https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06923-7
Published: 31 January 2024
Homo sapiens reached the higher latitudes of
Europe by 45,000 years ago

Abstract
The Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition in
Europe is associated with the regional
disappearance of Neanderthals and the spread
of Homo sapiens. Late Neanderthals persisted
in western Europe several millennia after the
occurrence of H. sapiens in eastern Europe.
Local hybridization between the two groups
occurred, but not on all occasions.
Archaeological evidence also indicates the
presence of several technocomplexes during
this transition, complicating our understanding
and the association of behavioural adaptations
with specific hominin groups. One such
technocomplex for which the makers are unknown
is the Lincombian–Ranisian–Jerzmanowician (LRJ),
which has been described in northwestern and
central Europe5,6,7,8. Here we present the
morphological and proteomic taxonomic
identification, mitochondrial DNA analysis and
direct radiocarbon dating of human remains
directly associated with an LRJ assemblage at
the site Ilsenhöhle in Ranis (Germany). These
human remains are among the earliest directly
dated Upper Palaeolithic H. sapiens remains
in Eurasia. We show that early H. sapiens
associated with the LRJ were present in
central and northwestern Europe long before
the extinction of late Neanderthals in
southwestern Europe. Our results strengthen
the notion of a patchwork of distinct human
populations and technocomplexes present in
Europe during this transitional period.

"In summary, our work shows that the LRJ at
Ranis was made by hominins with H. sapiens
mtDNA. This indicates that pioneer groups of
H. sapiens expanded rapidly into the higher
mid-latitudes, possibly as far as the modern
day British Isles (Fig. 1b), before much
later expansions into southwestern Europe,
where directly dated Neanderthal remains are
documented until about 42,000 cal BP (Fig. 2).
Although non-directly dated and
non-genetically identified, a human deciduous
tooth from Grotte Mandrin27 also suggests an
H. sapiens incursion into southeastern France
as early as about 54,000 cal BP. If
confirmed... "

This is a very, Very, VERY old subject of argument.

Seems impossible that any so called "Moderns" after 50k years
ago were already hybrids. They met in the middle east.

"Dah."

So any mixing happened there. They were already hybrids when
they entered Europe.

As for Europe, Wolpoff showed physical evidence for hybridization
well beyond that.

The point is that you don't look down at South Africa at 45k years
ago and see a lot of Cor Magnon..or any. They ARE the hybrid!

https://youtu.be/FlR22hcjp_w?feature=shared&t=121

There. The physical evidence never supported your nonsense.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/741817533268656128

JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
>
> This is a very, Very, VERY old subject of argument.
>
> Seems impossible that any so called "Moderns" after 50k years
> ago were already hybrids. They met in the middle east.
>
> "Dah."
>
> So any mixing happened there. They were already hybrids when
> they entered Europe.
>
> As for Europe, Wolpoff showed physical evidence for hybridization
> well beyond that.
>
> The point is that you don't look down at South Africa at 45k years
> ago and see a lot of Cor Magnon..or any. They ARE the hybrid!
>
> https://youtu.be/FlR22hcjp_w?feature=shared&t=121
>
> There. The physical evidence never supported your nonsense.
erectus in South Africa around 2mya

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiregional_origin_of_modern_humans

The multiregional hypothesis is not currently the
most accepted theory of modern human origin among
scientists. "The African replacement model has
gained the widest acceptance owing mainly to
genetic data (particularly mitochondrial DNA)
from existing populations. This model is consistent
with the realization that modern humans cannot be
classified into subspecies or races, and it
recognizes that all populations of present-day
humans share the same potential."[3] The African
replacement model is also known as the "Out of
Africa" theory. See also, "The 'out of Africa'
model is currently the most widely accepted model.
It proposes that Homo sapiens evolved in Africa
before migrating across the world."[4] And: "The
primary competing scientific hypothesis is
currently recent African origin of modern humans,
which proposes that modern humans arose as a new
species in Africa around 100-200,000 years ago,
moving out of Africa around 50-60,000 years ago
to replace existing human species such as Homo
erectus and the Neanderthals without
interbreeding.[5][6][7][8] This differs from the
multiregional hypothesis in that the multiregional
model predicts interbreeding with preexisting
local human populations in any such migration."

Maybe your space aliens helped them ;)

Primum Sapienti wrote:

> The multiregional hypothesis is not currently the
> most accepted theory of modern human origin among
> scientists.

Interbreeding was widely & quite loudly denounced, even though
the evidence was quite clear generations ago, and even after
Trinkaus put the matter to rest with his work. It was still
popularly believed AND DEFENDED that there was no interbreeding.

The fact is that we do have different populations. Period.

> "The African replacement model has
> gained the widest acceptance owing mainly to
> genetic data (particularly mitochondrial DNA)

I've explained this to you and others so many times that I can
guarantee that you will read almost nothing and understand
even less:

Modern Europeans haven't been in places like South America
and Africa for very long, in terms of human origins, yet they
have already completely swamped the DNA of many a local
dog breed, including the Pharaoh Hound of Egypt...

Yet, when the exact same pattern pattern emerges in human
DNA, you insist that it proves the classic "Replacement"
model.

Wow.

Talk about "Dogmatic"... Sheesh!

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/742798356654473216

JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
> Primum Sapienti wrote:
>
>> The multiregional hypothesis is not currently the
>> most accepted theory of modern human origin among
>> scientists.
>
> Interbreeding was widely & quite loudly denounced, even though
> the evidence was quite clear generations ago, and even after
> Trinkaus put the matter to rest with his work. It was still
> popularly believed AND DEFENDED that there was no interbreeding.
>
> The fact is that we do have different populations. Period.

Utterly irrelevant at thse recent dates.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiregional_origin_of_modern_humans

>> "The African replacement model has
>> gained the widest acceptance owing mainly to
>> genetic data (particularly mitochondrial DNA)
>
> I've explained this to you and others so many times that I can
> guarantee that you will read almost nothing and understand
> even less:
>
> Modern Europeans haven't been in places like South America
> and Africa for very long, in terms of human origins, yet they
> have already completely swamped the DNA of many a local
> dog breed, including the Pharaoh Hound of Egypt...
>
> Yet, when the exact same pattern pattern emerges in human
> DNA, you insist that it proves the classic "Replacement"
> model.
>
> Wow.
>
> Talk about "Dogmatic"... Sheesh!

You certainly are.

On Feb 23, 2024, Primum Sapienti wrote

> JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
> > Primum Sapienti wrote:
> >
> > > The multiregional hypothesis is not currently the
> > > most accepted theory of modern human origin among
> > > scientists.
> >
> > Interbreeding was widely & quite loudly denounced, even though
> > the evidence was quite clear generations ago, and even after
> > Trinkaus put the matter to rest with his work. It was still
> > popularly believed AND DEFENDED that there was no interbreeding.
> >
> > The fact is that we do have different populations. Period.
>
> Utterly irrelevant at thse recent dates.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiregional_origin_of_modern_humans'

Wiki isn’t a cite. And if you need to pretend that there’s ONE
MultiRegional
model then that is nature’s way of letting you know that your position is
Intellectually bankrupt.

It’s not an argument of any kind. You’re attempting to impose a viewpoint
on others just so you can pretend to be arguing with them...

MultiRegionalism was confirmed by the Neanderthal DNA. We went from
separate species to separate POPULATIONS. There’s also the fact that
we weren’t talking about anything new. I mean, the idea that these two
Distinct POPULATION existed for hundreds of thousands of years with a
chain link fence keeping them apart, only to one day have the fence blow
over in a storm resulting in interbreeding..

No, my luscious friend, it was always happening. Only after certain events,
like Toba, there was a massive wave coming from one side and a puddle
on the other. “Fortune favors the bold” but genetics favored the southern
hemisphere.

Primum Sapienti wrote:

> JTEM is so reasonable wrote:

> > Interbreeding was widely & quite loudly denounced, even though
> > the evidence was quite clear generations ago, and even after
> > Trinkaus put the matter to rest with his work. It was still
> > popularly believed AND DEFENDED that there was no interbreeding.
> >
> > The fact is that we do have different populations. Period.

> Utterly irrelevant at thse recent dates.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiregional_origin_of_modern_humans

You just keep repeating the exact same trolling!

There isn't "A" MultiRegional theory any more than there's only
only version of Out of Africa purity or Aquatic Ape for that
matter. "Regional Continuity," for example, is just another
brand of MultiRegionalism...

There isn't "A" date, and there can't be when properly paired
with Aquatic Ape.