/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10698066
>old abo
>serious jaundice in the eyes
Kek. I thought their problem was with petrol, not firewater.

>>10698066
It's complicated.

>>10698066
Yes. We're all in Africa. All human activity outside Africa is fake news, just like the moon landing.

>>10698102
What do you mean? Can you elaborate?

>>10698066
not familiar with this, can someone explain

>>10698066
No it hasnt

>>10698066
The date for leaving keeps getting pushed back, and we know different groups of humans bred with different protohominids, which left Africa 100s of thousands of years ago.

>>10698121
Old as fuck human fossils (as in in older than the africans') found outside of Africa.

If not Africa where did homo sapiens originate?

Scientists have discovered the oldest fossils ever in Bulgaria in the Balkans. So probably the climate was a lot different back then, and human being traveled freely all over the middle east, southern europe, and africa without a problem. It was only later with a changing climate that the populations became isolated and migrating.

There used to be tigers, lions, and elephants all over the middle east, southern europe and india. But the climate changed, isolating the populations. So that now we just have indian elephants and african elephants. Indian tigers and african tigers.

>>10698066
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiregional_origin_of_modern_humans

>>10698066
It has been, essentially, but it's been effectively hush-hushed to the lay public because the data is headed in a direction that suggests that sub-saharan africans and Caucasians are probably a different species.

>>10698318
source?

>>10698128
>The date for leaving keeps getting pushed back
No it doesn't.

>>10698351
Basically every single study about polygenic scores and genetic distance as well as all of that neanderthal admixture stuff and the whole "hominid remains found in Europe that pre-date the earliest Homo Sapiens remains in Africa" thing.

All signs point to Homo Sapiens evolving as something resembling Ethiopians or Somalis that admixed with Neanderthals to form Caucasians, admixed with Denisovans or whatever to become gooks, and admixed with Homo Erectus and a bunch of other stuff to form sub-Saharan Africans. At the very best, the major racial groups are a collection of reproductively-compatible subspecies.

>>10698191
Shut up faggot

>>10698379
what part of sauce did you not understand, link the article now fagget

>>10698066
"Out of Africa" is an ill-founded piece of science fantasy, long since debunked by fact checkers, and whose original proposer has long since abandoned it as the countermanding evidence stacked up.

>>10698444
sauce?

if there's so much evidence why don't you niggers post it

I'm confused are /pol/niggers really getting triggered by the word Africa?

>>10698458
for some reason it hurts their fees fees that the human race started at the Congo Basin instead of Berlim

>>10698222
There are no tigers in africa dumbfuck

>>10698244
That doesn't debunk Out-of-Africa.

>>10698444
Out of Africa absolutely BTFO

>>10698066
that dude needs sunscreen jesus christ.

>>10698379
Source or gtfo

>>10698066
Out of Africa was quietly abanadend by anthropologists years ago, it just does not fit the data

>>10698066
The more difficult problem is where H. sapiens came from. It's obvius how neanderthals and others could evolve from H. erectus, but H. sapiens has so many features that are distinct from all the other Homo species, it's impossible to tell who they evolved from.

>>10700140
Braincase placement, ear ossicles, teeth, brow ridge shape, chin, etc all seem different, while remaining stable in all the others. In fact the most plausible solution to me seems that we come directly from H. naledi and not from other humans.

>>10700150

Homo Naledi is only 250,000 years old apparently.

>>10700226
That doesn't make it impossible, if there was strong selection. It would explain the insufficient birth canal in human women, actually.

>>10698379
While those admixture events are true, correlation is not causation. Those other hominids happened to exist in varied environments, so when humans evolved in those environments they also picked up e.g. Neanderthal DNA, though in small amounts. The only example where admixture could be defining is in a couple of African tribes - I can't remember which - but they have multiple double digits of archaic admixture.

>>10698066

>>10702123
Cro-magnon don't have any living descendants.

>>10702145
>identical to modern Europeans
>no living descendants

>>10700132
>by anthropologists
crazymagazin.com doesn't count

>>10702123
From the title it seems the research is going to claim the opposite.

>>10698066
>Out of Africa
>Shows picture of Australian

No, no it hasn’t. The oldest sapiens fossils are still African.

>>10698379
There’s a big difference between “hominid” and specific “Homo sapiens”.

