New Type of Ancient Human Found—Descendants Live Today?

And what are the other ways?

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

I gave an example already, but allow me to elaborate:Genetic information can flow from population A to population C (through B) even if none of the members (or their offspring) make a trip from A to C. If A's members are breeding with B's on the peripheries (where their populations meet/overlap), then A-genes get mixed with B-genes such that the peripheries contain an AB hybrid. Anyone breeding with these hybrids also takes on hybrid genes, this means any more internalized B-members who breed with some of the hybrid peripheral members. This process continues until there are members now on the B-C frontier who are AB hybrids, at which point these hybrids breed with peripheral Cs to create an ABC hybrid. The same process moves B's genes to A, C's to B, etc. without anyone having to journey any further than the house next door.But this is not the sort of migration OOA supposes; if we reduce the OOA population movement statements to what I've laid out above, then we really no longer have the OOA model as currently proposed by mainstream science, we've just got MH, albeit with a flair.Jon

---

Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr

Combining replies to Message 29 & Message 30: Indeed, but OOA still uses a migration model to explain the spread of sapiens. This means daddy and mommy set out on an adventure, have kids along the way, die, and let the kids continue the adventure. Notice the reference to numbers of people who left Africa in the Wikipedia article I linked. OOA is not just about gene flow between neighboring populations; it is about the migration of a new species, fully sapiens, from some point of origin outward to other places. The number of generations doesn't change the model; it just changes the timescale. I'm not sure I understand the question. Perhaps if we are defining the physical in terms of the genetic, then a separation would be impossible. Generally, though, genetic information can travel without a corresponding travel of the originating body.Jon

---

Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr

I still don't see how that is different. Yes, you add an intermediate step, population "B", but it is still a migration model. Perhaps it is closer to the pony express than the telegraph but it is still a migration model.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Hi, Jon. How else do you propose population A got its genes into population X? Teleporting gametes?It's a simple fact of heredity that the only people who can transmit my genes to somewhere else are myself and my descendants. Therefore, if I'm African, and my genes somehow end up saturating the gene pool of Malaysia, this means that either I or my descendants went to Malaysia and hosed the placed down with our African gametes. There is literally no other way for my genes to get there (ignoring artificial insemination and sperm banks, which presumably don't apply here).And remember that we're not just talking about a few African genes being moved into Asia: we're talking about essentially entire African genomes saturating every population in Asia! How does this happen? By slow diffusion of genes from Africa through hundreds of hybrid populations until they reach the extremities of Asia?Realistically, hybridization can't explain such a lopsided result, unless the Africans were contributing substantially more to the Asian gene pools than the Denisovans were, which shouldn't be happening if Africans are staying in Africa.Realistically, Africans actually being in Asia---indeed, Africans outnumbering Denisovans in Asia---explains the lopsided result much better.But, if Africans live in Africa, how do they end up in Asia?Why... migration, of course.----- Ignoring the fact that somebody still has to leave the family farm in order for the next generation to not end up on the family farm, let me show you why this is absurd.In order for this scenario you've proposed to explain the data, there would have to be an endless network of interconnected populations spanning all of Asia, no one of which was so far from the neighboring populations that any of the locals actually had to walk farther to get there than they would have walked that day anyway.I haven't done the math, but I'm pretty sure even modern Asia doesn't have a population density high enough for that to be feasible. Paleolithic Asia certainly didn't.Furthermore, you're still stuck with the evidence that shows that these populations were once isolated enough for them to have diverged morphologically; but you're proposing that, later, they were interconnected enough for the African gene pool to sweep through all these populations and eliminate all but a few traces of the other gene pools, all without anybody having to do a little extra walking.Are you really going to take it this far?Why is it so hard for you to admit that somebody had to hoof it out of Africa?

---

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)Darwin loves you.

Hi, Jon. ...but not without a corresponding travel of some body.

---

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)Darwin loves you.

How is it a migration model? What's migrating?Jon

---

Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr

People.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Replies to Message 35 & Message 36: Yes; people must travel. The issue is how far they travel and the kind of travel they do. I already explained one possible scenario.

quote:

---

Jon in Message 32:

​

Genetic information can flow from population A to population C (through B) even if none of the members (or their offspring) make a trip from A to C. If A's members are breeding with B's on the peripheries (where their populations meet/overlap), then A-genes get mixed with B-genes such that the peripheries contain an AB hybrid. Anyone breeding with these hybrids also takes on hybrid genes, this means any more internalized B-members who breed with some of the hybrid peripheral members. This process continues until there are members now on the B-C frontier who are AB hybrids, at which point these hybrids breed with peripheral Cs to create an ABC hybrid. The same process moves B's genes to A, C's to B, etc. without anyone having to journey any further than the house next door.

