New Type of Ancient Human Found—Descendants Live Today?

For anyone who might be interested, here is the full (PDF) version of the one of the articles Bluejay cited in one of his previous posts: Multiregional, Not Multiple Origins by Wolpoff, Hawks, & Caspari.I cannot get the second one; perhaps if he could let me know the title I could find it.Jon

---

Love your enemies!

Replies to Message 197The book I cited is far from new, and is largely based off of previous work. Maybe not; I haven't yet read it fully. It's possible to find papers on any topic that are less than explanatory. This is why I've listed sources that provide a more detailed look into the MH theory as presented by MH proponents.Replies to Message 198Too bad that citing stuff actually written by MH proponents as proof of their views does not appear as one of your options.I can understand your reluctance to find source material supporting your claims, of course: especially if none exists.And seeing as how you've been making the same claims about the MH model and my understanding of it since your first post in this thread (Message 8); and seeing as how you've refused to offer any evidence to support your claims about the MH model and my understanding; I can say I'm no longer interested in your shenanigans.When you come up with a new angle, let me know.Jon

---

Love your enemies!

But we do see center-and-edge effects, we see what those effects are after a couple million years in the works. If you want to address the possible validity of the center and edge hypothesis in explaining past situations, you have to do what I've suggested several times now: look at actual evidence from the past. LOL. Glad to see you think that now Jon

No; we do see the effects. We see what we would expect given a couple million of years worth of center-and-edge processes.Now if we want to address how the situation looked earlier on, we have to go digging. The evidence from the past isn't actually all that sparse. Multiregionalism, when it was still the prevailing model, was founded largely on the basis of physical remains. The physical evidence still unequivocally supports MH. The genetic evidence is, as I've already admitted, somewhat ambiguous, but nevertheless in line with a working MH model. Thank you for the question. I did lay out one scenario a while ago when Taq asked the same question. Here is my response to Taq:

quote:

---

Jon in Message 174:

​

Assuming an migration+interbreeding model: any halflings that result from interbreeding will be 50/50 carriers of sapiens and pre-sapiens genetic material and should be the oldest hybrids found in a region. If our model is mostly migration with limited interbreeding, then we should find these locations of 'halflings first' to be spotted around the Old World following the lines of migration.

​

Assuming a mostly gene-flow model with little migration: the earliest hybrids in the region will not be 'halflings', per se, but will be characterized by a higher proportion of pre-sapiens traits and a lower proportion of sapiens traits, with each later generation showing a higher proportion of sapiens characteristics than the generation(s) previous. If our model is mostly gene flow, then we should find 'halflings first' only at the genetic contact point between the non-originator populations and originator-of-the-DNA populations, and the further out we go from this point of contact, the lower the proportion of sapiens traits in the oldest hybrids will be.

---

I can certainly look into developing some others; I don't have easy access to most of my sources anymore, so I'll have to think up some more on my own.Jon