From Newsgroup: talk.origins


I had just posted this to a real discussion group but
then thought; what they hay? Share it with the
collective...

https://youtu.be/WxWwEryMHrM?si=q27MPeGUuSj6_A7k

This was the free lecture at Harvard I told everyone about.

I had originally intended to watch it online, attend virtually as I
suggested the folks here might do, but at the last minute I decide to
head in.

And I have to say, rather unfortunately, I did NOT know they were
holding a wine & cheese reception following the lecture, with the public invited. I had made dinner plans with someone already, which I was
already late for as the talk ran over.... no cheese & wine for me!

I dunno, some very interesting stuff but otherwise plenty of room to
argue. I myself got a very strong sense of Conventionality. Which, let's
face it, would be rather shocking if I didn't get it seeing how the guy
laid down a lot of that Convention.

Them's the brakes, huh?
--
https://jtem.tumblr.com/

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: talk.origins

On 5/24/2026 9:44 PM, JTEM wrote:

I had just posted this to a real discussion group but
then thought; what they hay?-a Share it with the
collective...

https://youtu.be/WxWwEryMHrM?si=q27MPeGUuSj6_A7k

This was the free lecture at Harvard I told everyone about.

I had originally intended to watch it online, attend virtually as I suggested the folks here might do, but at the last minute I decide to
head in.

And I have to say, rather unfortunately, I did NOT know they were
holding a wine & cheese reception following the lecture, with the public invited. I had made dinner plans with someone already, which I was
already late for as the talk ran over.... no cheese & wine for me!

I dunno, some very interesting stuff but otherwise plenty of room to
argue. I myself got a very strong sense of Conventionality. Which, let's face it, would be rather shocking if I didn't get it seeing how the guy
laid down a lot of that Convention.

Them's the brakes, huh?

He is proposing a more recent out of Africa wave. As he noted it has
been estimated to have occurred 60,000 to 80,000 years ago, but his new estimate is around 49,000 years for the event, but the event seems to
have occurred over a 7,000 year period. The proposal is that modern
humans started to leave Africa around 49,000 years ago and it took 7,000
years to create a population in a single region of the middle east
outside of Africa. This population interbred with a few Neanderthals,
and this interbreeding event was well mixed in this initial out of
Africa population when they started to disperse to other locations in
Asia and Europe. My guess is that there will likely be issues with his
use of fossil DNA obtained by humans that had additional interbreeding
events, but that likely left no descendants in the extant population.
His estimates may be affected by the more recent interbreeding events.
He seems to claim to be able to differentiate the sequences from the
more recent interbreeding events from the original interbreeding event,
but I do not know how that estimate is affected by the fragmentary
nature of the ancient genome assembly. You need to assemble both
chromosomal haplotypes to be sure that your seemingly shorter fragment
lengths are not due heterozygousity of the introgressed fragment.

I think that his region of Neanderthal occupation is a ridiculous underestimate of the regions that Neanderthals could exploit during the
over half a million years that they existed in Europe and Asia. They
had to survive multiple glacial periods, but they also had their
populations expand during the interglacial periods. Two of the last 5 interglacial periods were as warm or warmer than this current period and
more ice melted than has yet melted this time. Neanderthals would have
been exploiting Finland, Sweden and Norway, just as we do today. We do
not find evidence of this occupation probably because the area is
scraped clean by mile high glaciers during the ice ages.

What was interesting was his evidence that modern humans first exploited
the northern habitable regions of Europe over 40,000 years ago. This
means that Neanderthals were initially able to minimize modern human
expansion into the Mediterranean coastal regions, and modern humans had
to first exploit the more marginal regions of Europe. This initial
modern human incursion into Europe failed or this northern European
modern human population was eventually eliminated and replaced by the
modern humans that were able to push the Neanderthals out of southern
Europe. The initial modern human incursion into northern Europe was
over 15,000 years before the glacial maximum and they may not have
survived the expanding ice fields. They would have been trapped between
the ice and the Neanderthals.

Ron Okimoto

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: talk.origins

On 5/25/26 12:27 PM, RonO wrote:

He is proposing a more recent out of Africa wave.-a As he noted it has
been estimated to have occurred 60,000 to 80,000 years ago, but his new estimate is around 49,000 years for the event, but the event seems to
have occurred over a 7,000 year period.

I remember, years ago, it was very common for people to talk about a
~60k year old Out of Africa dispersal AND a ~35k dispersal. Now they
commonly add a ~100k dispersal in addition to those two.

Funny how you picked up on the dating though. For me, dating usually
goes in one ear and out the other -- the more specific the more this
being true. I like to draw back, look at "The big picture."

To my mind, the more precise a date is, the more you're focused on
individuals when we're really talking about populations.

That's just me.