---

Again, the issue is the type of movement. Yes, only your descendants can carry your genes to a new location, but this doesn't mean any of them must travel further than they otherwise would in the course of their regular lives. Of course it can. Africa being the origin of pre-sapiens (who, of course, did migrate) and the location of the greatest population density, we would naturally expect Africans to make the highest contribution to the world-wide population gene pool. It would be ridiculous to expect less dense, peripheral populations to contribute an equal amount of genetic material to the world population (which includes themselves) as the denser, central populations. I guess it depends on how you define an 'African'. This is most likely the type of network that existed. Remember, these folk were mostly nomadic hunter-gatherers. The space needed to live and the distances covered on daily excursions was likely large. What is more, this model is to be expected given the supposed patterns of dispersal from Africa of earlier pre-sapiens. What sort of isolation are you talking about? There's little need to get personal. There were clearly folk moving back and forth between various geographical locationsit was part of how they survived; the super exodus proposed by OOA, however, is just not one of the type of movements likely to have taken place. Even the gradual expansion that characterized the first wave of movements out of Africa is unlikely, as the areas to be moved into were already populated and we've no evidence, as far as I'm aware, of sapiens and pre-sapiens existing simultaneously in serious geographical proximity.Happy New Year!Jon

---

Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr

Okay. That explains the 'what'. And the 'how'?Happy New Year!JonEdited by Jon, : Awaiting reason...

---

Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr

On foot, step by step.Even if there is some interbreeding at the boundary of A ---> B unless your carry that through the whole population, of B, you need someone carrying the A gene set to walk all the way to the boundary of B ---> C to screw around.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Hi, Jon. There's only one way to define it that's meaningful in an evolutionary context: i.e. as a hereditary lineage, in this case a lineage of humans that began in Africa, as opposed to the separate lineages from Europe (Neanderthal) and Asia (Denisovan).----- How did you determine how likely this is?I say that the evidence does not bear this out.The evidence seems to suggest that, up until the point of the alleged "super-exodus" (about 70,000 years ago), the three lineages had distinct morphologies and distinct genetic markers. Then, at about 70,000 years ago, the isolation was broken, and now everybody alive belongs to the African lineage.This evidence suggests a shift from isolated populations to an invasion of Africans that swamped out and/or exterminated the other lineages. This shift indicates that something changed in the movement patterns of the Africans.----- I'm not sure what "pre-sapiens" has to do with this, because it was the Denisovans and Neanderthals who inhabited the areas into which H. sapiens allegedly migrated (all the other groups of hominins from the region were apparently extinct by 70,000 years ago, when the migration is thought to have happened); and, since the new evidence shows that humans interbred with Neanderthals and Denisovans, I think we can go ahead and say that they coexisted.----- I like that you said "little need" instead of "no need."

---

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)Darwin loves you.

Not at all. The breeding that takes place at the A-B boundary also takes place at the AB-B 'boundary', etc. If you think this qualifies as 'migrating', then so be it. But this phenomenon is just not the phenomenon proposed by OOA for the spread of sapiens genes.Jon

---

Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr

HUH?

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

By that definition, would anyone who possesses ample African-originated genetic material would qualify as African? Everything we know about the way people live, grow up, leave the nest, and start their own families suggests that the first exodus (of erectus) was of a slow, expansion-like typeurban sprawl in a hunter-gatherer fashion. A pattern of on-off isolation is not inconsistent with MH. Isolation doesn't only limit movement, but also interbreeding. So, once the populations become connected again, the sudden flooding of the world population with African genetic material neither contradicts the MH model nor supports the OOA model. You're still only addressing the movement of genetic material. The genetic evidence does not tell us whether there was 'coexistence' of the OOA variety or 'begetting' of the MH variety. Evidence that would support coexisting of the OOA variety would be something on the order of bones and such found in geographical proximity of both pre-sapiens and sapiens dated to identical time frames. Without such evidence, though, we're just left with the same mystery of why Clark Kent always disappears everytime Superman's in town. Well, there's always some Jon

---

Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr