Homo sapiens Direct Ancestors Migrated Out of Africa 2 million years ago

2

There has been a constant stream of discoveries in the last twelve months which suggest a need to move back the dates for our early ancestor’s migration out of Africa. Modern human fossils uncovered in Asia, as well as new DNA studies, have pushed back the occupation of that continent from 60,000 to 120,000 years ago. Stone tools and hominin fossils discoveries suggest that archaic Homo sapiens inhabited parts of Eurasia well before 200,000 years ago, at least 300,000 to 400,000 years ago.

These suggested revisions to the human story may sound quite major, but they are extremely conservative considering the greater body of evidence available. There is a good reason to believe our early ancestors migrated out of Africa 2,000,000 years ago, for some peculiar reason the public almost never hears about this in the mass media. It may at first sound so extreme that it must be a fanciful revision, but it is incredibly reasonable and supported by a wealth of sound scientific evidence.

“It was not until around 2 million years ago that human ancestors first migrated out of Africa and spread throughout the Old World.” – Rolf Quam, Associate Professor of Anthropology, Binghamton University, State University of New York

Today scientists almost unanimously believe that modern humans can trace their origins back to a population of hominins that appeared in the African fossil record around 2 million years ago, Homo ergaster. That Homo ergaster is our direct ancestor has never been established for certain, and there has always been a second strong contender, Homo erectus. We know that Homo erectus and Homo ergaster were once part of a single population, 2 million years ago they were simply two regionally separated populations within a single species.

Homo erectus distribution map

Homo erectus did something that no other hominin before it had managed, it conquered the planet. Today fossils place members of this hominin species at sites as disparate as the Georgian Republic and Indonesia as early as 1.8 million years ago. Groups of Homo erectus made their way into almost all habitable regions in the hundreds of millennia which followed this initial expansion, a few skull fragments in America have even been claimed as evidence they were the first to reach that continent (though such claims remain highly contested).

Changes in environment or climate are understood to be the primary drivers of evolutionary adaptation, just as a need is the mother of innovation. Homo erectus would have faced incredible challenges as it moved into alien environments beyond the African continent. These intrepid explorers would have encountered unknown animals, many of them dangerous predators, explored unfamiliar landscapes such as icy tundra, deserts, tropical rainforests and coastlines while passing through a wide range of climates. Their survival would have been dependant on flexible thinking, innovation and rapid adaptation. When you apply basic logic, it seems obvious that Homo erectus had entered the evolutionary fast lane by exiting the familiar and relatively static environment within the African motherland.

Meanwhile, back in Africa, Homo ergaster would have been under little pressure to change, being highly adapted to the African landscapes and climate the forces responsible for human evolution would have been running in a low gear, restricted to at most negligible levels. Evolutionary changes would still inevitably occur for these hominins, but there is little reason to think it would have occurred rapidly or produced any profound modifications. There are numerous examples of well-adapted organisms in almost static environments that have barely changed over millions of years.

You are almost certainly wondering why academics favour the stay-at-home stick-in-the-mud Homo ergaster as a prime candidate for our Homo sapiens ancestor, rather than the dynamic and entrepreneurial Home erectus.

The decision to favour Homo erectus’s African cousin was based largely on assumptions, as hominins appeared first in Africa and evolved into new forms there over millions of years and the earliest definitively Homo sapiens fossils were found within that continents boundaries, it was assumed they evolved there from earlier hominins. There was, of course, a huge time gap between Homo ergaster and the emergence of Homo sapiens, there was also an enormous change in the morphology (physical form) during that separating period. The scientists needed fossils representing a series of transitional human forms that would connect these two populations.

With the discovery of Homo heidelbergensis, it seemed that the missing link, or one of them, had finally been uncovered. Sometime around 600,000 years ago, this large brained hominin named Homo heidelbergensis appeared in the fossil record across Africa, Europe and Asia. With a strong contender for a direct, immediate ancestor of Homo sapiens identified in Africa the case for an Out of Africa Homo sapiens model seemed almost certain. It seemed only a matter of time before an earlier hominin would be found that linked Homo heidelbergensis to Homo ergaster. That was of course until the best contender for Homo sapiens ancestor was knocked out.

