FREE ESSAY ON MULTIREGIONALISM VS. OUT OF AFRICA

MULTIREGIONALISM VS. OUT OF AFRICA

Multiregionalism V. Out of Africa
Anthropologists today are debating two sides to the story of the evolution of the modern
human Homosapian sapian. The sides agree on two different theories called the Out of
Africa theory and the Multiregional (or Candelabra) theory. The debate, which some may
call a slanderous argument, is far from being resolved on either side. Both evolutionist
sides have strong evidence, however, this evidence does have its flaws and is not
accurate enough to prove one side over another. However, the arguments for the Out of
Africa theory seem to be flawed far more than those of the Multiregional theory.
The Multiregional theory states that the hominid H. erectus. Migrated out of Africa
through the north approximately one million years ago and spread throughout the rest of
the world. After some time several populations of H. erectus became isolated and each
followed a similar path of evolution until they developed into archaic humans. Such small
populations have a selective gene pool and although each group may have proceeded to
develop different rates they all managed to follow the same evolutionary lines. This
theory suggests many possible movements of Homo erectus out of Africa but does not allow
for any other movements out of Africa after H. erectus.
On the other side the Out of Africa theory is drastically different. It states that Homo
erectus stayed in Africa and all modern H. sapian developed in Africa. The theory is
based on the idea that our modern human populations have a single source of ancestry and
that we are all derived from that source called "Eve". Once developed into H. sapian only
then did the descendants of "Eve" leave Africa and begin to colonize the rest of the
world over the next 100,000 years In this colonization the Out of Africa theory suggests
that the humans from Africa replaced all other hominids in Europe and Asia such as
Neanderthal. 
About 150,000 to 100,000 years ago, while our ancestors were still in Africa, another
hominid species known as Neanderthal was living in what is known today as modern Europe
and the Near East. The Neanderthals, according to our fossil records, had a strength and
size that is rarely attained by modern humans. The sites where muscle and ligaments
connect to the bone in these fossils are enlarged and strongly marked which implies large
highly developed muscles (Trinkhaus 135). Little is known about the intelligence of the
Neanderthals. Their brain size is in fact larger than that of modern humans but this is
not sign of more or less intelligence. The stone tool record associated with the
Neanderthals has shown no progress between the 100,000 to 35,000 years which is a sign
that there was little creativity and gives some clues to intelligence level. Humans, on
the other hand, are physically much different from the Neanderthal. Modern humans are
taller and thinner than Neanderthal and have a well-defined chin, vertical forehead, and
much smaller brow ridges (Shreeve 153). Humans also create art such as Paleolithic cave
paintings, stone carvings, bead and shell jewelry, and had more highly developed stone
tool technology, which served a wide number of uses. None of such items were found in
Neanderthal sites. These differences between humans and Neanderthal may be the reasons
why the Neanderthal found its ultimate fate about 35,000 years ago and modern humans
began to thrive. A current theory suggests that the Neanderthal were out competed by H.
sapian. However, there are other theories that explain the disappearance of the
Neanderthals. One suggests that all were killed off either by humans, other species of
hominids, or by the megafauna of the time period. Another suggests that Neanderthal and
H. sapian may have interbred combining their lineage with our own and in fact they could
be part of out ancestry. However, there is not enough evidence from the fossils to show
that there was ever any kind of interaction in between the two hominid species. The only
information anthropologists have to go by is that generally Neanderthal fossils date
later than 35,000 years ago and H. sapian fossils are dated at 35,000 years or less.
If we are to take one of the two main evolutionary theories as true we must understand
where their sources of data are and if they are reliable or not. The basis of data for
the Out of Africa theory is based on evidence gathered from research on a small part of
the human genome packaged on the outside of the nuclei called Mitochondrial DNA.
According to advocates of this theory Mitochondrial DNA (MtDNA) shows a great deal of
individual variability and can be used to trace maternal generations since it is only
passed down by women. Researchers used the idea that MtDNA changes occur randomly and
accumulate at a constant rate in an isolated population (Bower 2). Using this rate in
change Out of Africa Evolutionists have been able to date ancient population splits.
Results from such research using MtDNA has lead Evolutionists to believe that we all
share MtDNA which originated in a female in Africa 200,000 years ago called "Eve". 
A crucial assumption for the Out of Africa theory to be valid is that all the
Mitochondrial lineages evolve at the same rate. Here is where Multiregionalists say the
data is flawed. According to some researchers sections nucleotides in MtDNA undergo rapid
changes even within a few generations and may not be as predictable as believed. Many
Multiregionalists are questioning the accuracy of these dating methods and estimated ages
for evolutionary trees and sizes of ancient populations (Bower 3).
The Out of Africa theory suggests that modern humans came out of Africa and replaced all
other groups in Europe and Asia at the time. However it doesn't seem likely to claim that
one species replaced all other groups in every climate and environment (Thorne 76).
According to Thorne and Wolpoff Newcomers would have been at a disadvantage in a new
environment compared to groups adapted to living there such as the Neanderthal. Also
Archaeologists would expect to find archaeological traces of the behaviors that made the
descendants of "Eve" so successful (Thorne 76). So far none of such traces can be found 
On the other hand the Multiregional theory seems to be well supported and less flawed.