I think that his region of Neanderthal occupation is a ridiculous underestimate of the regions that Neanderthals could exploit during the
over half a million years that they existed in Europe and Asia.-a They
had to survive multiple glacial periods, but they also had their
populations expand during the interglacial periods.-a Two of the last 5 interglacial periods were as warm or warmer than this current period and more ice melted than has yet melted this time.-a Neanderthals would have been exploiting Finland, Sweden and Norway, just as we do today.-a We do
not find evidence of this occupation probably because the area is
scraped clean by mile high glaciers during the ice ages.

Although that's all true, I can't help but see his movement of so called "Moderns" as avoiding the strongest Neanderthal positions.

Neanderthals and/or their ancestors survived multiple glacial periods.
They knew how to live. But, the coast and southern Europe in particular
would have been the prime real estate. Being south is better when it's
cold, the sea moderates climate and aquatic resources are more stable,
better able to sustain people when the climate isn't cooperating. His
path for so-called "Moderns" seems to bypass the Neanderthal
strongholds, where they had their deepest roots, moving them where the Neanderthals would have been the least dense, easiest to breed out or
kill off.
--
https://jtem.tumblr.com/

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: talk.origins

On 5/25/2026 11:41 PM, JTEM wrote:

On 5/25/26 12:27 PM, RonO wrote:

He is proposing a more recent out of Africa wave.-a As he noted it has
been estimated to have occurred 60,000 to 80,000 years ago, but his
new estimate is around 49,000 years for the event, but the event seems
to have occurred over a 7,000 year period.

I remember, years ago, it was very common for people to talk about a
~60k year old Out of Africa dispersal AND a ~35k dispersal. Now they
commonly add a ~100k dispersal in addition to those two.

Funny how you picked up on the dating though. For me, dating usually
goes in one ear and out the other -- the more specific the more this
being true. I like to draw back, look at "The big picture."

To my mind, the more precise a date is, the more you're focused on individuals when we're really talking about populations.

That's just me.

I think that his region of Neanderthal occupation is a ridiculous
underestimate of the regions that Neanderthals could exploit during
the over half a million years that they existed in Europe and Asia.
They had to survive multiple glacial periods, but they also had their
populations expand during the interglacial periods.-a Two of the last 5
interglacial periods were as warm or warmer than this current period
and more ice melted than has yet melted this time.-a Neanderthals would
have been exploiting Finland, Sweden and Norway, just as we do today.
We do not find evidence of this occupation probably because the area
is scraped clean by mile high glaciers during the ice ages.

Although that's all true, I can't help but see his movement of so called "Moderns" as-a avoiding the strongest Neanderthal positions.

Neanderthals and/or their ancestors survived multiple glacial periods.
They knew how to live. But, the coast and southern Europe in particular
would have been the prime real estate. Being south is better when it's
cold, the sea moderates climate and aquatic resources are more stable,
better able to sustain people when the climate isn't cooperating. His
path for so-called "Moderns" seems to bypass the Neanderthal
strongholds, where they had their deepest roots, moving them where the Neanderthals would have been the least dense, easiest to breed out or
kill off.

I pointed that out. His data indicates that modern humans first
exploited the northern more marginal habitats of Europe over 40,000
years ago. It looks like Neanderthals were able to keep modern humans
bottled up in a small region of the middle east for a while and were
able to initially exclude them from the southern coastal regions. Once
modern humans had pushed Neanderthals out of the coastal regions they
had to move into more marginal habitat and were extinct by the glacial
maximum (25,000 years ago). It was a period of time when they were
forced to live in a region that became less and less habitable. They
went extinct around the coldest period of time before the glacial
maximum. The climate was warming for a few thousand years before it
became warm enough to stop the advance of the glaciers.

He also noted that he thought that hybridization between Neanderthals
and modern humans had a selective disadvantage because mixing that
occurred after the initial interbreeding event that occurred as our
ancestors were leaving Africa, the fossil individuals that have evidence
of subsequent interbreeding failed to contribute to our extant
population. They were dead ends.

Ron Okimoto

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: talk.origins

On 5/25/2026 11:27 AM, RonO wrote:

On 5/24/2026 9:44 PM, JTEM wrote:

I had just posted this to a real discussion group but
then thought; what they hay?-a Share it with the
collective...

https://youtu.be/WxWwEryMHrM?si=q27MPeGUuSj6_A7k

This was the free lecture at Harvard I told everyone about.

I had originally intended to watch it online, attend virtually as I
suggested the folks here might do, but at the last minute I decide to
head in.

And I have to say, rather unfortunately, I did NOT know they were
holding a wine & cheese reception following the lecture, with the
public invited. I had made dinner plans with someone already, which I
was already late for as the talk ran over.... no cheese & wine for me!

I dunno, some very interesting stuff but otherwise plenty of room to
argue. I myself got a very strong sense of Conventionality. Which,
let's face it, would be rather shocking if I didn't get it seeing how
the guy laid down a lot of that Convention.

