New analysis shows three human migrations out of Africa, Replacement theory 'demolished'

Washington University in St. Louis ^ | 02 February 2006 | Tony Fitzpatrick

[PatrickHenry]

I post, you decide.

[PatrickHenry]

Evolution Ping The List-O-Links

A conservative, pro-evolution science list, now with over 340 names. See the list's explanation, then FReepmail to be added or dropped. To assist beginners: But it's "just a theory", Evo-Troll's Toolkit, and How to argue against a scientific theory.

[kentj]

Ah Dam Bubba now what ya gonna do with all them hoods?

[Adder]

"Templeton said that the fossil record indicates a significant change in brain size for modern humans at 700,000 years ago..."

"Heyyyyy...wait a minute...we're still in Africa! OOweena! Get the kids...we're leavin!"

[ToryHeartland]

"I set up a null hypothesis and the program rejected that hypothesis using the new data with a probability level of 10 to the minus 17th. In science, you don't get any more conclusive than that. It says that the hypothesis of no interbreeding is so grossly incompatible with the data, that you can reject it."

A very neat illustration of the self-correcting mechanism in scientific methodology, and Popper's principle of "falsifiability". I have marvelled to witness, on another thread here, that a number of folks don't seem to understand the scientific meaning of 'theory,' and insist on using the term in its vernacular sense. Theory of Evolution is not controversial outside the US (at least, not in the developed western world), it is simply subject to increasing refinement as more data points are accumulated, as is any scientific theory.

[Vaquero]

Is he saying that we do have a genetic intermix with Neanderthal or not? they supposedly went belly up around 35,000 years ago, but he wasn't talking about that time frame. I suppose if Neanderthal migrated back to africa over various periods of time that they are in our DNA and not just a dead end, but he is not that specific.

[Pharmboy]

Just wanted to make sure you'f seen this...

[Casaubon]

if we have any neanderthal DNA....it votes dem

[prisoner6]

Is he saying that we do have a genetic intermix with Neanderthal

Didn't read the article yet but it's easily provable we have Neanderthal DNA. All ya hafta do is see a picture of my wife and her brothers.

Course she claims the same is true with me...sigh.

prisoner6

[Vaquero]

no its the 'out of Africa' DNA that votes the Ray Nagin, Barak Obama, and Bill Clinton (our first black prez).

While my 'Neaderthal' blood would vote for a Condi Rice (prez? why not) or a JC Watts for whatever. and Bless Judge Thomas and Judge Janice Rogers Brown.

[Vaquero]

My favorite Neanderthal Catcher, Joe Girardi. Just check out those brow ridges.

[Junior]

...and that these populations persisted instead of going extinct...

Okay, maybe the coffee hasn't kicked in yet, but what's the difference?

[jalisco555]

A very neat illustration of the self-correcting mechanism in scientific methodology...

Well said.

[jalisco555]

Please add me to your ping list.

[old and tired]

Alright. I read the article. I'm too dumb to get its significance. Does this article make some kind of pro or anti evolution statement? Can someone please explain the significance in layman's terms?

p.s. I'm a Catholic so I don't have a dog in the evolution fight, it just bugs me when I read something and I still don't get it.

[truemiester]

I'm Cahtolic as well, but I think it is saying something taht we've ALL ben taught. The only 'race' is the human race.

[dirtboy]

Templeton said that the fossil record indicates a significant change in brain size for modern humans at 700,000 years ago as well

Unfortunately, the first over-educated intellectuals developed right after that.

[DaGman]

The theory of evolution is not controversial here. For lack of education or whatever, some people refuse to accept it. But their lack of any provable alternative and ability to formulate one does not make evolution controversial. Among the rest of the thinking and educated America, evolution is as accepted as the theory of gravity. IMHO, of course.

[ovrtaxt]

Maybe this explains why I have a thing for black chicks.

[Alas Babylon!]

It means instead of dying out completely (like neanderthals, Peking man, Java man, etc) and being replaced by people migrating out of Africa around 100,000 years ago, they lived on, breeding with these Africans, creating a new race of men that still exist today in the various countries that make up the world.

It's as if a rather large family of cousins, brothers, etc lived on the frontier of America, say 200 years ago, and, by circumstance and what not, due to this and that, didn't have children, or they died, etc, so by now the last old man, the only descendant of this vigorous family, just died, taking the bloodline and family name with him forever. The area, however, was settled by people from the East so there's still people there, just not our original family.

This guy shows how the family didn't die out, because some of them married into the newcomers, and these people's descendants are still among the local inhabitants.

I believe it's a compelling argument. The out of Africa theory never explained the differences that are the various races of mankind, but if there were several migrations over the millenium, then this would account for these differences very nicely.