So it’s going to come down to “African is the PURE species of man?? Puleeeeeeez.....
Sheila Jackson Lee....
Now THERE is evidence of a more evolved breed of human!
I don't think that is what they are saying at all. For all we know, the reason North African, Middle Eastern, European and Asian populations advanced, developed cities, farming, writing, and so on, while sub-Saharan people did not is because of the Neanderthal genes. Just because the popular view of Neanderthals is that they were stupid doesn't mean it's true.
“So, speculates Dr. Labuda, did these exchanges contribute to our success across the world? “ “Every addition to the genome can be enriching.”
He seems to be arguing for the success of non-African populations- those that had cross bred with the Neanderthal line. The doctor must look out, the PC police may cometh.
The other side of the argument is that, rather than being the pure species, they are only a precursor species to modern man. Perhaps truly modern man is a Homo Sapiens-Neanderthal hybrid, rather than just the straight Homo Sapiens (which is itself a hybridization of earlier hominids). Besides, one of the distinguishing characteristics of the Neanderthal is a larger brain than Homo Sapiens. Hybridization may have been an evolutionary benefit to Europeans and Asians, allowing them to adapt to and eventually prosper in the harsher northern climates. It also might explain why the only part of Africa to have developed a great civilization is in the extreme northeast and populated by peoples who, though born in Africa, are not what the world knows as “Africans.” I don’t necessarily subscribe to any of these views, but the argument can be made if people want to play those games.