The Khoisan

[1798]

The Khoisan are one of the most isolated tribes in Africa and belong to Y haplogroup A. Y Haplogroup A is said to have originated 300,000 so that is the first line of modern humans. The name of the ancestor who lived at that time from the fossil records is Homo Heidelbergensis. These were in Europe as well as Africa. I find it interesting to learn that the Khoisan have Eurasian autosomal dna. Perhaps the Out of Africa theory is not right.

[T E Peterman]

H. heidelbergensis is considered by most to have been the common ancestor of Neanderthals, Denisovans, & African archaics.

There is no indication that heidelbergensis moved from Europe to Africa. The most parsimonious explanation is that the root population of heidelbergensis was in Africa, with several waves of settlement departing from Africa into Eurasia.

I've never seen any interpretation that suggests that Khoisan people have European autosomal DNA.

Timothy Peterman

[N21163]

H. heidelbergensis is considered by most to have been the common ancestor of Neanderthals, Denisovans, & African archaics.

There is no indication that heidelbergensis moved from Europe to Africa. The most parsimonious explanation is that the root population of heidelbergensis was in Africa, with several waves of settlement departing from Africa into Eurasia.

I've never seen any interpretation that suggests that Khoisan people have European autosomal DNA.

Timothy Peterman

1798 has yet again chosen not to provide any references...

Concerning Khoisan autosomal DNA there was an article in New Scientist about a year ago that discussed a 'back migration' from the Middle East to Africa: https://www.newscientist.com/article...vealed-in-dna/

Discussion around this article was on anthrogenica earlier today: http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthre...l=1#post101375

This would be no reason to question the Out of Africa theory.

[1798]

H. heidelbergensis is considered by most to have been the common ancestor of Neanderthals, Denisovans, & African archaics.

There is no indication that heidelbergensis moved from Europe to Africa. The most parsimonious explanation is that the root population of heidelbergensis was in Africa, with several waves of settlement departing from Africa into Eurasia.

I've never seen any interpretation that suggests that Khoisan people have European autosomal DNA.

Timothy Peterman

Some of the heidelbergensis fossils found in Europe had the same brain capacity as modern humans. That is a clue. The Khoisan are said to be one of the most isolated of the Africans tribes and yet they have Eurasian dna.

[MMaddi]

Some of the heidelbergensis fossils found in Europe had the same brain capacity as modern humans. That is a clue. The Khoisan are said to be one of the most isolated of the Africans tribes and yet they have Eurasian dna.

If you had read the post by N21163 immediately before yours, you'd have the answer as to how the Khoisan have Eurasian DNA. It's due to back migration to Africa, not an ancient origin outside Africa.

[T E Peterman]

Since the Khoisan people can no longer be considered pristine representatives of the earliest branch, I suppose this leaves the Australian Aborigines/ inland Papuans as the best representatives of what humanity may have been like 50,000 years ago. Of course, I suspect that, just like the rest of Eurasians, the aborigines & Papuans may have acquired a bit of Neanderthal & then Denisovan DNA as they travelled eastward along the Indian Ocean.

Timothy Peterman

[1798]

If you had read the post by N21163 immediately before yours, you'd have the answer as to how the Khoisan have Eurasian DNA. It's due to back migration to Africa, not an ancient origin outside Africa.

The scientists don't know the number of times humans moved back and forth between Europe and Africa over the course of the last 300,000 years.

[Ashley87]

Y Haplogroup A is said to have originated 300,000 so that is the first line of modern humans. The name of the ancestor who lived at that time from the fossil records is Homo Heidelbergensis.

Interesting. In two sentences - for anyone that knows anything about evolution - you contradict yourself. It's quite cute because you actually believe this despite hundreds of people with dozens of degrees and DECADES of research under their belt proving without doubt yeah the modern human species [well all humanoid species] originated in Africa.

