Were Our Earliest Hominid Ancestors European?

I’ve never really understood why the location of human origins is of any importance to race realism. Leftists use the argument, “We all came from Africa” as if this somehow proves that we must accept multiculturalism.
Personally, my theory is that there were actually two separate human evolutions. One in Africa and one in Asia. This could explain the vast differences between blacks and all other racial groups in terms of intelligence, skull shape, and hair texture.

Who really knows if they came from Europe. In the ancient Babylonian records there is a mention of those who came from the stars and shaped or changed early hominids in the “House of Fashioning”,etc. If this was done somewhere in the Middle East, the mystery of human origins and differences is solved.

“Millions of years before early humans evolved in Africa, their ancestors may have lived in Europe, a 12-million-year-old fossil hominid from Spain suggests.”

I’ve always believed this out of Africa nonsense was pure hogwash.

I think the races evolved close to the same time….except for blacks who formed later…… in different parts of the world, although there is no empirical evidence yet to support that; however, I think there will be in the next several years.

I wonder how long before Sr. Moya-Sola is denounced as a “racist”, because of his important find in Spain?

Like Anonymous(633pm), I also feel that separate evolutions of hominids occurred in Asia and Africa.The sheer numbers of Chinese and Indians would preclude their having developed in Africa, and then migrated to China, India and Russia, and other places.

Look at other species who have developed separately in Asia and Africa - elephants, hyenas and cobras. I think that the Asian and African examples of these species developed separately. Why then, is it thought by some, that only hominids developed in Africa, but then spread out to every corner of the globe?

To above posters:

The scientific evidence is that the human species began in the Southern-Eastern Africa some 160-200KYA. The new species migrated to all parts of Africa during the next 110-150K years before migrating out to other parts of the globe. Thus humans remained in Africa for some 65-75% of the time they have existed.

The multi-regional hypothesis has been shown erroneous from DNA and other genomic analysis. Until alternative hpotheses founded on scientic analysis provide better explanations then the single-origin(monogenetic) theory stands.

To above posters:

The scientific evidence is that the human species began in the Southern-Eastern Africa some 160-200KYA. The new species migrated to all parts of Africa during the next 110-150K years before migrating out to other parts of the globe. Thus humans remained in Africa for some 65-75% of the time they have existed.

The multi-regional hypothesis has been shown erroneous from DNA and other genomic analysis. Until alternative hpotheses founded on scientic analysis provide better explanations then the single-origin(monogenetic) theory stands.

Very interesting indeed. This could be a breakthrough in evolutionary studies. But we must keep in mind that they could have ultimately been just a species that appeared and then went extinct after a brief existence. After all, only one specimen has been found. Only further excavations will reveal the real circumstances.

Since political correctness has been shaping scientific “discovery” for some time, I doubt the stuff about “ancestors from Africa.”

What’s important about this, to me, is that this indicates that the crucial environmental factors selecting for human intelligence were in Europe.

If we humans have been around for 200,000 years but Europeans & Asians left 40,000 years ago, would we not expect a 20% divergence in DNA between Africans and Europeans?

The Garden Of Eden was located in today’s Iraq, not today’s Africa. As for the propaganda that we all came from the “Black Mother” is so obviously laughable that one can only surmise this is another black myth, as so many are.

While I believe that the Out-of-Africa theory is correct, I also believe that the mult-regional hypothesis can also in part be reconciled to it. When Homo Sapiens Sapiens first moved out of Africa, there were other similar hominids living in Asia and Europe that HSS interbred with on a small scale. While the different characteristics of the races are largely based on geography and climate, I think they are also in part based on HSS interbreeding with the local hominids already living in those parts of the world. For example, Europeans may have a small amount of Neanderthal DNA that gives them some of their characteristics, while Asians do not have this, or have some DNA from some other non-HSS hominid.

Not to put anyone down but self respecting whites Know with whom they belong, PERIOD! Nature paints something SO different for a REASON! White is our heritage, our genetic sculpture, our Identity,.. to squander and lose it is not openess or generosity but rather promiscuity that harms many others outside the perpe-(traitor). This might be why the ancient Hebrews were taught by the strictures to be very cogniscent of the different foods and garments and materials and preserve the distinctness in not mixing them contrary to law as with the law that forbade them mix with lesser races. Stupidity is not a virtue!

I’ve always believed this out of Africa nonsense was pure hogwash. — ranger

Yes, I’ve suspected it too. It was just too convenient and politically correct. (After all, we’re all really Africans,you know. Africa is the Mother Continent and our ancestors were all originally black.)

I have never believed we are all out of Africa.

I read somewhere that the only reason why so many human fossils are found in Africa is because it is just so much easier to find fossils in desert sand. There is no excavation necessary. If you know where to look, the fossil bones are just lying on the surface of the ground or only partially submerged. Also, because Africans did not build cities or towns to the extent Europeans did, you do not have to displace a city to find a fossil.