Them's the brakes, huh?

He is proposing a more recent out of Africa wave.-a As he noted it has
been estimated to have occurred 60,000 to 80,000 years ago, but his new estimate is around 49,000 years for the event, but the event seems to
have occurred over a 7,000 year period.-a The proposal is that modern
humans started to leave Africa around 49,000 years ago and it took 7,000 years to create a population in a single region of the middle east
outside of Africa.-a This population interbred with a few Neanderthals,
and this interbreeding event was well mixed in this initial out of
Africa population when they started to disperse to other locations in
Asia and Europe.-a My guess is that there will likely be issues with his
use of fossil DNA obtained by humans that had additional interbreeding events, but that likely left no descendants in the extant population.
His estimates may be affected by the more recent interbreeding events.
He seems to claim to be able to differentiate the sequences from the
more recent interbreeding events from the original interbreeding event,
but I do not know how that estimate is affected by the fragmentary
nature of the ancient genome assembly.-a You need to assemble both chromosomal haplotypes to be sure that your seemingly shorter fragment lengths are not due heterozygousity of the introgressed fragment.

I think that his region of Neanderthal occupation is a ridiculous underestimate of the regions that Neanderthals could exploit during the
over half a million years that they existed in Europe and Asia.-a They
had to survive multiple glacial periods, but they also had their
populations expand during the interglacial periods.-a Two of the last 5 interglacial periods were as warm or warmer than this current period and more ice melted than has yet melted this time.-a Neanderthals would have been exploiting Finland, Sweden and Norway, just as we do today.-a We do
not find evidence of this occupation probably because the area is
scraped clean by mile high glaciers during the ice ages.

What was interesting was his evidence that modern humans first exploited
the northern habitable regions of Europe over 40,000 years ago.-a This
means that Neanderthals were initially able to minimize modern human expansion into the Mediterranean coastal regions, and modern humans had
to first exploit the more marginal regions of Europe.-a This initial
modern human incursion into Europe failed or this northern European
modern human population was eventually eliminated and replaced by the
modern humans that were able to push the Neanderthals out of southern Europe.-a The initial modern human incursion into northern Europe was
over 15,000 years before the glacial maximum and they may not have
survived the expanding ice fields.-a They would have been trapped between the ice and the Neanderthals.

Ron Okimoto

What Hublin is proposing likely means that Modern humans escaping Africa
could not compete very well with Neanderthals. They were likely
initially surrounded by Neanderthal and this likely limited the initial territory that they could occupy. They interbred with Neanderthal, and
likely gained more than just disease resistance. One light skin variant
was obtained from Neanderthal (the rest of the light skin variants seem
to have already been segregating among Africans) and likely stature and
muscle mass became more like Neanderthals.

I recalled that there were brain size differences, and I had seen casts
of Cro-Magnon skulls. Before modern humans could invade Europe they
evolved to be more robust than their African ancestors, and they had
brains the same size as Neanderthals. The modern humans that invaded
Asia and interacted with Denisovans may have decreased their brain size compared to their African ancestors. The one Denisovan skull that we
may have has the same brain size as modern humans and has less cranial capacity than Neanderthals. My take is that this difference in brain
size is correlated with body mass. More robust and larger individuals
had larger skulls and brains. I recall being shocked by the tooth size difference between Cro-Magnon and modern humans. Cro-Magnon were large
robust individuals, and more robust than Africans 40,000 years ago. It
likely took some time to evolve something that could compete with Neanderthals, so modern humans initially dispersed along the Asian coast
and entered the more marginal northern regions of Europe where there was likely less competition with Neanderthals. My guess is that the initial hybridization with Neanderthals improved the stature and robustness of
the population that was eventually able to take Europe away from the Neanderthals. The initial European modern humans were displaced by less robust modern humans that had evolved in Asia, and then displaced by the agriculturalists of the fertile crescent.

Google put up some estimates that I have not confirmed. The claim is
that 40,000 years ago the average brain size of modern humans in Africa
was 1,500 cc (This is larger than modern humans today (1,350 cc)). The average brain size of Neanderthal was claimed to be between 1,400 and
1,600 cc. The same (1,400-1,600 cc) average brain size was claimed for Cro-Magnon 40,000 years ago. Modern human brain size in Asia 40,000
year ago was claimed to be between 1,200 and 1,500 cc. So there seems
to be a difference between the modern humans that needed to compete
against the Denisovans and those that had to compete against
Neanderthals. My take is that it was a body mass issue. Cro-Magnon had
to be more robust to compete against Neanderthals that were built more
like apes. Modern humans have hourglass figures while Neanderthals have
lower ribs that flare out and have a more ape-like figure, and their
bones indicate that they carried more muscle than modern humans. The
larger size of both Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon was likely a disadvantage
as the glacial maximum approached. It takes more calories to feed
larger bodies and brains.

Ron Okimoto

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2