New Type of Ancient Human Found—Descendants Live Today?

What predictions does the MR model make that differ from an OoA model with very limited interbreeding with Neanderthals and others?

And this is what we see with 95% of the genome. Only 5% of the regional DNA is kept which seems very discontinuous to me. It would seem to me that the major driving force was replacement with regional additions making up a small percentage of the resulting genome. This seems to be what you have been arguing for, the same results no matter which model we use. That is just it. The MH model does not predict that 95% of the wordwide human genome would be replaced by African DNA in a very short time period. The OoA model does predict this.

Because the major driving force (>95%) was migration of DNA instead of gene flow.

The spread of European traits across North America is a good example (and was mentioned earlier). It was due to the migration of Europeans that selected mates within their own population for the most part. It's not as if there was free gene flow between Europeans and the regional populations that resulted in European genes spreading across the continent and swamping the regional DNA.

Actually, I was thinking more along the lines of a migrating population. Obviously, there will be many generations in this migration just as there was in the migration of Europeans from Europe to the coast of the Pacific Ocean. The important mechanism is that members of this population showed strong mate selection for those within their own population. Gene flow was within the population, and the increase in population numbers is what explains the spread, not gene flow into indigenous gene pools.

There was not the same gene flow between the populations as there was within each population. The major mechanism was migration, not gene flow. Divergence between the human groups evidences interrupted gene flow through mate selection, as does the 95% dominance of African DNA in modern populations.Also, xenophobia amongst human groups seems to be the norm, not the exception. I don't see why earlier humans would be any different. This is given by Y-chromosome data. It demonstrates the timing of the migration and subsequent replacement:http://nadge.org/...igration-Map-Spencer_Wells2-1024x524.jpgWe see zero Y-chromosome haplotypes from Neanderthals and the Denisova species moving from outside of African into Africa. All of the movement is out of Africa.

The genetic divergence of anatomically modern humans, neanderthals, and the Denisova species. This genetic divergence required 300,000 years of very limited to no gene flow. Which I supplied with the Y-chromosome haplomap, the dominance of African DNA across the globe, and modern examples of the mechanism in action. Since these populations no longer exist I think it is quite permanent. The most diverse genetic groups are found in Africa, and they include the alleles found in human groups outside of Africa. Regional alleles are modifications of these African alleles (except for the tiny percentage of alleles from non-African, non-modern human populations). This means the source was Africa.Also, when people migrate they tend to bring their gonads along for the ride. When you find their DNA somewhere else in such a large bloc (95%) it is because it was taken there. These measurements are taken using molecular clock data using modern DNA. Since we are talking about the evolution of modern humans this seems to be a viable sample pool.

Not if there is uninterrupted gene flow between the populations as the MR model proposes. What link? The genetic data points to very limited gene flow between the populations, not free genetic flow as the MR model proposes. Our genomes are direct records of the past. They are the written genetic history of our ancestors passed down from one generation to the next. The workable model is OoA. MR fails to be a workable model, as we have been discussing. Could you cite his work so we could all take a look? (apologies if you have already presented it in a previous post) So why is it that African lineages dominate for both mtDNA and Y-chromosome DNA? Why do the Y-chromosome haplotypes create a pattern of migration?

The data shows that there was discontinuity between the populations for 300,000 years. It wasn't until populations migrated out of Africa that these genomes came into contact again, and even then the interaction was very limited resulting in the 5% of non-African DNA in modern populations.Also, why is there only a small amount of surviving non-African DNA? Shouldn't we find a lot more? As DNA moves through populations by genetic drift it has to be diluted by local variation. There is no way around it. What you seem to be pushing for is the genetic equivalent to homeopathy. So what part of our genome was not inherited from an ancestor? So what evidence, in your eyes, would support it? More importantly, what evidence would falsify the MR model as the major mechanism for the evolution of modern humans?ABE: I will definitely take a look at those articles and any others that are cogent. Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

From the article in the OP:"The team estimates Denisovans split from the parent group of Neanderthals about 350,000 years ago."
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/...volution-fossil-fingerLikewise, neanderthals split from the modern human lineage at about this time. There were at least 3 human populations with highly restrictive to no gene flow for 300,000 years prior to the proposed migration of Africans into Asia and Europe. So what would the population differences need to be in order for this to work with an MH model?Also, why would African alleles that are specialized for the open savannas of Africa be selected for in Asia? On top of that, why would selectively neutral traits such as the protruding chin be selected for? That doesn't seem to jive. What about 30,000 year old neanderthal DNA from Europe that remain distinct from 30,000 year old anatomically modern human DNA? How does that fit in?Also, if MH is true then we shouldn't have divergent genomes to begin with, but we do. I think we will have to agree to disagree on this one. The way I see it . . .If there was open gene flow then alleles should be evenly spread throughout the population to begin with. We should also see encroachment of Asian genes into Africa.