quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

Nobody in this thread is complaining about science, or has any objections to the article.
We are complaining about YOU, and objecting to your racism, stupidity and obnoxiousness.

You are posting this because you think it is denigrating sub-Saharan Africans, and this fills you with racist glee.

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

They are studying sub-Saharan Africans because their genome is 'purer' than Asians and Europeans, who interbred with Neanderthals after leaving Africa.

Bosco the racist thinks they're saying black people are somehow 'debased' or 'less human', but they're acually talking about everyone.

The article says the interbreeding happened about 150,000 years ago, and the first humans are thought to have left Africa between 80,000 and 120,000 years ago.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

They are studying sub-Saharan Africans because their genome is 'purer' than Asians and Europeans, who interbred with Neanderthals after leaving Africa.

Bosco the racist thinks they're saying black people are somehow 'debased' or 'less human', but they're acually talking about everyone.

The article says the interbreeding happened about 150,000 years ago, and the first humans are thought to have left Africa between 80,000 and 120,000 years ago.

That's all purely your projecting your own inner vile racist hate

I didn't post anything of the sort. I posted a scholarly article purely for legitimate discussion.

The genes discussed in the article are found only in modern Sub-Saharan Africans, not everybody

Instead of spewing pure ignorance try reading the article

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

They are studying sub-Saharan Africans because their genome is 'purer' than Asians and Europeans, who interbred with Neanderthals after leaving Africa.

Bosco the racist thinks they're saying black people are somehow 'debased' or 'less human', but they're acually talking about everyone.

The article says the interbreeding happened about 150,000 years ago, and the first humans are thought to have left Africa between 80,000 and 120,000 years ago.

That's all purely your projecting your own inner vile racist hate

I didn't post anything of the sort. I posted a scholarly article purely for legitimate discussion.

The genes discussed in the article are found only in modern Sub-Saharan Africans, not everybody

Instead of spewing pure ignorance try reading the article

If you had posted this article for legitimate discussion, then it would be the first time you have ever created a thread for that purpose... but nobody who has been here longer than 3 days is buying it.

And FFS, do the math:

The article says early humans interbred with whatever not later than 150,000 years ago.
Humans left Africa no earlier than 120,000 years ago.

150,000-120,000= Humans left Africa 30,000 years AFTER the interbreeding in the article.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22830434-400-first-humans-to-leave-africa-went-to-china-not-europe/

And that was for Asia, NOT Europe... and they can't confirm that the early migrations were successful.
They only reached Europe 35,000 years ago, because the Ice Age made it impossible to survive up North-- also why early Europeans interbred with Neanderthals.

So you think the early humans who became the Europeans and Asians didn't interbreed for the at least the first 80,000 years of their existence?
They were saving themselves for the migrations that they were planning to undertake 80,000 years in the future?
And in the case of Europeans, 115,000 years in the future?

So hey, what do you think white people will be doing 115,000 years from now?
Still being the smartest, bestest, most pure-blooded overlords of all time?

I already told you that they were probably studying sub-Saharan Africans because they didn't interbreed with Neanderthals as recently as Europeans and Asians.
They have the 'purest' human genome, and all of us share genetic material with them.

If you were interested in science beyond knee-jerk reactions that you think support your painful ignorance, you would know this.
But you're too stupid to ever understand this, so I don't know why I'm even trying.

You will find more support for your bullshit on Stormfront... why not post there instead?

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX


Also, while homo sapiens may have left Africa as recently as 80,000 and 120,000 years ago, the article discusses the people of Sub-Saharan Africa, rather than North Africa - where homo sapiens migrated from (obviously)

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX


Also, while homo sapiens may have left Africa as recently as 80,000 and 120,000 years ago, the article discusses the people of Sub-Saharan Africa, rather than North Africa - where homo sapiens migrated from (obviously)

Holy fuck you are ignorant.
ALL MODERN HUMANS CAME FROM SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/07/070718140829.htm

This is now 10 years old.
Of course, you're a total fucking fraud so of course you don't know anything about it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

They are studying sub-Saharan Africans because their genome is 'purer' than Asians and Europeans, who interbred with Neanderthals after leaving Africa.

Bosco the racist thinks they're saying black people are somehow 'debased' or 'less human', but they're acually talking about everyone.

The article says the interbreeding happened about 150,000 years ago, and the first humans are thought to have left Africa between 80,000 and 120,000 years ago.

