Thursday, October 29, 2009

"Out of Africa" theory demolished

The founding myth of liberalism is the One world, One Race, Out of Africa Theory.


Black Africans came from European Dmanisi Hominins - modern white Europeans did not evolve from Black Africans.

It has now been demolished.

Whites and blacks evolved separately. Whites and blacks ARE different races.

You haven't heard about this. Why? Because it would destroy the liberal establishment's fabrication that we're all the same race despite mounting and compelling archaeological and DNA evidence to the contrary. The story has been kept quiet unlike the media fanfare that usually follows obscure findings that states that the races are the same.

Whites came from Africa originally yes, possibly,
but what they fail to tell you is that the migration occurred far back enough - almost two million years - for the species of hominins to evolve separately hence the differences between the races. It was in fact, whites that migrated back into Africa.

There are many human races, not one.

We now have the Out of Europe Theory.

Related:
Race as a Biological Concept
March of the Titans - A History of the White Race - Chapter 1

DNA proves race differences

It’s elementary, my dear Watson…
James Watson Tells the Inconvenient Truth: Faces the Consequences
In Defense of The Splendour of Truth
Fury At DNA Pioneer's Theory: Africans Are Less Intelligent Than Westerners

The biological basis of race


From the Independent (UK)

A skull that rewrites the history of man

It has long been agreed that Africa was the sole cradle of human evolution. Then these bones were found in Georgia...

By Steve Connor, Science Editor - Wednesday, 9 September 2009


The conventional view of human evolution and how early man colonised the world has been thrown into doubt by a series of stunning palaeontological discoveries suggesting that
Africa was not the sole cradle of humankind. Scientists have found a handful of ancient human skulls at an archaeological site two hours from the Georgian capital, Tbilisi, that suggest a Eurasian chapter in the long evolutionary story of man.

The skulls, jawbones and fragments of limb bones suggest that our ancient human ancestors migrated out of Africa
far earlier than previously thought and spent a long evolutionary interlude in Eurasia – before moving back into Africa to complete the story of man.

Experts believe fossilised bones unearthed at the medieval village of Dmanisi in the foothills of the Caucuses, and dated to about 1.8 million years ago, are the oldest indisputable remains of humans discovered outside of Africa.

But what has really excited the researchers is the discovery that these early humans (or "hominins") are far more primitive-looking than the Homo erectus humans that were, until now, believed to be the first people to migrate out of Africa about 1 million years ago.

The Dmanisi people had brains that were about 40 per cent smaller than those of Homo erectus and they were much shorter in stature than classical H. erectus skeletons, according to Professor David Lordkipanidze, general director of the Georgia National Museum. "Before our findings, the prevailing view was that humans came out of Africa almost 1 million years ago, that they already had sophisticated stone tools, and that their body anatomy was quite advanced in terms of brain capacity and limb proportions. But what we are finding is quite different," Professor Lordkipanidze said.

"The Dmanisi hominins are the earliest representatives of our own genus – Homo – outside Africa, and they represent the most primitive population of the species Homo erectus to date.


They might be ancestral to all later Homo erectus populations, which would suggest a Eurasian origin of Homo erectus."

Speaking at the British Science Festival in Guildford, where he gave the British Council lecture, Professor Lordkipanidze raised the prospect that Homo erectus may have evolved in Eurasia from the more primitive-looking Dmanisi population and then migrated back to Africa to eventually give rise to our own species, Homo sapiens – modern man.

"The question is whether Homo erectus originated in Africa or Eurasia, and if in Eurasia, did we have vice-versa migration? This idea looked very stupid a few years ago, but today it seems not so stupid," he told the festival.

The scientists have discovered a total of five skulls and a solitary jawbone. It is clear that they had relatively small brains, almost a third of the size of modern humans. "They are quite small. Their lower limbs are very human and their upper limbs are still quite archaic and they had very primitive stone tools," Professor Lordkipanidze said. "Their brain capacity is about 600 cubic centimetres. The prevailing view before this discovery was that the humans who first left Africa had a brain size of about 1,000 cubic centimetres."

The only human fossil to predate the Dmanisi specimens are of an archaic species Homo habilis, or "handy man", found only in Africa, which used simple stone tools and lived between about 2.5 million and 1.6 million years ago.

