RandomAfricanAm:

Much better! Now that is a much more coherent statement.

Questions:
1. In what way(s) are you suggesting that "modern black Africans are not the same (in terms of skeletal morphology, for example) as humans from many tens of thousands of years ago"?

delineators
a. Erect posture
b. Skull morphology
c. Limb ratio
d. Height
e. Other

2. Are you saying that Qafzeh 9 fits the above limitations?

3. Are you saying that the humans we are referring to do not fit into what is commonly referred to as "modern man"?

4. If such early people are deemed modern man, What use are such limitations when Modern Africans have no uniform skeletal morphology short of a tropical adapted morphology?

I'm not saying that Qafzeh 9 "fits the above limitations" and my point (besides the issue of the difference in the genes of the individuals under consideration) is about skull morphology (unless I see evidence otherwise), though I'm sure height would probably be another significant difference.

But, putting your other questions aside (I don't see the point of carrying out two detailed, stretched out debates with two different posters on the same issue in the same thread), are you suggesting that because "Modern Africans" have no uniform skeletal morphology it would ever be correct to suggest that they were the same as the people that we are referring to from many tens of thousands of years ago?

PhysicsQED: (I don't see the point of carrying out two detailed, stretched out debates with two different posters on the same issue in the same thread)

Fair enough, I'll drop off. My points have been largely addressed anyway.
Side note: I don't do debates they reek of people(I'm not saying you) constantly trying to "win". I just want to understand a persons position and make sure my position is clearly understood. Afterwards come to some (dis)agreement then move on to the next step.

I despise "academic debate" ...it's one of those residual European cultural nuggets that don't suit me at all

---

I'll leave on this...

Questions:
1. In what way(s) are you suggesting that "modern black Africans are not the same (in terms of skeletal morphology, for example) as humans from many tens of thousands of years ago"?

delineators
a. Erect posture
b. Skull morphology
c. Limb ratio
d. Height
e. Other

Answers:

PhysicsQED: my point (besides the issue of the difference in the genes of the individuals under consideration) is about skull morphology (unless I see evidence otherwise)

PhysicsQED: I'm sure height would probably be another significant difference .

2. Are you saying that Qafzeh 9 fits the above limitations?

Answers:

PhysicsQED: I'm not saying that Qafzeh 9 "fits the above limitations"

3. Are you saying that the humans we are referring to do not fit into what is commonly referred to as "modern man"?

Answers:
None

4. If such early people are deemed modern man, What use are such limitations when Modern Africans have no uniform skeletal morphology short of a tropical adapted morphology?

Answers:
None

PhysicsQED:

I'm not saying that Qafzeh 9 "fits the above limitations" and my point (besides the issue of the difference in the genes of the individuals under consideration) is about skull morphology (unless I see evidence otherwise), though I'm sure height would probably be another significant difference.

But, putting your other questions aside (I don't see the point of carrying out two detailed, stretched out debates with two different posters on the same issue in the same thread), are you suggesting that because "Modern Africans" have no uniform skeletal morphology it would ever be correct to suggest that they were the same as the people that we are referring to from many tens of thousands of years ago?

I'll leave that conversation to you and kidstranglehold

KidStranglehold:

Wrong...The San people were not the early people and West Africans and other Africans do NOT descend from them. They just carry some of the oldest clades like Y-DNA haplogroup A in high frequencies. But even so there are other Africans that carry much other clades. San/Khoisans just share a common ancestor with other Africans. But the earliest Africans lived in East Africa and were not San/Khoisan.

The early Africans most likely did not look like modern Khoisans, because they didnt live in dry heated/Arid climates like Khoisans but humid where darker skin is needed.

So can you explain this picture?
Also I've heard somewhere the San people aren't from southern Africa, but somewhere north due to the presence of a Khoisan group in Tanzania and "San-like people" in the Sahara.

Also, what about the hair on this person:

Why do people take pride in being the first people, doesn't that fall into racists claims that certain people are more primitive and less evolved than others?

kingston277:
So can you explain this picture?
Also I've heard somewhere the San people aren't from southern Africa, but somewhere north due to the presence of a Khoisan group in Tanzania and "San-like people" in the Sahara.

The san people occupied east and southern Africa.

osystein: Why do people take pride in being the first people, doesn't that fall into racists claims that certain people are more primitive and less evolved than others?

No because that idea hinges on the notion that the "material progress" we see today is predicated on the human genetic evolution of some set of people ...which isn't true, or at least verified.

