31 ms·

Genetic studies have put an end to that kind of speculation. Only crackpots and religious nuts are supporting alternatives.

by nabla9 2y ago

wolfhumble 2y ago
Which "religious nuts" support a "multi-regional hypothesis"? A mono-regional 'Eden' is supported in Abrahamic religions.
- Boogie_Man 2y ago
  Presumably tribal religions
  - AlecSchueler 2y ago
    Which tribes? Don't the Abrahamic religions stem from the tribes of Israel?
    - Boogie_Man 2y ago
      I might accidentally be using a dated term for it, Wikipedia redirects to "Ethnic Religion". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_religion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_religion
      - AlecSchueler 2y ago
        So Judaism for example?
    - trallnag 2y ago
      For example the religious group "Nation of Islam" believes that Yakub, a black scientist, crated the white race / ethnic group and tricknology a few thousand years ago
      - bilbo0s 2y ago
        The Nation of Islam are Muslims. They would be considered theologically descended from the Abrahamic line of religions. They would certainly not be considered a "tribe". And they take their creation mythology from the Koran. I think you may be talking about the ADOS people who believe all sorts of conspiracy theories like that, but are not a religious group at all. However they do believe black Christians and black Muslims are following the "white man's" religions. In any case, their beliefs would mean the ADOS nutjobs are technically "crackpots", as the initial post indicated, rather than a "tribe".
        DiogenesKynikos 2y ago
        > The Nation of Islam are Muslims. They would be considered theologically descended from the Abrahamic line of religions. Not really, and most Muslims would dispute that the Nation of Islam is Islam. The Nation of Islam is essentially a newly invented religion from the early 1900s. It has its own extensive Sci-Fi mythology (including the Yakub story) that is pretty much entirely different from Islam, though it borrows some aspects of Islam. It's heavily influenced by Black Nationalism and Pan-Africanism.
        School-Cotton 2y ago
        > The Nation of Islam are Muslims. Not according to mainstream Muslims.
ty6853 2y ago
All Americans are African Americans, as I put it. Put it on your med school applications too when submitting MCAT scores.
- foxhop 2y ago
  Politically motivated bollocks. The white colonizer did not get colonized by tribes in Africa.
noch 2y ago
> [T]he mythos of people having popped out from the same area or region that they their most recent ancestors have lived […] >> Genetic studies have put an end to that kind of speculation. Only crackpots and religious nuts are supporting alternatives. David Reich (author of "Who We Are and How We Got Here: Ancient DNA and the new science of the human past") says[^0]: " The modern human lineage, leading to the great majority of the ancestors of people today, was probably in sub-Saharan Africa for the last 500,000 years at least. It might be much more. Certainly our main lineage was in Africa, probably 3-7 million years ago. But in a period between about 2 million to 500,000 years ago, it's not at all clear where the main ancestors leading to modern humans were. There were humans throughout many parts of Eurasia and Africa with a parallel increase in brain size and not obviously closer ancestrality to modern humans in one place than in the other. It's not clear where the main lineages were. Maybe they were in both places and mixed to form the lineages that gave rise to people today. There's been an assumption where Africa's been at the center of everything for many millions of years. Certainly it's been absolutely central at many periods in human history. But in this key period when a lot of important changes happen—when modern humans develop from Homo habilis and Homo erectus all the way to Homo heidelbergensis and the shared ancestor of Neanderthals, modern humans, and Denisovans— that time period which is when a lot of the important change happened, it's not clear, based on the archaeology and genetics, where that occurred as I understand it. " (emphasis mine throughout) --- [^0]: https://www.dwarkeshpatel.com/p/david-reich https://www.dwarkeshpatel.com/p/david-reich
- nabla9 2y ago
  >But in this key period when a lot of important changes happen—when modern humans develop from Homo habilis and Homo erectus all the way to Homo heidelbergensis That's a time period before homo sapiens, not after.
  - themgt 2y ago
    David Reich is widely acknowledged as a top if not the foremost leader in the field of ancient human origins, and he's talking about exactly the debate you claim is settled to everyone but crackpots. His interview with Dwarkesh Patel linked by OP is one of the most informative you'll find anywhere. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reich_(geneticist) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reich_(geneticist)

Genetic studies have put an end to that kind of speculation. Only crackpots and religious nuts are supporting alternatives.

by nabla9 2y ago

Genetic studies have put an end to that kind of speculation. Only crackpots and religious nuts are supporting alternatives.

wolfhumble 2y ago

Which "religious nuts" support a "multi-regional hypothesis"? A mono-regional 'Eden' is supported in Abrahamic religions.