>>10700150
>>10700226
>h naeldi
Don't you mean h idaltu

>>10700150
Naledi was literally contemporary with anatomically modern Homo sapiens.

>only thing linked so far is a wikipedia article

>>10702284
No, I mean h naledi.
>>10702290
Their estimated timeline makes it just close enough to make it possible if their brain size rapidly increased, either from the competition or being taken as slaves by the bigger brained species.

>>10702259
>Not slipping past the censors by making an opposite 'rationalizing' conclusion that goes against all observations
Not gonna make it

>>10702297
welcome to /sci/

>>10698121
It's pretty arbitrary nonsense about where to draw the dividing line between species.
It's well-established that non-African humans have at least 2% Neanderthal DNA, rising to something like 7% in Melanesia, with more non-human DNA when Denisovans are taken into account.

But of course this begs the question: what is human and what is non-human? I think the only reason Neanderthals were considered non-human is because they were wrongly believed to have been exterminated by our victorious ancestors, meaning they must have been inferior in some way.

Multiregional origin is basically drawing the line between human and non-human much later than in the old scheme. There is no unambiguous line between human and non-human, just our psychological sense of us and them; in the multiregional case, it represents a rejection of blacks and abbos as breeding partners. Which I'm basically on board with, but this doesn't mean I take the goalpost-moving seriously.

>>10702610
I would add that the fossil record is pretty bad in Africa. If we had more DNA evidence from there, we would also be discovering "non-human" DNA in African populations, but for political reasons, I doubt this new DNA would be dubbed non-human. There's a narrative to push. But at the same time, that doesn't mean that the counter-narrative (that Africans are less human than us) is any less fictional or idealistic.

>>10698464
Oldest human remains ever found where in the Balkans, retard.

>>10702635
Evidence?

>>10702620
>taking a long, hard look at the meaning of "human" and "race" in the face of modern molecular biology and statistical methods is fictional and idealistic
>>10702639
See here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semmelweis_reflex

>>10702219
There were several groups that left Africa.

>>10702642
>See here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semmelweis_reflex

What the fuck is this?

>>10702642
Are you talking about the pre-human remains found in the Balkans?

https://theconversation.com/theres-not-enough-evidence-to-back-the-claim-that-humans-originated-in-europe-78280

>>10702642
>wikipedia
I will kill you

>>10698066
time travel needs to be invented for this and many other questions

>>10702645
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semmelweis_reflex
>What the fuck is this?

If you don't have it you have shcizophrenia.

>>10698066
The oldest human-like fossil used to be from Ethiopia. More recently, an older one was discovered in Morocco. Both location are in Africa.

True, homo sapiens mixed with hominids in Asia, but overall the primary lineage is homo sapiens, which still originated in Africa. As did ultimately all other hominids, even if they later moved to Asia.

>>10702642
Yes, it is. You're looking for validation. You want science to back your personal preferences by enshrining them in definitions. The reality is that you are on your own. The final nigger you must confront is your neighbor, who by not being your twin is your genetic enemy, and probably a much more serious rival than some spearchucker.

Even family are genetic enemies: exactly how much of the pie do you want to go to a brother, with whom you might only share a quarter of your genes? If you end up having a son, do you want him to have his way and get all the attention and care, or do you want to sow more seeds against his best interests? There's no escape from the struggle of evolution, no possibility of uncovering some secret that, once publicised, will turn your compatriots into allies. It's all a barrel of crabs.

>>10702620
There have been some genetic studies suggesting just that, showing that west Africans intermixed with a "ghost" hominid; something like 8% of their DNA comes from this group.

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/285734v1

Similarly, there are studies showing that the pygmies & Khoi-san are about 2-4% of another, separate "ghost" hominid.

>>10702820
Interesting stuff, and less bowdlerised than expected.
But what is our reference for pure homo sapiens?

I'm not totally skeptical of neatly identifiable genetic groups, just of the concept of humanity, which mostly means "us," which mostly means "me." Geographic separation over long periods of time is a pretty cut and dried measure of difference, I think; was there ever a Homo Sapiens homeland?

>>10702819
>scientific inquiry is wrong because I believe you have evil motivations
>also these imagined motivations are dumb
>you are dumb
>life is meaningless
You seem a bit scatterbrained today.