This actually plays into a discussion Physics and pleep were having a couple of months back about Jews, IQ, and genetics that I meant to insert myself into but never got around to. Todays worlds is built on the back of ideas not some random genetic leap among modern man which is largely genetically the same.

To put it simply:
1. Humans seek to meet their basic needs of food, security, shelter, etc. any method(s) they develop to meet those needs live and die within the confines of that group in the form of cultural Memes. These "methods of production" are largely based on environment.


2. If conditions force groups into close proximity and provides the ability to meet their basic needs those "methods of production" once confined to particular groups spreads replacing/coexisting with other models(for better or worse).

See: Nile valley


See: Ghana-Mali-Songhai Complex
[img]http://fpif.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/GHANA-MALI-SONGHAI-EMPIRE.jpe[/img]

See: Swahili coast
[img]http://davidderrick.files./2013/04/swahili-coast.jpg[/img]

See: Mesopotamia


See Indus valley civilization


See: Shang Dynasty


See: Olmec civilization


3. In that environment which sustains larger populations the chance, need, speed, and variety of production methods increase. Given the close quarters of people these cultural memes spread throughout the inhabitants increasing derivatives and improvements while also insuring survival.

4. Those "methods of production" are further spread by trade relation between said population centers. The extent to which you are isolated from those trade routes determines the extent to which you are isolated from the ideas of the world.
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b7/Niger_saharan_medieval_trade_routes.PNG[/img]



5. As the worlds cultural memes diversify and form ever complex configurations through increased population and means to fund more complex expressions of cultural memes you get todays world.


In conclusion:

osystein: Why do people take pride in being the first people, doesn't that fall into racists claims that certain people are more primitive and less evolved than others?

No because the world is the way it is because of the accumulated population and subsequent ideas of man ...along with the massive influx of capital that went into the capitalist system that was birthed by the accumulated wealth gained off the backs of free African labor in the Americas along with the raw materials still being taken from the bowls of Africa today.

This materialized not on the back of some special strain of DNA but on the martialing of a huge subset of the accumulated ideas of man that was deposited in Europe at the fall of the Moorish occupation of Spain. All you would really be saying is that the foundation of the worlds accumulated culture and genetic make up that facilitated that comes from "us"


But really everybody is a subset of "us" so what's the point <---That's the real question

RandomAfricanAm, I only answered those questions you posed to me that seemed relevant to clearing up the confusion about what me and Kidstranglehold were disagreeing (or misinterpreting each other) on. I could give answers to the others, but it was unnecessary to do so to clear things up and as I said, I would like to keep things short and simpler.

Also, I think that you misunderstood osystein's question. He'll probably return to clarify what he was asking about though - or at least I assume that he will if he still has any interest in the thread.

KidStranglehold: Another thing one should note is that L3 mtDNA(which is associated with the Out of Africa) is actually highest in West Africa than anywhere else on the planet according to this study.

Mitochondrial DNA/mtDNA (page 5)
http://www.scs.illinois.edu/~mcdonald/WorldHaplogroupsMaps.pdf

Modern day Africans are obviously descendants of those early Africans than anyone else.
[img]http://forwhattheywereweare.files./2012/01/fig-3.png[/img]

Which is also why Africans are the most diverse humans.

True, but many make the mistake to refer Africa as "one people"

I think it would be more efficient to study the origins of various Africa groups before moving on the world level.

Wats ur opinion on ape-like fossils found all around the world?

I think this proves that before modern men, migrations and expansions were done.

it's also very possible that life didn't start in one place

PhysicsQED: RandomAfricanAm, I only answered those questions you posed to me that seemed relevant to clearing up the confusion about what me and Kidstranglehold were disagreeing (or misinterpreting each other) on. I could give answers to the others, but it was unnecessary to do so to clear things up and as I said, I would like to keep things short and simpler.

No prob I'm good

PhysicsQED:

...Also, I think that you misunderstood osystein's question. He'll probably return to clarify what he was asking about though - or at least I assume that he will if he still has any interest in the thread.

Misunderstood ...ummm I don't know if I'd say misunderstood. Now I certainly didn't answer his entire question, but that was intentional.
Hence the emboldened segment...

osystein: Why do people take pride in being the first people, doesn't that fall into racists claims that certain people are more primitive and less evolved than others?

^^
I was replying explicitly to that part so I intentionally disregarded the first part of the question which I have no real position on either way(personally I think it's a rather random claim also though for different reasons)