Guide to Patagonia's Monsters & Mysterious beings


Austin Whittall

Wednesday, February 1, 2017

An intersting paper on the NON AFRICAN orign of mankind

Seems it is an Out of Asia after all...

This is a very interesting -at least it goes against the grain of most orthodox papers, positing an out of Asia orign of mankind- paper: WORLD SCIENCE EN ROUTE FROM OUT-OF-AFRICA TO OUT-OF-AMERICA: FIRST STOP IS OUT-OF-ASIA.

By the way, Happy 2017!! I have the feeling that this year will bring us surprises galore, and not only from some Neanderthals (with my apologies to our great and dignified ancestors) who have recently taken up their lodging in Washington DC.

May reason, sensible discussion of ideas, open-mindedness and above all, Western values such as respect, freedom to dissent, freedom of religion, thought and above all, freedom of speech, prevail above any populist sleazy politicians and their demagoguery. On both sides of the Anglo-Saxon Atlantic (i.e. Brexit supporters). Respect, chivalry and rationality must prevail over bigotry, prejudice and Medieval witch-hunting. Racism belongs with the 1940s fascists, not in the XXIst century.

And if you post any insidious comments I will publish them even if I disagree -of course-, no foul language please.



  1. Happy new year for you too!!
    Refering to the scientific content of your entry, I agree with you that this is a very relevant research ….as it validates the Multiregional approach, that is to say, continuity in evolution from one ancient specie, with eventual hybridization… but not replacement, as a definitively better way to explain modern human evolution, at least in East Asia.
    Now, having known that there was an Out of Asia…the question for me would be; In which stage of the Asian´s evolution were the first Homo who arrived at America from there???...because I can´t believe they were just the final product of it, as the orthodox science still conceives…H.sapiens in its “full version”, very behaviorally modern, and with a toolkit of advanced lithics in his bag…
    Though, on the other extreme, it would be yet too reckless to consider that also the starting point of Asian´s evolution (presumably, 1,5/1,9 Myr H. erectus) came into America,… but they could perfectly enter in several convenient climatic periods (and with a varying degree of evolution) since the Middle Pleistocene…some signs of this early presence were treated in detail in your blog.
    Of course, seen from an open minded optics… I think that today, it can not be ruled out the possibility that this first inmigration, could have led to some sort of “regionally adapted version” of what apparently happened in Asia.
    With respect to the other subject…It is worrying how the chaining of the events (social, political and economical) have derived in what seems to me, an incredible step down in the respect of the values you have mentioned, shared for most of the people in the world…some of which very ( but very) hardly acquired…
    If we consider it as an “anomality” that sometimes (perhaps cyclically ??) occurs in every “more or less ordered society” ( in Argentina, we have not been exempt from these periods)…normally these societies are capable to counter it by means of a coherent, strong and also prudent action…but it may take a while.

  2. Thank you Marcelo, your comment is very interesting.
    By the way, in a post of mine of Sep. 29. 2016, (, I wrote: "This leads me to ask, what if African heterozygosity was enriched by recent admixture with other hominins in Africa? an inflow of different relic alleles elevated African diversity above that of non-Africans. Could current lower Amerindian heterozygosity reflect an ancient population just like that of Denisovans or Neanderthals?"
    Which is quite similar to the position of Yuan Dejian et al (bioRxiv doi: on Homozygosity - Heterozgosity.

  3. Though a detailed analysis of this research is definitely not an easy task for me, I perfectly understand what you are pointing. Indeed … very similar (if not the same) ideas/speculations to those you have published in Sep.29, 2016, can also be inferred from Yuan
    Both questions are “in tune” with the essence of this very recent paper.
    I wonder if you are going to treat them, particularly the last “¿ Could current lower Amerindian heterozigosity reflect an ancient population just like that of Denisovans and Neanderthals ? more detail.

  4. We are given a false dichotomy, once again. We are given two choices, a regional model and the out-of-Africa model. What if they are BOTH correct. What if Europeans and Asians have 90% African ancestry and 10% from some regional model. What if there were multiple races of the extinct Homo Erectus in different parts of Eurasia. Let's say Middle East/Black Sea/Caucasus, India, China, Indonesia. And then there was a huge surge of Homo Sapiens coming out of Africa. They intermixed with the local Homo Erectus races, and the result is the different modern Homo Sapiens in those regions. Again, with 90% of the genetics coming from Africa ? And the MiddleEast/Black sea/Caucasus is also the ancestor of Europeans. Why isn't anyone talking about a fusion theory. Why is everyone focussed on the false dichotomy.

  5. Very interesting. How about yet another Theory - The out of Australia (Oceania) theory?
    In February 2017 there is an article about a lost continent found to the east of Australia. The lost continent is called Zealandia.

    The news about Zealandia in combination with an article from October 2016 about the Australo-Melanesian and DNA admixture of an unknown hominid could change everything in the research on the human origin.

    The similar stories about Noah (Noah's flood) all over the world could be factually true.
    What if the homeland of Noah is the lost continent 'now called' Zealandia?
    Australia or atleast the Sahul (Papua, Australia and Tasmania) could be the original Ararat.
    Australia would be the dispersal place of humankind in other words; Noah stayed in Australia (Sahul); his sons (Shem, Ham and Japheth); and their wifes; spread into Asia(Eurasia), America and Africa.
    Later there are backmigrations from Asia(Eurasia), America and Africa towards Australia in the form of spice trade, spread of various cultures; religions and advanced technology.

    Another article from September 2016 could strengthen the out of Australia (Oceania) theory:

  6. Sub-saharan Africans have no Denisovan or Neanderthal DNA but DNA from some other ancient archaic human. In both instances, ancient DNA got injected into homo sapiens, who may have been quite archaic themselves. Nevertheless, these injections seem to set up a dividing line, dividing the sub-saharan group from all the other ones. This set-up supports the out-of-Africa theory, but the original point of evolution for homo sapiens may lie a little bit more north yet still subsaharan. But after that, the evolution of homo sapiens became wild and woolly. People have moved in and out of Africa, muddling the whole picture even more. What a fascinating story.

    1. Sam, yes, the evidence seems to point towards an archaic human introgressing into sub-Saharan Africans and the interesting point seems to be this: these "more diverse" Africans have always been singled out as the original Homo sapiens because of their "genetic diversity". But... if this turns out to be more diverse because of the archaic admixture, then, the question is "Where did Homo sapiens originate?".
      I am persuaded that we originated in Asia. At first I mocked the notion of a Chinese origin for us (I called it "sino centrism" as most Chinese scholars are alwayst quick to point out that the Chinese did everything first from paper to pizza, noodles and the compass just to mention a vew). But now I am more and more convinced of an Eurasian or even an American origin of modern humans. We all admixed with Neanderthals, some with Denisoans and some with none of the above, those are the ones that entered Africa and mixed with the local (H.naledi?) primitive hominins, leading to a more genetically diverse sub-Saharian African population...

  7. Austin, yours is one of the most fascinating blogs I have ever encountered and I have been an avid reader of yours for many years.

  8. The MGD or "Maximum Genetic Diversity" theory championed by D. Yuan is published here (free access):


Hits since Sept. 2009:
Copyright © 2009-2018 by Austin Victor Whittall.



Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy

Patagonian Monsters -