Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
According to science, Homo Sapiens left Africa about 100,000 years ago. And, Europeans and Asians are separated only about 60,000 years ago.
Is 100,000 years really long enough for people to evolve so differently to get the result of Africans and whites? Is 60,000 years really long for people to be so different as the whites and Asians? Do you think other "humans" were inter-mixed with them to create these differences?
Look around at the variation in dog breeds in just the last 500 years and you'll have your answer.
Have you done any reading whatsoever on the topic beforehand or are you just skeptical because you are maybe more of the noah riding a dinosaur types?
...Americans at least are several inches taller on average, and heavier, than just a few hundred years ago. ...
I'm not saying you're wrong, but can you cite evidence that that is evolution? I've always read that a change in diet on the part of Japanese resulted in them becoming taller, not evolution, and that getting fatter is, again, a diet concern, not evolution.
Multiregional theory has been debunked long ago. It's no longer valid giving what has been discovered in the Human Genome Project.
1. I don't think that the multiregional theory has been "debunked"; it is simply an alternate theory to evolution to Homo sapiens sapiens via the "out of Africa" theory.
2. But beyond that, the diagram I referenced is not depicting the multiregional theory. The multiregional theory depicts coming from various regions, the diagram depicts going to various regions. It clearly shows the line coming "out of Africa".
1. I don't think that the multiregional theory has been "debunked"; it is simply an alternate theory to evolution to Homo sapiens sapiens via the "out of Africa" theory.
2. But beyond that, the diagram I referenced is not depicting the multiregional theory. The multiregional theory depicts coming from various regions, the diagram depicts going to various regions. It clearly shows the line coming "out of Africa".
The multiregional theory is not an "alternate" theory. How many times do I have to say that all human variations are a result of natural selection, not interbreeding?
Last edited by knowledgeiskey; 10-15-2015 at 01:54 PM..
A set of 47 human teeth found in China is giving scientists a lot to chew on. The teeth have been dated as at least 80,000 years old -- perhaps even older. The problem with that is that most researchers believe humans only left Africa for the first time around 60,000 years ago. And even then, they were thought to trek to Europe first, not Asia. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...human-history/
Gotta be a little careful with any information coming out of Chinese dig sites. They are um, extremely nationalistic and proud of their heritage and have been caught in the past embellishing or covering up things that don't fit their narrative.
If it's been independently confirmed etc. then great but if it's an early report then grain of salt it.
Supachai, Eurasians are not genetically closer to Neanderthals than Africans.
I didn't say they were. Please learn to read more carefully. It seems to me from this post and others that you either don't understand the topic or you have reading comprehension issues.
I'm not saying you're wrong, but can you cite evidence that that is evolution? I've always read that a change in diet on the part of Japanese resulted in them becoming taller, not evolution, and that getting fatter is, again, a diet concern, not evolution.
Diet changes have increased average population heights around the world through better nutrition, but those changes in diet also affect the ability for larger people to survive and spread their genes. Changes in conditions that affect propagation rates is one of the primary engines of evolution. Though this has happened over a short time frame, it's difficult to argue that this isn't evolution, even if slight. It's important to remember that humans are always evolving, since we are always subjected to selection pressures.
The multiregional theory is not an "alternate" theory. How many times do I have to say that all human variations are a result of natural selection, not interbreeding?
Since you are so demanding, I guess I need to ask for your sources or qualifications.
Again, I'm not saying you're wrong, but why should we just believe anything you post?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
