Homo Erectus - Move The Dates Back in Asia

[Minimalist]

Interesting shit.

https://scientificinquirer.com/2018/08/3...d-in-asia/

Artifacts found in China revises date humans arrived in Asia

The artefacts show that our earliest human ancestors colonised East Asia over two million years ago. They were found by a Chinese team that was led by Professor Zhaoyu Zhu of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and included Professor Robin Dennell of Exeter University. The tools were discovered at a locality called Shangchen in the southern Chinese Loess Plateau. The oldest are ca. 2.12 million years old, and are c. 270,000 years older than the 1.85 million year old skeletal remains and stone tools from Dmanisi, Georgia, which were previously the earliest evidence of humanity outside Africa.

I wonder how you say "Garden of Eden" in Chinese?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The Chinese are committed to proving they're are exceptional in the evolutionary field.

[Minimalist]

You have to admit they don't have a lot of creatard asswipes gumming up the works.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

You have to admit they don't have a lot of creatard asswipes gumming up the works.

No, but I suspect The State is making demands here. Just a suspicion.

[Minimalist]

That's something I'd expect the WLB to say.

[Anomalocaris]

You have to admit they don't have a lot of creatard asswipes gumming up the works.

They have other biases influencing what they regard as paleontologist science there.  For example most Chinese paleontologists seem to take a dim of the evidence that modern Chinese, like everyone else outside of Africa, descended mostly from a recently emigration of Africans who had evolved primary modern traits in Africa, and have for no particular good reason generally asserted modern Chinese must have arisen independently from a long and pure lineage of homo erectus that dates back at least a million years and must have evolved in place in China. Some have even asserted distinctive Chinese character can be seen in fossils dating back half million years, despite the fact that genetically there is no such thing as distinctive Chinese character.

The pseudoscientific notion that the modern human population in a country did not arise from a late emigration of African HSS, but rather from separate pure lineage of pre-humans that evolved in place from earliest days of hominids is also popular in japan and Korea.

[Minimalist]

It's called Multi-Regionalism and with Dmanisi and now this as well as Heidelbergensis and Neanderthal and the Denisovans I think there may be something to it.

[Anomalocaris]

The overwhelming proportion of our genes indisputably came from one single pulse of emigration out of Africa recently.  To the degree multiregionalism in the weakest sense still has any potential for validity it would be in the scraps of a fraction of a few percent that might have been obtained through admixture after the main truck of euroasia HSS Ancestery left Africa less than 100,000 years ago.

People who are still arguing for multi-regionalism in the strong sense, like many in China, japan and Korea still do, are arguing for the earth being flat.

The multi-regionalism advocated in Asia is even stronger than the strong sense that might have a seemed anthroplogically viable 100 years ago.   They are not saying the broad population in east Asia might have had a large genetic contribution from an aancestral pre-HSS  population that also lived the region.   They are denying major contribution from any outside group at all.  Further more, they are fixated not on the interbreeding modern population of the region, but specific ethnic groups.   They are arguing the Han ethnic group, or the japonic speaking ethnic group, or Korean speaking ethnic group, each separately sprung directly  from local distinct population of homo erectus that lived where the present ethnic groups lived, that had distinct and identifiable traits linkable to the present population half a million years ago, and were by implication, uncontaminated by foreign gene flow for half a million years, and has prior claim the the land they deem to be theirs by a precedence of half million years.

[Minimalist]

IN the Americas there are still people shrieking Clovis-First at the top of their lungs, too.  Nonetheless, the argument rages.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/artic...n-origins/

The Modern Human Origins Morass

When it comes to explaining the emergence of modern humans, researchers generally subscribe to one of two hypotheses. The Out of Africa theory holds that Homo sapiens burst onto the scene as a new species around 150,000 to 200,000 years ago in Africa and subsequently replaced archaic humans such as the Neandertals. The other model, known as multiregional evolution or regional continuity, posits far more ancient, diverse roots for our kind. Proponents of this view believe that Homo sapiens arose in Africa some two million years ago and evolved as a single species spread across the Old World, with populations in different regions linked through genetic and cultural exchange. Of these two models, Out of Africa has found favor with the majority of human evolution scholars. Just this month, however, results of two studies have come out that appear to support multiregionalism, adding new fuel to the long-standing debate.

I don't expect to live long enough to see this one resolved.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

That's something I'd expect the WLB to say.

But then you'd be more aware of the WLB than of Chinese ethnocentric-driven paleontology, wouldn't you.