I question the OP - if humanoids didn't originate in Africa where did we originate? In the Siberian icefields - in that case we'd be more Asiatic / Aboriginal than "African" as that seems to be your folly.

However:


a) the "modern" human didn't exist until 200,000 years ago give or take a few thousand years.

b) there is no Heidelbergensis in the modern human genotype. There is Sapien, Neanderthal and Denisovan. So this pre-historican species could be Homo-Martianous it won't matter because the DNA is not in the surviving gene-pool [ours].



TRUE Heidelbergensis - or rhodesiensis - itself is a merely 200,000 years old. A forefather of the rhodesiensis family group diverged from Africa [as has happened dozens of times throughout - the most habitual region in our ancient world WAS Africa [Sudan] & a generalized North African region].

The pre-rhodesiensis family ORIGINATED in Africa - notice how every single 150,000+ year old humanoid skeleton is in Africa by majority [that little fact speaks volumes] - and that forefather moved into Europe [Neanderthals]... diverted into Asia [Denisovan]... and then circled back into Africa [Sapien]. If you are unaware that forefather was homo erectus... whom ironically left Africa millions of years ago.



Now to the Khoisan having Eurasian dna. You are aware - maybe not - that the Khoisans are located in southern Africa. You are aware - or maybe yet again not - that some of the biggest "Eurasian" settlements of Africa during the 1700s and slave-trade era were the Ivory Coast AND South Africa.

Unless the Khoisan possess a RARE Eurasian DNA type [R1B for example is like a grain of sand, almost everyone possesses it] that Eurasian DNA is most likely due to far more modern Eurasian influence [e.g. rape, intermarriage, slaves, etc.] than something that happened 100,000+ years ago. You are aware - or maybe this is yet another ill known historical fact - that conquering "tribes" [which would be Eurasian / mostly dutch in that area] reproduced with the subjected tribes [which would be Khoisans and other Africans in that area].


The fact that Haplogroup A and the Haplogroup B [the FIRST haplogroups] are predominantly in Africa and rarely anywhere else does not write this out in black & white for you. Humanoids originated in Africa. The true originating Eurasian haplogroups are C & F with the diverging G and H. A & B originated 65,000 years ago give or take, F and its subclads 30,000 - 45,000 years ago.


I am aware of some story from the mid-east of humans originating there - a story I take with a giant grain of salt as "400,000+ year old" tooth shows little to no sign of the weathering present in every other 50,000+ year old tooth found of the homo sapien species. That and oldest modern human skeleton is Ethiopia [Africa]. The Manot Skull of Isreal is in comparison a mere 55,000 years old.

http://www.bradshawfoundation.com/herto_skulls.php

[1798]

From Yfull-so this SNP did not belong to modern humans as far as you know!!!!
A0-T YP2191 * YP2192 * FGC26871/YP2025... 587 SNPsformed 235000 ybp, TMRCA 146300 ybp.

The Out of Africa 70,000 ybp is only a theory at present. Humans could have originated in Europe 300,000 ybp or even a million ybp.

[N21163]

From Yfull-so this SNP did not belong to modern humans as far as you know!!!!
A0-T YP2191 * YP2192 * FGC26871/YP2025... 587 SNPsformed 235000 ybp, TMRCA 146300 ybp.

What are you on about? The subclade you are describing is an African subclade of modern humans. Decades of research show that virtually all other Y-haplogroups branches descend from A0-T: http://yfull.com/tree/A0-T/

The Out of Africa 70,000 ybp is only a theory at present.

So you are trying to suggest it is unsubstantiated? Based on what? The Gospel of Ciaran? What you are stating has no basis in any type of research or analysis.

Humans could have originated in Europe 300,000 ybp or even a million ybp.

Based on the voices in your head?

Given the plethora of research you are foolish to suggest such things.

[1798]

What are you on about? The subclade you are describing is an African subclade of modern humans. Decades of research show that virtually all other Y-haplogroups branches descend from A0-T: http://yfull.com/tree/A0-T/



So you are trying to suggest it is unsubstantiated? Based on what? The Gospel of Ciaran? What you are stating has no basis in any type of research or analysis.



