It still had the connection to the Atlantic till 5.9m to 5.5m years ago when it got cut off causing the salinity crisis (which would have been a good reason for a migration).
But it don’t really matter how dry or wet it was the foil evidence is there, people animals adapt and evolve, isn’t that what this whole thread is about.
For environmental reasons at least. It just doesn’t make sense.
So, still probably out of Africa
They say it’s a maybe, unless the ancestral DNA came from somewhere else.
However, developing efficient methods for inferring the underlying genealogy has proved challenging (54, 55). The methods described here produce high-quality dated genealogies that include thousands of modern and ancient samples. These genealogies cannot be entirely accurate; nevertheless, they enable a wealth of analyses that reveal features of human evolution (23, 56–60). That our highly simplistic geographic estimator captures key events suggests that more-sophisticated approaches, coupled with the ongoing program of sequencing ancient samples, will continue to generate insights into our history. Specifically, the methods developed here provide a framework for testing different models of human migration and demographic history, such as Neanderthal absorption models (61), using a parametric and explicitly spatial simulation framework. However, the accuracy of any ancestral geographic inference method will be limited when the distribution of sampled individuals does not reflect the location of the samples’ ancestors.
Bold added by me
All this stuff is maybe, but you don’t get published in Science based on weak maybes
I used the word probably when I posted, which is like maybe, but the preponderance of evidence still points towards out of Africa.
Maybe not. Surely the Chinese don’t think so. Still lots we don’t know for sure!
The quotes I posted are the caveats from the article published in science, its looking at viable DNA evidence only, it misses fossil evidence that pre dates DNA evidence.
I used to think this was the only viable theory, I mean its what I was taught at School.
and I dismissed the Chinese theory also when it cam out, I mean they did invent pizza also 
But after reading other articles its made me more open to Assimilation theory I haven’t quite got to parallel evolution yet but I don’t fully dismiss it.
I don’t see how any of these articles challenges the Out of Africa theory. Homo Sapiens, Neanderthals, Denisovans, and Homo erectus all originated from Africa, they just left Africa at different inter-glacial periods.
The interbreeding with Neanderthals happened very early on in the Levant, and while some of the Neanderthal and Denisovan genes helped modern humans to adapt to tough environments, but there’re really only like less than 1 to 2% of genes from modern non-African Homo Sapiens that came from Neanderthals or Denisovans.
There is no evidence of this, we don’t know where the pre hominid originated, that’s the point we are looking at.
There are Hominid fossils found that pre date the African fossils, so why can’t they of evolved somewhere else but then thrived when they got to Africa?
Even if you support the idea that Homo Erectus evolved from Homo Habilis somewhere in Asia before making their way back into Africa, Homo Habilis would have to make it “Out of Africa” for that to have happened.
However, there are more tools from that period found in Africa than anywhere else, so I think it’s more probably that Homo Erectus evolved in Africa.
But it theorised that Graecopithecus predates Sahelanthropus and that wasn’t found in Africa, these are around 7m years old. The oldest tools found to date are around 3.5m years old.
So with this information I could never say the out of Africa is correct without taking in to account other theories, I can’t dismiss other theories just because they don’t fit what I believe.
I posted an image in another thread relating to Physics and I think the same is true of evolution, if we don’t challenge the theories when new evidence presents itself then we should just give up thinking.
I’ve already said what I have to say about apes in Africa prior to the Sturtian glaciation period. I just don’t think apes of the genes graecopithecus is relevant to the discussion of the genes homo.
I think it’s relevant as this is the basis of parallel evolution, if there is evidence of pre hominids in other areas that means that the hominids themselves could have evolved independently.
The fact that these pre hominids fossils are older than the ones found in Africa opens the possibility that they could have migrated there, or even hominids themselves could have migrated to Africa from other areas.
To eventually be subsumed in a single inter-breeding population? That sounds unlikely.
Unlikely but not imposable, hybridisation happens in nature with a common ancestor.
In the above case we don’t know where the common ancestor comes from as per below.
Which goes right back to my first point
No one is disputing that given the right conditions there could have been parallel evolution. However, the ice age happened and it became really difficult for apes to live in the current temperate zones without sufficient technology.
Parallel evolution could also happen had the inter glacial periods been even longer in between, then Neanderthals and Denisovans could have had more time to evolve to the point of having technology parallel to homo sapiens and at the same time unable to interbreed.
Based on modern day humans, but look at bears they evolved to live in many climate areas. we have no idea what early/pre hominids where capable off.
The earliest tools that have been found to date are 3.5m years old, the time we are looking at predates this, so we have no idea what technological level any one was at.
As for interbreeding, Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA is present in modern humans also some unknown hominids also, what we don’t know is where they originated or who came first.
All evidence used to point to Africa, but then new evidence has emerged that brings up questions. Then new theories emerged to better fit these facts, the accepted consensus of out of Africa has gone now it’s just one of the accepted theories.
The ‘Out of Africa’ (Replacement), ‘Multiregional Evolution’ (Continuity), and ‘Assimilation’ models all have there merits., hence we are having this debate.
We do though. Last I checked there aren’t any apes native to Europe, not even monkeys, except those in the Gibraltar.
Judging by how little Neanderthal and Denesovan genes are in Modern non-Africans, I don’t see how continuity and assimilation are on the table. They are all possible in other hypothetical scenarios, but all the evidence points to replacement with very little early interbreeding. Replacement doesn’t have to mean Homo Sapiens actively wiped our distant cousins off the plant. Both Neanderthals and Denesovans coexisted with Homo Sapiens for a long time. Heck, even Homo Floresiensis, a subspecies of Homo Erectus were still around 50,000 BP, and they would have co-existed with Denesovans, but then soon disappeared after the arrival of modern humans. While there must had been competition, they just had a tougher time adjusting to climate change when the earth started warming up.
This has no relationship
At for the other part of your post ( can’t cut and paste as I’m on my phone now)
These theories are on the table because people who research in this area think they are relevant and they got peer reviewed, it wasn’t me who thought of them.