>>10702635
>human
No the fossils are from bipedal apes like pic related.

>>10702899
Where did I say that racism is evil or that you are dumb? You're not very good at reading, though, which isn't the best sign.

What part of the concept of humanity is scientific? Maybe it was scientific to draw an absolute line between animal and human in the time of Aristotle, but faced with the continuity of evolution, it is ridiculous.

You can draw the line early in Africa and hug a jig, or late in different regions and feel okay about being a genetic dead end in caucasoid population, so long as you get to bask in the glory of its Humanity. But drawing the line is purely sentimental. "These are real humans, these guys are cool, these guys are my friends, they're just like me. I like/hate niggers because they are/aren't humans." Whatever this is, it isn't scientific inquiry. It's seeking confirmation of a prior belief or hope.

Why has /sci/ literally just turned into /pol/?

Out of Africa is the most widely accepted theory for the origin of modern humans. I know /pol/tards want to deny this, but political motivations are not relevant when talking about what the evidence shows us.

>>10703063
>>10703193
I don't know why /pol/ trys so hard to find scientific justifications for hating niggers. Like we get it guys you hate niggers don't make shit up as to why you hate niggers it just makes you look wishy washy.

I studied Archaeology as part of my undergraduate degree. Out of Africa theory is no longer considered the absolute truth. It's now viewed as just a theory that is probable. There have been lots of recent discoveries however that put Out of Africa into question. The development of genetic science and its uses in the field of archaeology have led a lot of archaeologists to follow what's called the Multi-Regional Hypothesis and you'll probably see this soon spread into archaeological education and then into the general knowledge.

In short, Out of Africa's popularity amongst academics is falling due to recent archaeological discoveries. It's viewed as a bit of a dated understanding of things now.

>>10703193
/pol/acks think they're magically smarter for posting on /sci/ while it ironically proves that they're less intelligent through being intellectually based in their fears rather than their interests.

>>10698318
Literally not even close, but okay

>>10702123
Is that blonde hair on Cro-Magnon? lol

>>10703193
Anyway, anyone who accepts the theory of evolution (i.e. pretty much anyone with an education) must accept that human beings descended from organisms that were entirely different species and "intellectually inferior". So no matter what /pol/tards must accept that at some point in their ancestry, they weren't European humans with modern human brain capacity, even if they want to argue that sub-Saharan Africans are "inferior" somehow to Europeans.

>>10698080
Claim: Abos are not homo sapiens. Prove me wrong

>>10704136
If I have sex with one and create fertile offspring, is that enough for you?

>>10702123
Cool fap folder fanfic.

THIS, is how the ACTUAL cro-magnon (ancient) looked like:
>>10698451

>>10704180
How do you know they looked like that?

>>10704186
God told me so.

I learned somewhat recently that is widely accepted in China that out of Africa is incorrect. I don't speak Gook though, so I can't find much on it. The Chinese (((wiki))) page for Peking man at least mentions it though:

https://zh.m.wikipedia.org/zh-hans/北京猿人

>>10703231
>>10703209
>>10704023
They’re debunking the “Out of africa theory” specifically not that we didn’t have a common ancestor or that one never lived in africa. That theory specifically states we had a common human ancestor around 70000 years ago. New evidence has shown that is not the case. Its okay though newfriends eventually you’ll catch up.

>>10702123

What joy do you receive from posting misinformation on the internet. Factually untrue crack head theories people come with in there bored stupors arent enlightening they are barbaric.

>>10704770
source mongoloid?

>>10702610
Neanderthals and denisovans are humans, just different species. Anything in the clade “Homo” is a human.

>>10704791
mongoloid source
>>10704753

>>10704136
Aboriginals are literally some of the most pure Homo sapiens in the world, dumb cunt.

>>10698430
>faggot
Why the homophobia?

>>10704803
>wiki

>>10704154
A wolf and coyote can make fertile offspring known as coywolfs. Of course exceptions don't define the rule.

>>10704853
Congrats on coming within two inches of realizing species don’t actually exist outside of our heads and then running away from it.

>>10703193
I'm delivering an argument against racism from a hard-right perspective. It's necessary to express my contempt so that it's clear that I'm not making this argument out of sentimentality or a desire to just get along.