Thread: "out of africa"

hi, im currently reading richard dawkins book " Tke Ancestors Tale", and at one point in the book he is talking about the "out of africa theory" that ew all descend from africa, and the multiregional theory; that we all evolved seperatly in our own regions. He states that the two theories should be called instead, old out of africa, and young out of africa, because as he says in it, theoretically if you go back far enough you eventually have to come to africa.

anyway my question is why africa? i dont understand why is HAS to be africa.

Originally Posted by kenokrend

anyway my question is why africa? i dont understand why is HAS to be africa.

Because all species have to originate somewhere, and our ancestors evolved in Africa.

yes i know they all have to evolve somewhere, i still dont understand why theoretically it HAS to be africa.

Originally Posted by kenokrend

yes i know they all have to evolve somewhere, i still dont understand why theoretically it HAS to be africa.

I am not sure that I understand what you are looking for. Theoretically, it does not have to be Africa, but various disciplines of science have traced the origin of the species to there, such that there seems little doubt now.

from his book he made it sound inevitable. umm here ill copy it.

"Both names are misleading because everybody agrees that our ancestors are from africa if you go back far enough. 'Seperate origins " is also not an ideal name because again if you go back far enough, the seperation must disappear on any theory."

he says everyone agrees, which would include the multiregionalists, and he says if you go back far enough the seperation MUST dissapear, which is true because all species must have a common acncestor.

im assuming he means that this common ancestor to all species must hav been from africa then.

Originally Posted by kenokrend

from his book he made it sound inevitable. umm here ill copy it.

"Both names are misleading because everybody agrees that our ancestors are from africa if you go back far enough. 'Seperate origins " is also not an ideal name because again if you go back far enough, the seperation must disappear on any theory."

he says everyone agrees, which would include the multiregionalists, and he says if you go back far enough the seperation MUST dissapear, which is true because all species must have a common acncestor.

im assuming he means that this common ancestor to all species must hav been from africa then.

Perhaps this is what you are looking for:

The out of Africa theory claims that our species evolved in Africa and then migrated out of Africa and around the world. The multi regional theory claims that our species evolved independently at various locations around the world. However, in the multi regional theory, from what did these people evolve? They evolved from Homo erectus. Homo erectus also evolved in Africa and migrated around the world. Therefore, both theories are out of Africa, one based on the migration of Homo erectus and one based on the migration of Homo sapiesn, both species of which evolved in Africa before they migrated away.

yes that is. thanks : )