That's all purely your projecting your own inner vile racist hate

I didn't post anything of the sort. I posted a scholarly article purely for legitimate discussion.

The genes discussed in the article are found only in modern Sub-Saharan Africans, not everybody

Instead of spewing pure ignorance try reading the article

If you had posted this article for legitimate discussion, then it would be the first time you have ever created a thread for that purpose... but nobody who has been here longer than 3 days is buying it.

And FFS, do the math:

The article says early humans interbred with whatever not later than 150,000 years ago.
Humans left Africa no earlier than 120,000 years ago.

150,000-120,000= Humans left Africa 30,000 years AFTER the interbreeding in the article.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22830434-400-first-humans-to-leave-africa-went-to-china-not-europe/

And that was for Asia, NOT Europe... and they can't confirm that the early migrations were successful.
They only reached Europe 35,000 years ago, because the Ice Age made it impossible to survive up North-- also why early Europeans interbred with Neanderthals.

So you think the early humans who became the Europeans and Asians didn't interbreed for the at least the first 80,000 years of their existence?
They were saving themselves for the migrations that they were planning to undertake 80,000 years in the future?
And in the case of Europeans, 115,000 years in the future?

So hey, what do you think white people will be doing 115,000 years from now?
Still being the smartest, bestest, most pure-blooded overlords of all time?

I already told you that they were probably studying sub-Saharan Africans because they didn't interbreed with Neanderthals as recently as Europeans and Asians.
They have the 'purest' human genome, and all of us share genetic material with them.

If you were interested in science beyond knee-jerk reactions that you think support your painful ignorance, you would know this.
But you're too stupid to ever understand this, so I don't know why I'm even trying.

You will find more support for your bullshit on Stormfront... why not post there instead?

You really are a moron.

Take it up with the researchers, who I trust their genetic sampling over your ignorant wild guesses

And again, it was the people of Saharan Africa who migrated out of North Africa, which the article is about sub-Saharan Africans

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX


Also, while homo sapiens may have left Africa as recently as 80,000 and 120,000 years ago, the article discusses the people of Sub-Saharan Africa, rather than North Africa - where homo sapiens migrated from (obviously)

Holy fuck you are ignorant.
ALL MODERN HUMANS CAME FROM SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/07/070718140829.htm

This is now 10 years old.
Of course, you're a total fucking fraud so of course you don't know anything about it.

Through the Sahara, idiot. Homo Sapiens was in Morocco 300,000 years ago

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

You're just making this up.
It's hilarious to watch you humiliate yourself... and then you go the extra mile and call me a moron.

Do you know what happens to deserts during an Ice Age?
Why the fuck would they live in a desert where food is scarce, having no modern technology??

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX


Also, while homo sapiens may have left Africa as recently as 80,000 and 120,000 years ago, the article discusses the people of Sub-Saharan Africa, rather than North Africa - where homo sapiens migrated from (obviously)

Holy fuck you are ignorant.
ALL MODERN HUMANS CAME FROM SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/07/070718140829.htm

This is now 10 years old.
Of course, you're a total fucking fraud so of course you don't know anything about it.

Through the Sahara, idiot. Homo Sapiens was in Morocco 300,000 years ago

Homo Sapiens didn't EXIST 300,000 years ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_sapiens#Origin

We evolved into our present state 200,000 years ago.
Of course, I can't speak for how it happened in your parallel reality.

quote:

For Wood, though, Hublin’s use of “early modern humans” makes sense. And regardless of precise labels, he says, the Jebel Irhoud fossils have their place in the tapestry of humankind.

“Three hundred thousand years ago, there is fossil evidence of a population that in a remarkable number of ways resembles modern humans, and you can make of that what you like,” says Wood.

“You can either expand the definition of Homo sapiens to include [Jebel Irhoud], or these were creatures that were on their way to [becoming] modern humans.”

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

You're just making this up.
It's hilarious to watch you humiliate yourself... and then you go the extra mile and call me a moron.

Do you know what happens to deserts during an Ice Age?
Why the fuck would they live in a desert where food is scarce, having no modern technology??

You're the one pulling your ignorance out of your ass, disputing the genetic science as posted in the article I cited in my OP with your wild guesses

(Don't tell me, let me guess - you have "liberal" leanings, don't you)

They either went through the desert, or they didn't go. And they took their sweet time

Which a percentage of mostly Asians (and a very few others too) have the smallest traces imaginal of neanderthal DNA