientific mind observing. Its objective existence is proof of the fraud, yet it is still pushed as fact because of the foreign interest in keeping the NGO money flowing. The theory supported by the evidence is the MRH or Multi-Regional Hypothesis. MRH is exactly what it sounds like, there were many races which developed across all/multiple continents and most of these remain to this day while others (Denisovan, Neanderthal) were driven to extinction. OOA is to anthropology what creationism is to biology. With MRH, however, these different races still living would each require public acknowledgement and protection. Savvy readers know that probably isn’t going to happen.

Either humanity is a very broad umbrella term encompassing the entire spectrum of intellect and ability, or we must ignore most forensic evidence since the 1800s to keep the hippies happy.