Research revolving around a large collection of hominin fossils in Northern Spain (Sima de los huesos) has revealed that Homo heidelbergensis emerged after the split between the ancestors of modern humans and those of Neanderthals, with Homo heidelbergensis being exclusively an early form of Neanderthal. There are now no fossils representing a viable ancestor for modern humans anywhere in Africa earlier than 300,000 years ago. We also lack evidence of the evolutionary transition between Homo ergaster and Neanderthals, or Denisovans, in the African record.

When you put all this information together and apply logical deduction, the existing evidence points towards all three large brained hominin lineages emerging from Homo erectus somewhere far from Africa, perhaps East Asia. Sporadic migrations of transitional human forms gradually brought these populations into Africa in waves as climate changes drove them towards preferential locations. While Africa suddenly has a glaring lack of suitable transitional fossils, East Asian scientists are announcing a growing list of potential candidate finds.

“The tale is further muddled by Chinese fossils analysed over the past four decades, which cast doubt over the linear progression from African H. erectus to modern humans. They show that, between roughly 900,000 and 125,000 years ago, east Asia was teeming with hominins endowed with features that would place them somewhere between H. erectus and H. Sapiens.”  Wu Xinzhi, palaeontologist at the Chinese Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology

The Dali Skull, a 260,000-year-old archaic Homo sapiens skull from China.

With the recent announcement that the 260,000-year-old Dali Skull in China is that of an archaic Homo sapiens, and Levallois type stone tools (usually associated with these archaic Homo sapiens) in India date to 385,000 years ago, the case for an Asiatic genesis of our species has strengthened incredibly. The only thing missing here is direct evidence that early Homo sapiens migrated into Africa, surely that would be the final proof?

In September 2017, a team of scientists from Buffalo University announced that they had made an astonishing discovery while investigating a saliva protein in humans, designated as MUC7. The team realised that a significant number of Sub-Saharan Africans carried a wildly different variant of the MUC7 gene to members of all other sampled populations, suggesting to them that the ancestors of these people had interbred with another ancient human species. The date for this interbreeding appeared to be around 200,000 to 150,000 years ago, and the hominin species responsible was calculated to have diverged from our direct ancestors between 1.5 to 2 million years ago.

The dates suggested in the MUC7 study are nothing short of incredible, on the one hand, we have a date close to the first clear expansion of early modern humans across Africa, and on the other hand, we have a date range that meshes well with the divergence of Homo erectus from Homo ergaster.

“This unknown human relative could be a species that has been discovered, such as a subspecies of Homo erectus, or an undiscovered hominin. We call it a ‘ghost’ species because we don’t have the fossils.” – Omer Gokcumen, assistant professor of biological sciences, Buffalo University

MUC7 distribution showing the significant divergence of a form found among many Africans.

The scientists also realised that non-African modern humans carried a variant of MUC7 that was much the same as that carried by Neanderthals and Denisovans, both of which are accepted as Eurasian archaic hominins. Somehow the scientists failed to make the final leap towards the most obvious conclusion.

If Homo sapiens evolved in Eurasia, alongside Neanderthals and Denisovans, from an Asian Homo erectus last common ancestor resident there, it would be no surprise they all carried a similar MUC7 gene. As some groups of early modern humans migrated into Africa around 200,000 years ago, they would have inevitably encountered any descendants of Homo ergaster, perhaps hominins like the species Homo naledi, known to have inhabited South Africa until at least 236,000 years ago. The fact that the modified version of MUC7 is common across Africa also suggests it entered the human genome almost as soon as the first population of Homo sapiens appeared in Africa before they split into separate regional groups.

Conversely, if Homo sapiens evolved entirely within Africa, how on Earth did they avoid interbreeding with a nearby, sexually compatible, neighbouring human species for well over a million years?

Why is it that if non-African modern humans migrated out from Africa long after 150,000 years ago, the variation of MUC7 common across that continent is found in none of the supposed descendants of these migrants living across Eurasia, Australasia and America?

