Thread by @GemsOfINDOLOGY

"African Eve: Hoax or Hypothesis?"

- A critical analysis of the replacement hypothesis suggesting modern humans evolved only in sub-Saharan Africa.
- The hypothesis is refuted using genetic, anthropological, and archaeological perspectives.

#Archaeology

1/

The field of Pleistocene archaeology and paleoanthropology has been compromised by sectarian preoccupations and struggles for authority.

- The concept of "anatomically modern humans" is nonsensical.
- The belief upheld for a long time is that the "Upper Paleolithic" was introduced from Africa to Europe.
- The case of false datings by Professor Reiner Protsch "von Zieten", exposed in 2003.
- The "Afro-European sapiens" model and the "African Eve" complete replacement scenario have gained traction but face methodological problems.
- The mitochondrial Eve model, which assumed constancy of mutation rates, has been debunked.
- Various genetic hypotheses about the origins of "Moderns" have placed the hypothetical split between them and other humans at different periods.

2/

The genetic basis of the replacement hypothesis lacks sound data. Factors such as contamination, base substitution, and DNA fragmentation undermine its credibility.

The rapidly dominant paradigm in human evolution had considerable impacts. The epistemology of the "African Eve hypothesis" therefore requires examination.

Notably, the replacement hypothesis profoundly influenced paleoanthropology and Pleistocene archaeology.

This paper presents two hypotheses:
1) One lacking empirical support
2) Another with ample support and explanatory potential.

3/

The genetic differences between Neanderthals and modern humans have generated much debate.

1. Recent studies show that Neanderthal genes are present in Europeans, Asians, and Papuans.
2. The interbreeding occurred with the ancestors of Europeans and Asians, not Africans.
3. This suggests that Europeans and Asians evolved from local robust populations. Some previous evidence, such as tooth enamel traits, supports this idea.
4. The replacement theory and the claim of greater genetic diversity among Africans have thus been challenged.
5. Genetic distance measurements based on nuclear DNA have produced conflicting results, with some opposing the models.

4/

The proposed AMHs theory is rejected when applied to dogs due to lack of paleontological evidence. A similar restraint is needed when considering hominins.

Genetic diversity in humans is likely the result of introgression; this may be due to humanistic fervor.

A critical examination of both fossil and cultural evidence also warrants a reconsideration of the supporting research for the "African Eve hypothesis".

5/

The "African Eve" notion originated from false datings of hominin remains in Europe:

- Misdated fossils, including those from Germany and Croatia, have led to inaccurate conclusions about the "Early Upper Paleolithic" period.
- The "Aurignacian" Cro-Magnon specimens, considered "modern" Europeans, actually have Neanderthaloid features.

6/

The earliest "post-Neanderthal" finds in Europe include:

- The Peştera cu Oase mandible from Romania
- A partial cranium found in the same cave.

Both lack an archaeological context and are not anatomically modern.

Numerous Eurasian specimens from the Late Pleistocene period show intermediate characteristics between robust and gracile Homo sapiens, contradicting the idea of separate species. The proponents of replacement theory ignored these findings.

Furthermore, no fully gracile specimen in Eurasia can be linked to any Early Upper Paleolithic tool tradition. The proposition that these industries were introduced from sub-Saharan Africa lacks evidence.

The African Eve advocates also ignored Neanderthal remains found at several Early Upper Paleolithic sites.

Conclusively, the replacement paradigm is not supported by paleoanthropological finds from Africa, which mirror the gradual changes seen in Eurasia.

7/

The scarcity of African fossils prompts replacement advocates to turn to the Levant.

However, skulls from Mount Carmel present features of both modern and archaic humans.

The dating of these sites is unreliable.

The claim of 90,000-year-old "modern" humans from Mount Carmel is unsound.

These populations are transitional between robust and gracile forms.

8/

The Early Upper Paleolithic tool traditions of Eurasia, indicating the arrival of Eve's progeny, emerged between 45 ka and 40 ka bp.

Here are the key points:
- The Aurignacian in Spain dates back at least 43 ka.
- EUP variants like Uluzzian and Proto-Aurignacian have been found in southern Italy.
- The Olschewian in central Europe developed from the final Mousterian.
- Various traditions exist in the Russian Plains.
- Mode 3 industries gradually developed into Mode 4 on the Don River, Crimea, and northern Caucasus.

The Kostenkian is the first fully developed Upper Paleolithic tradition, appearing about 24 ka ago. Similar developments can be seen in eastern Europe and Greece.

Key findings:
- There is no evidence of an intrusive technology arriving from the Levant in eastern or southeastern Europe.
- The Mousteroid traditions in the Levant transitioned into blade industries.
- Late Mousterian in Europe is marked by regionalization, miniaturization, and increased blade use.

9/

1. Claims of cultural transmission from sub-Saharan Africa across northern Africa lack support. Many Eurasian regions developed these traditions before they reached northern Africa or the Levant.