Out of africa is basically proven. I commend to everyone the book “Race: The Reality of Human Differences” by Vince Sarich, a respected anthropologist, if you’re interested in this. Basically, evolution CAN occur very rapidly. Asians, Indians and Europeans had about tens of thousands of years to develop many distinctive features. A multitude of things affect rates of evolution, including societal and environmental pressures. Tens of thousands of years is more than enough time to create distinctive gene pools. So it doesn’t matter that a political academic blathers pretentiously about us all being african brothers. He’s wrong.

No one knows the origin of whites, the Africa thing is a feel good idea for blacks.

The link below appears to also be related to the subject in hand.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/03/080326-first-european.html

One suggestion is that the fossil ‘Anoiapithecus brevirostris’ might have possibly been a member of the ancestral group which gave rise to the Neanderthal species, but the latter also allegedly originated in Africa too.

What is important to bear in mind, is that over considerable time, evolution effected ongoing changes in primitive humanoids wherever they migrated to, sufficiently enough to have given rise to the natural creation of distinct and separate races.

Suffice to say, today’s Europeans, Asians and Semites are no longer ‘African’ if they truly ever were in the first place.

The link below appears to also be related to the subject in hand.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/03/080326-first-european.html

One suggestion is that the fossil ‘Anoiapithecus brevirostris’ might have possibly been a member of an ancestral group which gave rise to the Neanderthal species, but the latter also allegedly originated in Africa too.

What is important to bear in mind, is that over considerable time, evolution effected ongoing changes in primitive humanoids wherever they migrated to, sufficiently enough to have given rise to the natural creation of distinct and separate races.

Suffice to say, today’s Europeans, Asians and Semites are no longer ‘African’ if they truly ever were in the first place.

Lygeia,

The evidence that humans originated in East/Southern Africa is not based uniquely on fossils. DNA analysis is what scientists use to determine lineages, migration routes, etc.

It has been conclusively determined that modern humans in European have no genetic connection with the now extinct Neanderthals.

This just shows how silly arguing or taking pride over where some pre-homo sapien hybrid may have lived millions of years ago really is after all. As in the Lucy case, who knows that she or her ancestors did not actully move down from somewhere like the Euphrates or even the Caucuses regions? If we go back far enough, continents were even arranged differently.

What matters is culture and peoples that can be identified as having some relavant value and perhaps, the ones of greatest value and preserving them against the modern onslaught of increasing, primitivization of culture and world populations.

Anonymous wrote at 8:07 AM on June 3:

“Since political correctness has been shaping scientific “discovery” for some time, I doubt the stuff about “ancestors from Africa.”

Heh,heh,… Just imagine how long the religious community has sought to control scientific interpretation. What it couldn’t suppress, it seeks to claim as its own. However, what is hoped for is an objective, unbiased use of scientific method (forensics) in investigating. Luckily, most scientists today involved in this are actually nerdy White men who could care less about politics. Until they are finally supplanted by feminists and minorities who have come to desire their jobs and status, we are relatively safe from too much PC in the scientific community.

However, I would posit that far too many Race Realtists are far from objective, critical thinkers in certain departments. That is something that must be corrected for any hope of a White Nationalist movement to succeed or survive. It’s been tried before, chasing away the best minds will only repeat disasters of the past.

“I’ve never really understood why the location of human origins is of any importance to race realism. Leftists use the argument, “We all came from Africa” as if this somehow proves that we must accept multiculturalism.”

You’ve just answered your question.

If all ‘men’ are ‘out of Africa’ then we Whites cannot say, ‘We are better, intellectually more superior’ etc.

Trouble is, as Gerald Schroeder (who is a Jew, and a scientist- therefore, no friend of fundamentalist Christians of the ICR 7/24 mindset) pointed out in his book, ‘The Science of God’, the appearance of ‘Adam’ on the scene AFTER the chronicling of Australopithecus, Neanderthal, etc., with the ‘neshama’ that Genesis 1 says was the ‘soul’ that YHWH God breathed into homo sapiens, kinda puts a kibosh on that ‘out of Africa’ scenario.

Not that a 30-point differential in IQ scores between European/American Whites, and sub-saharan African Blacks means anything, you understand…

Personally, I think that the Out-of-Africa means the exact opposite of what the multiculturalists intend, so the WNs are getting all worked over nothing.

If sub-Saharan Africans are the “oldest” of the human races, then logic would dictate that they are the least evolved, correct? They’ve been sitting around in the same part of the world for the last 100000 years, while Whites and Asians broke off and migrated far and wide to different, harsher locations - locations which selected for and helped evolve higher intelligence than the Africans.