Based on the voices in your head?

Given the plethora of research you are foolish to suggest such things.

There is no evidence to show that A0-T originated in Africa and I know that we are all descendants.

I am not related to the chimp and I believe that the chimp being found in Africa has something to do with the Out of Africa theory.

[1798]

Rethinking the dispersal of Homo sapiens out of Africa

Huw S. Groucutt, Michael D. Petraglia, Geoff Bailey, Eleanor M. L. Scerri, Ash Parton, Laine Clark-Balzan, Richard P. Jennings, Laura Lewis, James Blinkhorn, Nick A. Drake, Paul S. Breeze, Robyn H. Inglis, Maud H. Devès, Matthew Meredith-Williams, Nicole Boivin, Mark G. Thomas andAylwyn Scally

"Current fossil, genetic, and archeological data indicate that Homo sapiens originated in Africa in the late Middle Pleistocene. By the end of the Late Pleistocene, our species was distributed across every continent except Antarctica, setting the foundations for the subsequent demographic and cultural changes of the Holocene. The intervening processes remain intensely debated and a key theme in hominin evolutionary studies. We review archeological, fossil, environmental, and genetic data to evaluate the current state of knowledge on the dispersal of Homo sapiens out of Africa. The emerging picture of the dispersal process suggests dynamic behavioral variability, complex interactions between populations, and an intricate genetic and cultural legacy. This evolutionary and historical complexity challenges simple narratives and suggests that hybrid models and the testing of explicit hypotheses are required to understand the expansion of Homo sapiens into Eurasia."

[N21163]

There is no evidence to show that A0-T originated in Africa...

Really? All current evidence does suggest that it originated in Africa.

You won't have to spend a long time searching google to find all current research points to African origin.

I am not related to the chimp

If you choose not to believe in evolution that's your business.

Chimps and modern humans share a common ancestor.

...and I believe that the chimp being found in Africa has something to do with the Out of Africa theory.

That we share a common ancestor that's about it.

http://forums.familytreedna.com/showpost.php?p=416336&postcount=12

Did you actually read this article or just the abstract??

The authors believe they may have some genetic and archaeological evidence to support 3 possible different models for humans migrating out of Africa...

Try reading the discussion and conclusions section of the article at least: https://www.academia.edu/14880455/Re..._out_of_Africa

"Further work is needed to understand what constraints genetic and archaeological data place on models of ancestral population dispersal across the Middle East and South Asia. We have shown that inferences from single-locus genetic data need to be based on an understanding of the relationship between demography and genealogical stochasticity, as embodied in coalescent or other population genetic models. Just as archaeology has largely, but not entirely, transcended the “culture-history” approach, according to which pottery and tool types were simplistically seen as direct proxies for populations, so genetic analyses must avoid the “gene-history/population history” paradigm. "

This type of research is in it's infancy. They think that there is more to the Out of Africa theory than the more simplified two migration period approach. There may have been some back and forth migrations along the way, but more research and analysis is needed.

Getting back to the point at hand. Once again you begin a post saying one thing and then try and grapple to find articles to support your statements.
This article states nothing oh the Khoisan or Homo Heidelbergensis, which was what your opening post was about.
It also does not state anything about Humans possibly originating in Europe.

This article simply looks at a re-analysis of the ways humans may have migrated into Europe, during what periods and whether there was any back-migrations back to Africa from parts of the Middle East.

Read the whole article not just the abstract*.

*The abstract does not even support what you have been discussing

[GST]

The Out of Africa 70,000 ybp is only a theory at present. Humans could have originated in Europe 300,000 ybp or even a million ybp.

It is just amazing that that you can be so consistently wrong, regardless of the topic.

[1798]

@N21163
"Chimps and modern humans share a common ancestor."

You are wrong, we don't.