In 2002, Alan R. Templeton, PhD, geneticist and statistician at Washington University, analyzed ten different haplotype trees and performed phylogeographic analyses that reconstructed the history of our species through space and time. Three years later, he had 25 regions to analyze and the data provided molecular evidence of a third migration, this one the oldest, back to 1.9 million years ago.

“This time frame corresponds extremely well with the fossil record, which shows Homo erectus expanding out of Africa then,” Templeton said.

The media and the scientists are right, we need to revise the dates for when our early ancestors left Africa, but not by a few tens of thousands of years, we need to accept the obvious truth, our direct ancestors were already out of Africa at least 1.8 million years ago.

Sources

Fossil jawbone from Israel is the oldest modern human found outside Africa – TheConversation.com

Complete skull of 1.8-million-year-old hominin found – NewScientist.com

Homo erectus – Smithsonian National Museum

Homo ergaster – Australian Museum

Oldest ancient-human DNA details dawn of Neanderthals – Nature

How China is rewriting the book on human origins – Nature

Skull found in China could re-write ‘out of Africa’ theory of human evolution – Independent

In saliva, clues to a ‘ghost’ species of ancient human – University at Buffalo

New Analysis Shows Three Human Migrations Out Of Africa – ScienceDaily.com

Share.

About Author

Independent investigative journalist and science-minded researcher busy inquiring into human origins and the development of formative human cultures. Writer, speaker and author of 'The Into Africa Theory of Human Evolution'.

2 Comments

  1. I can appreciate why you wouldn’t want to “go there”, but the real story is how Out of Africa became the dominant paradigm despite all of the fossil evidence for Multi-Regional Evolution.

    There are three main factors:

    1) Atheists wanted a theory that took the origins of mankind out of the Levant, as described in the Bible.

    2) Anti-Colonialists / Cultural Marxists wanted a theory that would explain away racial differences while simultaneously sticking a thumb in the eye of white identity.

    3) Kenya was a British colony and the British Leakeys were the para-scientists that new how to sell a fable to the folks in points one and two.

    Even at the time of the mitochondria studies that “proved” Out of Africa, people knew there was more than one way to construct the tree, to include “modern” non-African Sapiens interbreeding with archaic hominids in Sub-Saharan Africa which would explain both the “genetic diversity” and the antiquity of the lineage: Into Africa.

    David Reich and Svante Paabo recently did a Q&A in Israel where David actually said his rabbi said it was OK to disturb the graves of people for DNA as long as the information was used to fight racism. (!)

    In a recent paper on the genetics of the Americas, the possibility of ancient Australians getting there first and having DNA surviving in South America to this day was totally glossed over. I saw one of the cheerleaders on Twitter thanking the authors of the paper for “undermining colonialist narratives”! I’ll translate that for you; if Australians got here first, then our current “Native Americans” were the first to practice genocide in the Americas, not white Europeans.

    If your religion-substitute tells you to “fight racism” it is unlikely that you will even look for evidence that would “support racism” whatever that may mean; and if you actually find such evidence you will bury it. Fortunately the cat is too far out of the bag for them to do that any longer.

    The true answer? Depoliticize science, and depoliticize all of Academia for that matter.

    • While I do not agree with all that you say, much of it is true from what I have found myself. I agree that we need to take politics out of science and offer objective arguments, no matter how uncomfortable some of them might be for one part or another. Human origins is essentially a social science, while it depends on hard sciences what we hear from palaeoanthropologists is just their personal interpretations, not definitive findings (different from the scientific process in chemistry, biology, physics or geology).

      To quote Prof Alan Wilson, a founding father of Recent Out of Africa Theory:

      “The history of anthropology is replete with scientific racism, and the news that the Australians might represent the oldest human population brings dark memories to the fore and stirs old arguments. ‘I think the majority of anthropologists are tinged by racism,’ Allan Wilson said to us in conversation, ‘as most of us are, and that their science hasn’t been a quantitative one and an objective one’. These data from Berkeley are quantitative and objective, and Wilson confesses he is ‘very worried about how to present this in a responsible way’.” (The Monkey Puzzle, 1983)

Leave A Reply