Boogie_Man 2y ago
Presumably tribal religions
- AlecSchueler 2y ago
  Which tribes? Don't the Abrahamic religions stem from the tribes of Israel?
  - Boogie_Man 2y ago
    I might accidentally be using a dated term for it, Wikipedia redirects to "Ethnic Religion". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_religion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_religion
    - AlecSchueler 2y ago
      So Judaism for example?
  - trallnag 2y ago
    For example the religious group "Nation of Islam" believes that Yakub, a black scientist, crated the white race / ethnic group and tricknology a few thousand years ago
    - bilbo0s 2y ago
      The Nation of Islam are Muslims. They would be considered theologically descended from the Abrahamic line of religions. They would certainly not be considered a "tribe". And they take their creation mythology from the Koran. I think you may be talking about the ADOS people who believe all sorts of conspiracy theories like that, but are not a religious group at all. However they do believe black Christians and black Muslims are following the "white man's" religions. In any case, their beliefs would mean the ADOS nutjobs are technically "crackpots", as the initial post indicated, rather than a "tribe".
      - DiogenesKynikos 2y ago
        > The Nation of Islam are Muslims. They would be considered theologically descended from the Abrahamic line of religions. Not really, and most Muslims would dispute that the Nation of Islam is Islam. The Nation of Islam is essentially a newly invented religion from the early 1900s. It has its own extensive Sci-Fi mythology (including the Yakub story) that is pretty much entirely different from Islam, though it borrows some aspects of Islam. It's heavily influenced by Black Nationalism and Pan-Africanism.
      - School-Cotton 2y ago
        > The Nation of Islam are Muslims. Not according to mainstream Muslims.

ty6853 2y ago

All Americans are African Americans, as I put it. Put it on your med school applications too when submitting MCAT scores.

foxhop 2y ago
Politically motivated bollocks. The white colonizer did not get colonized by tribes in Africa.

noch 2y ago

> [T]he mythos of people having popped out from the same area or region that they their most recent ancestors have lived […] >> Genetic studies have put an end to that kind of speculation. Only crackpots and religious nuts are supporting alternatives. David Reich (author of "Who We Are and How We Got Here: Ancient DNA and the new science of the human past") says[^0]: " The modern human lineage, leading to the great majority of the ancestors of people today, was probably in sub-Saharan Africa for the last 500,000 years at least. It might be much more. Certainly our main lineage was in Africa, probably 3-7 million years ago. But in a period between about 2 million to 500,000 years ago, it's not at all clear where the main ancestors leading to modern humans were. There were humans throughout many parts of Eurasia and Africa with a parallel increase in brain size and not obviously closer ancestrality to modern humans in one place than in the other. It's not clear where the main lineages were. Maybe they were in both places and mixed to form the lineages that gave rise to people today. There's been an assumption where Africa's been at the center of everything for many millions of years. Certainly it's been absolutely central at many periods in human history. But in this key period when a lot of important changes happen—when modern humans develop from Homo habilis and Homo erectus all the way to Homo heidelbergensis and the shared ancestor of Neanderthals, modern humans, and Denisovans— that time period which is when a lot of the important change happened, it's not clear, based on the archaeology and genetics, where that occurred as I understand it. " (emphasis mine throughout) --- [^0]: https://www.dwarkeshpatel.com/p/david-reich https://www.dwarkeshpatel.com/p/david-reich

nabla9 2y ago
>But in this key period when a lot of important changes happen—when modern humans develop from Homo habilis and Homo erectus all the way to Homo heidelbergensis That's a time period before homo sapiens, not after.
- themgt 2y ago
  David Reich is widely acknowledged as a top if not the foremost leader in the field of ancient human origins, and he's talking about exactly the debate you claim is settled to everyone but crackpots. His interview with Dwarkesh Patel linked by OP is one of the most informative you'll find anywhere. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reich_(geneticist) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reich_(geneticist)