"I'd have to say, if we'd found the Dmanisi fossils 40 years ago, they would have been classified as Homo habilis because of the small brain size. Their brow ridges are not as thick as classical Homo erectus, but their teeth are more H. erectus like," Professor Lordkipanidze said. "All these finds show that the ancestors of these people were much more primitive than we thought. I don't think that we were so lucky as to have found the first travellers out of Africa.

Georgia is the cradle of the first Europeans, I would say," he told the meeting.

"What we learnt from the Dmanisi fossils is that they are quite small – between 1.44 metres to 1.5 metres tall. What is interesting is that their lower limbs, their tibia bones, are very human-like so it seems they were very good runners," he said.

He added: "In regards to the question of which came first, enlarged brain size or bipedalism, maybe indirectly this information calls us to think that body anatomy was more important than brain size. While the Dmanisi people were almost modern in their body proportions, and were highly efficient walkers and runners, their arms moved in a different way, and their brains were tiny compared to ours.

"
Nevertheless, they were sophisticated tool makers with high social and cognitive skills," he told the science festival, which is run by the British Science Association. [ring any bells? - Ed.]

One of the five skulls is of a person who lost all his or her teeth during their lifetime but had still survived for many years despite being completely toothless.
This suggests some kind of social organisation based on mutual care, Professor Lordkipanidze said.

11 Opinion(s):

Vanilla Ice said...

I would go so far as to say we are seperate species.

Although we may have a common ancestor, this will not make us related.

It is probable that the European Erectus evolved into Homo Sapien, which migrated back to Africa and created a hybrid with the African Erectus.

The European Homo Sapien either evolved into Modern Man, or merged with the Neanderthal and then evolved into Modern Man.

But the point is that the sub-Saharan black of today definitely did not take the same evolutionary path as Europeans, and cannot be consider Modern Man.

Doberman said...

I agree.

Anonymous said...

You don't need more proof than to look at the SA black. Do we have the most violent and stupid in this country??

Anonymous said...

The "Out of Africa" theory has only been promoted by the MSM, because it suits their political agenda of multiculturalism and egalitarianism.

Everything that advances the cause of these inherently communist agendas are highlighted, often at the expense of the truth.

The agenda is to create a NWO. Don't be a dumb arse in go into denial.

Everything that advances this agenda is promoted. To have a one world government, you have to convince the sheeple that they are all ONE, a band of merry men so to speak.

Fact is that this article is a brick of information and when viewed together with other bricks, like the recent genetic studies that proof we have a 12% CNV genetic difference and a 25% SNP genetic difference between the races and the other ancient fossils that have been found....
http://news.nationalgeographic.com
/news/2002/07/0703_020704_
georgianskull.html
....these bricks become a wall of fact.

This however does not stop the liberals from trying to bend the truth to suit their ideologies and their agendas.

For liberals/communists the truth is not very important.

A4

Exzanian said...

This will have a very interesting impact on the study of evolution in years to come. We must remember that species are not "fixed" and there are countless gradations across generations. It is important to realise that there is homo sapiens (cro-magnon) and homo sapiens sapiens (modern humans)There is also homo neanderthalensis which died out scarcely 30,000 years ago. Even though we class the negroid race in the same species as us (obviously, interbreeding is proof of that)as little as a few hundred thousand years difference in evolution is important, in the sense that humans are mostly differentiated in terms of culture. A little bit of gene makes a helluva difference (bear in mind we share 99% of our genes with chimpanzees)

Vanilla Ice said...

@ExZ. Check out pitures of the Russian heavyweight boxing champ. He is a throw back to a Neanderthal.

Anonymous said...

http://genomebiology.com/2002/3/7/comment/2007

Vanilla Ice said...

Anon 7:51. Thanks for the link. Just another article to add to the mounting evidence debunking the myth that race is a social construct. The article was written in 2002, therefore they weren't aware that the Out of Africa hypothesis would be challenged. This doesn't affect their findings though.

Tia Mysoa said...