2. This also applies to paleoart. The belief that EUP traditions, like the Aurignacian, were created by "AMHS" (Graciles) has no clear evidence. The notion of distinct cultures is based on invented tool types and neglects important cultural information.

3. The "African Eve hypothesis" is challenged by the discovery that Neanderthals produced Châtelperronian artifacts, including paleoart objects. The reasoning of replacement advocates is often accommodative and lacks consistency.

4. There is no evidence linking early Aurignacian finds to Moderns or any EUP industry. The argument that Aurignacian rock art and portable paleoart are the work of "Neanderthals" or their descendants refutes the "African Eve hypothesis."

5. Genetic evidence supports the idea that recent human evolution in Eurasia occurred in situ. Claims of an "African invasion" into Europe lack support.

10/

Challenging the "African Eve Hypothesis" is difficult due to vested interests defending it, despite the lack of evidence.

Alternative theories propose:
- Introgressive hybridization
- Allele drift
- Genetic isolation
- Climatic events

These factors contribute to hominin evolution. The failure of the "African Eve hypothesis" leaves a gap in our understanding. The multi-regional model offers some explanation, but it needs more detail.

The sudden decrease in human brain size at the end of the Pleistocene challenges the replacement advocates' viewpoint.

11/

The human brain has undergone a significant reduction over the last 40 millennia, a development that seems paradoxical given the increasing demands on it. Here's a closer look at this phenomenon:

- This reduction in brain size coincided with a decline in physical power and skeletal robusticity.
- The observed changes cannot be fully explained by lifestyle, body weight, genetic drift, or climate change alone.
- Advocates of the "Eve" theory propose that speciation compensated for these adverse developments, but they fail to provide concrete evidence.
- Continuous encephalization facilitated the complexity of hominin societies. At the same time, a sudden decrease in brain size allowed for further cognitive and intellectual advances.
- Though the cost of encephalization was significant, it is justified by the distinct advantages it offered.
- However, the assumption that the reduced modern human brain has even greater processing power is biologically untenable.

12/

Certain physical features in modern humans are quite interesting:

- They resemble those of fetal chimpanzees and disappear in apes after birth. However, humans retain them for life.
- Humans have unique mate preferences for youth, specific body ratios, facial features, skin tone, and hair.

Around 40,000 years ago, cultural factors began influencing mate selection. This led to the establishment of physical attractiveness as a culturally negotiated construct.

An interesting hypothesis - the domestication hypothesis, provides the best explanation for the presence of detrimental genetic conditions in humans. These conditions are absent in non-human primates. Notably, these conditions emerged relatively recently, within the last few thousand years.

13/

The alternative hypothesis replaces the Eve hypothesis and is supported by empirical evidence (archaeological, anthropological, genetic). It explains various phenomena like human nature complexities, genetic disorders, and cognitive compensation for brain size reduction. The popularity of the Eve hypothesis may be due to its feel-good message but it also rationalizes genocide. Science should aim for detached presentation of findings. Traditional archaeology lacks scientific rigor compared to the "hard" sciences. Humanities disciplines show systematic bias in supporting initial hypotheses more than hard sciences.

14/

1. The social sciences rank higher than physical and chemical studies.
2. Psychology and psychiatry are more rigorous than Pleistocene archaeology.
3. The "African Eve" hypothesis led to false ideas about human evolution.
4. Archaeology fails to address the key question of why hominin development changed from evolutionary to teleological.
5. Cultural evolution is an oxymoron.
6. Understanding human self-selection and culture is crucial for understanding recent hominin history.
7. "Modern" humans derive from robust populations through a process of domestication.

15/

Further evidences challengng OOAT
1. 2.6 million year old Stone Tool found in the Siwalik Hills, India challenges Out-of-Africa Theory.
Scholars are now considering possibilities of Homo-genus may have parallely evolved in Asia.



16/

Stone tools dating back 385,000 years discovered in Attirampakkam, Tamil Nadu challenging 'Out of Africa' theory #Archaeology

17/


nature.com/articles/natur…
phys.org/news/2010-02-p…

Homo sapiens were not imported from Africa the new discoveries of Toba volcano's pre and post eruption tools found in Jwalapuram in South India and Dhaba in North India. On the contrary, H.Sapiens moved out of India to the rest of the world. #Archaeology

18/

researchgate.net/publication/22…

House Mice found today in Eurasia, ME, Africa are Indian and they started to migrate around 12000 years ago … #1


📷

19/ onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.104…

Human and ape ancestors arose in Europe, not in Africa, controversial study claims. Another jolt to 'Out of African' hypothesis #Archaeology …
📷

20/ livescience.com/archaeology/hu…

Src African Eve: Hoax or Hypothesis?

Robert G. Bednarik

International Federation of Rock Art Organizations (IFRAO), Caulfield South,

Melbourne, Australia Email: [e-mail]

Received September 11, 2013, revised October 9, 2013; accepted October 29th, 2013


@MANU_dgr8
@_shiva_shambo

21/scirp.org/html/39900.html