“Out of Africa” Theory Officially Debunked

http://redicecreations.com/article.php?id=31129

http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?paperID=19566#.U9hnVdxdUZI

Scientific evidence refuting the theory of modern humanity’s African genesis is common knowledge among those familiar with the most recent scientific papers on the human Genome, Mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosomes. Regrettably, within mainstream press and academia circles, there seems to be a conspicuous – and dare we say it – deliberate vacuum when it comes to reporting news of these recent studies and their obvious implications.

Australian historian Greg Jefferys explains that, "The whole ‘Out of Africa’ myth has its roots in the mainstream academic campaign in the 1990′s to remove the concept of Race. When I did my degree they all spent a lot of time on the ‘Out of Africa’ thing but it’s been completely disproved by genetics. Mainstream still hold on to it."

Seven thousand five hundred fifty-six (7556) haplotypes of 46 subclades in 17 major haplogroups were considered in terms of their base (ancestral) haplotypes and timespans to their common ancestors, for the purposes of designing of time-balanced haplogroup tree. It was found that African haplogroup A (originated 132,000 ± 12,000 years before present) is very remote time-wise from all other haplogroups, which have a separate common ancestor, named β-haplogroup, and originated 64,000 ± 6000 ybp. It includes a family of Europeoid (Caucasoid) haplogroups from F through T that originated 58,000 ± 5000 ybp. A downstream common ancestor for haplogroup A and β-haplogroup, coined the α-haplogroup emerged 160,000 ± 12,000 ybp. A territorial origin of haplogroups α- and β-remains unknown; however, the most likely origin for each of them is a vast triangle stretched from Central Europe in the west through the Russian Plain to the east and to Levant to the south. Haplogroup B is descended from β-haplogroup (and not from haplogroup A, from which it is very distant, and separated by as much as 123,000 years of “lat- eral” mutational evolution) likely migrated to Africa after 46,000 ybp. The finding that the Europeoid haplogroups did not descend from “African” haplogroups A or B is supported by the fact that bearers of the Europeoid haplogroups, as well as all non-African haplogroups do not carry either SNPs M91, P97, M31, P82, M23, M114, P262, M32, M59, P289, P291, P102, M13, M171, M118 (haplogroup A and its subclades SNPs) or M60, M181, P90 (haplogroup B), as it was shown recently in “Walk through Y” FTDNA Project (the reference is incorporated therein) on several hundred people from various haplogroups.

Care to summarize? Linking to an article and a paper does little to spur on discussion.

Did they find fossils older than those in Africa that prove it wrong? How did they do it? Are their claims supported by other biological scientists or is this just a preliminary paper?

So what theory has replaced it?

Also, *why* have mainstream scientists rejected this new finding?

If a new development popped up that radically changed a theory like this, evolutionary biologists would be all over this. They aren't a church - they don't just deny things they don't agree with.

idk just found it interesting

1

So.......where's the official debunking?

I'm pretty sure this is a spam thread.

read the titles of the rest of the articles in the journal. most are idiotic

Hate to burst your bubble but genetic testing is one of the main reasons why the out of Africa hypothesis is currently the accepted theory of human origins. The abstract of the paper says very little with respect to the title of your thread (ignoring the fact that one paper tracking genetic markers isn't going to 'disprove' such a theory), and given the link to that site I'm guessing you share the site's subtle undertones of white supremacy.

This thread sucks.

I just finished up 1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus and I must say, professional scientists can be religious in defending certain theories. If someone was to challenge the Out-of-Africa theory, I would not expect biologists to be all over it right away. It would take a long time to sway opinion.

Aliens.

i blame communism

Churches don't have that kind of power over the world anymore..

From what I understand the debate about the "Out of Africa" theory involves the origins of modern humans as a subspecies (h. sapiens sapiens), not the species as a whole (h. sapiens). Proponents of the "Out of Africa" Theory believe that modern man (homo sapiens sapiens) originated in Africa and then spread to other areas of the world, while opponents of the theory believe that homo sapiens originated in Africa and then spread into other areas and that later on h. sapiens sapiens populations evolved independently in different parts of the world.

I remember hearing some years ago that there were older fossils found in China than any fossils found in Africa. And then a few years ago there was some news about the oldest known human fossils (teeth I think) being found in Israel. Israel is pretty close to Africa, so it's possible that people could have originated in Africa and traveled to Israel via Egypt or across the Red Sea or that they could have originated in Israel and then traveled to Africa.

So, party at Stormfront or something?