If the notion that ‘WE ARE ALL FROM OUT OF AFRICA’ is true, then it basically implies that a certain group of individuals migrated from Africa 1000’s and 1000’s of years ago, leaving their African brothers and sisters behind to fend for themselves. As the years flew by and their numbers multiplied they gradually evolved into 100’s of distinctly different ethnic groups with a genetic diversity and various skin colours ranging from pitch-black, dark-brown, light-brown, to snow-white. (Strange that this diversity never took place on the African continent, but only in other regions of this Earth.)

The fully evolved white-skinned race must have lost all contact with their ancient forefathers because nothing – zero - zilch, was handed down to their offspring from generation to generation. Their old African traditions and customs mysteriously vanished into thin air. Then suddenly, while in the act of rediscovering their lost heritage, and while exploring new terrains they found other races, in Africa and various other places, who were vastly different to them in physical appearance, language, culture, and beliefs. The rest is History…

Anyone who believes that all races on this planet have their roots in Africa, are making a grave error. The White Races originate from an area known today as Eurasia, and there is ample solid evidence to prove this. The Black and White Races ARE two distinctly separate racial groups. The Black races were created first here in Africa 1000’s and 1000’s of years ago, followed many years later by a new human breed who possessed talents noticeably different from the previous creation of human beings. The sooner we all grasp the reality of this fact, the sooner we will understand why the world has become such a chaotic mess, and why, among numerous other things, confused rock musicians like John Lennon wrote a song called, “Imagine”.

In a previous posting on my blog (Exposing the Synagogue of satan), I touched briefly on the possibility that there were two separate creations described in the book of Genesis. The first creation is described in Chapter 1 and the second creation is described in Chapter 2. This pre-Adamite view concerning the creation of man is not something I’ve sucked out of my thumb, --- it also appears in the early writings of such authors as Paracelsus in 1520, Bruno in 1591, Vanini in 1619, and Peyrère, in 1655. It reached a high level of development with the 19th-century scholar Alexander Winchell in his book, Preadamites; or a Demonstration of the Existence of Men Before Adam, published in 1880. The evolutionists don’t like this view because it doesn’t fit in with their agenda, hence the reason why it is never taught to our children.

In its most simplified form, the two separate creations can be distinguished by two types of humans. The first type were the hunter-gatherers of this earth (The Black Race) and the second type was the common farmer known as Adam (The White Race). I will refrain from speculating on the exact date, but the mixing of the two races occurred quite recently in human history, more or less at the time when Cain was expelled to the East of Eden.

medical said...

I was a researcher on the mostly top secret "U.S. Department of Energy Human Genome Project" and we discovered the factual information regarding the true origins of the various races and a great deal more (99% of which remains HIGHLY classified) many years ago. Anyone who still believes "all races originated on the African continent" is totally daft. The U.S. Government is afraid the disclosure of all our scientific findings regarding the true origins of the different races will prevent or delay the formation of the "New World Order", aka "one world government". All the unchecked illegal immigration by the darker races is intentionally being allowed in order to dilute the European races and nations. We are absolutely NOT "all the same, except for our skin color"! The saying I despise most is, "we're all part of the same race, the human race". HOW TERRIBLY IGNORANT and COMPLETELY SCIENTIFICALLY INCORRECT! Thank GOD someone has finally published the long established scientific facts contained in this article! WE NOW KNOW THAT WHITE PEOPLE DEVELOPED THE ENTIRE CIVILIZED WORLD. Here's some truthful information for those of you who have been lied to about all the "great black inventions". http://www33.brinkster.com/iiiii/inventions/

medical said...

BTW, The many branches of the U.S. Government have "disappeared" persons for exposing less "top secret" information than I posted above. As a matter of fact, in 2006, I was warned that I would be "discredited" (U.S. military code word for "murdered") if I didn't shut my mouth (they made an attempt, but they didn't have the common sense to send someone I didn't know to do the "job", so you are reading the words of the person who won that gun battle, then cleaned up his own mess and instantly moved away). Most people around the world haven't a clue how many U.S. Citizens "who know too much" are violently assassinated (usually disguised as "street crime") or secretly locked away forever ("disappeared") in "above top secret" prisons by the U.S. Government. I am very much aware that what I have just written sounds crazy, but I swear it is the absolute truth. The U.S.A. is NOT a "free country"!