Y-DNA Refutes Single-Origin Out of Africa Theory?

J

JFWR

Banned
Messages
305
Reaction score
8
Points
0
Location
New York City
Ethnic group
Irish, English, French, German, Swedish, and Finnish
Y-DNA haplogroup
I-m223
mtDNA haplogroup
H64
What do you guys think of this article from Advances in Anthropology?

https://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=19566

The authors claim that Y-DNA analysis shows that Europeans do not share a Y-chromosomal connection to Africa at all, suggesting that their paternal line has no source in Africa to begin with.

What do you guys make of this? I find it intriguing, but also suspect given how it flies in the face of a lot of research. Not to say that research should be discounted because it defeats previous claims, but rather I am just worried that there might be some faulty assumptions here or something else to undermine the scientific credibility of this research. I am not sufficiently qualified to judge the merits of this claim, thus I come to the "experts" here on Eupedia to run it by your analysis.
 
I am sick and tired of that out of Africa Theory. Can't we just wait a little longer? Maybe, we discover some more clues about the origin of the life.
 
noman said:
I am sick and tired of that out of Africa Theory. Can't we just wait a little longer? Maybe, we discover some more clues about the origin of the life.
Click to expand...

Let's keep the discussion more geared towards the article itself.
 
This was posted in 2012. Surely there's more recent data on YDNA because it's a field that is moving quickly.
 
I1a3_Young said:
This was posted in 2012. Surely there's more recent data on YDNA because it's a field that is moving quickly.
Click to expand...

Is there? It sems like a hypothesis of this has some political implications that might not be picked up.

"Out of Africa" is an apolitical theory inherently, but it has been co-opted by anthropologists who are queasy with the notion of biological race, with the platitude "well, we're all ultimately African".

What I want to know is: Is the basic contention that European haplogroups are not downstream of African haplogroups correct?
 
Looking at the tree it appears that we are. Look at the split in E between E1b1a and E1b1b.

All F (and further) have the A, B, CT markers. I don't care one way or another but this paper appears to be making arguments that were refuted years ago.

You can check yourself at www.yfull.com

Also a main component of the Africa theory is that everyone who left acquired neanderthal mix.

Add that the archaeological evidence for modern humans is oldest in Africa.

I would not mind if this paper is true but I see a lot of evidence stacked against it. When I get a chance I'll look at the particular SNPs cited.

Sent from my XT1080 using Eupedia Forum mobile app
 
I1a3_Young said:
Looking at the tree it appears that we are. Look at the split in E between E1b1a and E1b1b.

All F (and further) have the A, B, CT markers. I don't care one way or another but this paper appears to be making arguments that were refuted years ago.

You can check yourself at www.yfull.com

Also a main component of the Africa theory is that everyone who left acquired neanderthal mix.

Add that the archaeological evidence for modern humans is oldest in Africa.

I would not mind if this paper is true but I see a lot of evidence stacked against it. When I get a chance I'll look at the particular SNPs cited.

Sent from my XT1080 using Eupedia Forum mobile app
Click to expand...

The paper claims that it doesn't actually have those markers. Are you aware of the data that suggests those markers -are- found in Haplogroups downstream from A and B?

I don't know a lot about African haplogroups, so I honestly don't know how to assess the information. Is there some good source that would identify the mutations found in downstream of A/B that are shared with A/B? I am a bit at a loss in how to read the data on the link you sent, given the truncated list of mutations. Is there something that highlights the subset of mutations?
 
JFWR said:
The paper claims that it doesn't actually have those markers. Are you aware of the data that suggests those markers -are- found in Haplogroups downstream from A and B?

I don't know a lot about African haplogroups, so I honestly don't know how to assess the information. Is there some good source that would identify the mutations found in downstream of A/B that are shared with A/B? I am a bit at a loss in how to read the data on the link you sent, given the truncated list of mutations. Is there something that highlights the subset of mutations?
Click to expand...

If you click the letters on Yfull such as CT or E, it will expand. I'm not exactly certain what you're trying to say so I'm guessing a bit. I certainly do have BT and CT markers as haplogroup I1 which originated in Europe after IJ split, which came from F.

They have found CT, F*, and I* in pre-LGM "Cro-Magnon" samples.

All haplogroup E, including sub-saharan African E1b1a, has the same BT and CT markers.

As for A and B in Africa, they would not have CT markers.

A1b and BT is a split in Africa. BT have A1 and A1b markers. Many variations of A1b have subsequently developed over the years in Africa and it still exists today, just further mutated. But the original A1b and BT had the same common man who went different directions.

After the BT split, B and CT split from there with many B variations being African to this day.

CT split into DE and CF. D is African and E has a split between African and Middle East / Europe.

CF split into C and F. C can be found in Australian Aborigines, southeast Asia, ancient Europe, and many places in between. C very clearly got out of Africa.

F also got out of Africa and was found in ancient Europe and the middle east.

The entire Y-DNA tree traces back to the earliest A like the branches of a tree, where the biggest branches closest to the ground were the major population shifts to certain areas of the world.

It would be very easy to tell if there were parallel and unconnected Y-trees going back farther. Like I said, this is a 2012 paper and the fast moving pace of Y-DNA research has relegated it to obscurity. It would be big news indeed to have a current study turn the African tree on its head. It would be a huge development and this entire website would be rewritten. Do you think all the researches and enthusiasts here have missed something so important?
 
I1a3_Young said:
All haplogroup E, including sub-saharan African E1b1a, has the same BT and CT markers.
Click to expand...
But if humans came from Africa then why Europeans look different from africans? Could Extra-terrestrials have introduced different races to Earth because the tone of skin seems to have nothing to do with temperature despite scientists assumption.
 
Parafarne said:
But if humans came from Africa then why Europeans look different from africans? Could Extra-terrestrials have introduced different races to Earth because the tone of skin seems to have nothing to do with temperature despite scientists assumption.
Click to expand...
Humans can change. Euros have depigmentation genes. The earliest Euros were darker skinned than now. We also don't know how the earliest Africans looked. Maybe they weren't as dark back then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 7813 times.

Back
Top