New Human Haplogroup Announcements Question the ’Out of Africa’ Hypothesis

This is a really intriguing story, and if true, will force at least some reconsideration of the “out-of-Africa” hypothesis presently the standard model in genetic reconstructions of human history:

When one clicks on this article ( ), there is a link to the open access paper itself, which is also well worth studying.

Of interest right here is the very first paragraph of the actual scientific research paper:

“This study concerns the origin of anatomically modern humans, which presumably belong to Y chromosomal haplogroups A through T according to the classification created in human genetics and DNA phylogeny of man. This paper 1) sets forth a timeframe for the origin of Europeoids (Caucasoids) 2) identi- fies their position among all haplogroups (tribes) identified today on the haplogroup tree and 3) delivers evidence to re-examine the validity of the “Out of Africa” concept.” (Anatole A. Klyosov*, Igor L. Rozhanskii, “Re-Examining the “Out of Africa” Theory and the Origin of Europeoids (Caucasoids) in Light of DNA Genealogy”, Advances in Anthropology, 2012, Vol 2, No 2, 80-86, p. 80).

The first page zeroes in on how the Out of Africa hypothesis originated:

“The idea was based primarily on the premise that Africa possesses the highest variability, or variance, of the human DNA and its segments. Set apart, it is not a strong argument due to the fact a mix of distinct DNA lineages also benefits in a high variability and, as we show below, it is largely what occurs in Africa. Moreover, a genomic gap exists among some Africans and non-Africans, which has also been interpreted as an argument that the latter descended from Afri- cans. A much more plausible interpretation may well have been that both existing Africans and non-Africans descended separately from a more ancient typical ancestor, as a result forming a proverbial fork. A region where this downstream frequent ancestor arose would not necessarily be in Africa. In truth, it was never confirmed that he lived in Africa.”(Ibid.)

The substantial “dent” in the Out of Africa hypothesis, according to the authors (Anatole A. Klyosov and Igor L. Rozhanskii), is that European Caucasians do not contain genetic markers widespread to the African haplogroups A or B (Ibid, p. 2). Indeed, the evidence, according to Klyosov and Rozhanskii, is rather strong that the Out of Africa hypothesis, at least in its standard version, is on rather wobbly ground:

“A critical datapoint has emerged that disproves the “Out of Africa” concept specifically, recent data shows that non-Afri- can people have neither M91, P97, M31, P82, M23, M114, P262, M32, M59, P289, P291, P102, M13, M171, M118 (hap-logroup A and its subclades SNPs), nor M60, M181, P90 (haplogroup B SNPs) in their Y-chromosomes.

“In truth, according to the information obtained from the “Walk Through the Y” (chromosome) international project carried out by Family Tree DNA (Texas and Arizona) [see Appendix] not one non-African participant out of more than 400 folks in the Project tested constructive to any of thirteen “African” sub- clades of haplogroup A…” (Ibid.,p. 83)

Now it is quite the critical matter here to point out that this research is getting carried out on the genetic signatures in the Y chromosome, that is to say, in males. On p. 84, Klysov and Rozhanskii produce a tree diagram, which obviously shows the two significant branches of the human loved ones(and ponder that diagram closely, and its implications), and it is worth citing their conclusions in this regard:

“These information, based on the SNPs (Single Nucleotide Polymor- phism), along with the data based on the STRs (Short Tandem other and undeniably indicate that non-African men and women, bearers of haplogroups from C to T, did not descend from the “African” haplogroups A or B. Their origin is probably not in Africa. A higher variance of the DNA in Africa, which was a cornerstone of the “Out of Africa” theory, is explained by Figure 3, in which haplogroup A has been evolving (mutation-wise) for 132,000 years, whilst the non-European haplogroups are significantly younger. Therefore, there is a lower variability in the latter. The very same is connected to language variability, which has also been utilized as an argument of the African origin of non-Africans. We believe that these arguments upon which the “Out of Africa” theory was based had been, in fact, conjectural, incomplete and not actually data-driven. For that reason, we are left holding the question of the origin of Homo sapiens.”(Ibid., pp. 84-85.)

It remains to be seen how other geneticists will react to these findings or even if they will be confirmed. But for these studying ancient texts, it is fascinating to recall that they speak of the male donor in the ancient “Mesopotamian genetic engineering project”, – if we may call it that, – as becoming “one of the gods.

It is additionally interesting that so many ancient myths, from the Norse to the Japanese, seem to indicate that some group of very European-described humanoids interacted with their local cultures and populations. This is a story that of course bears watching, but we can be sure that whatever debates this may touch off, or speculations concerning its possible relationship to ancient texts and myths, those debates will take place out of the public eye.

See you on the flip side. Maybe…

( via )