Several skeletons up end the sparse evidence for the human evolutionary tree.
“The history of human evolution has been rewritten after scientists discovered that Europe was the birthplace of mankind, not Africa. . . two fossils of an ape-like creature which had human-like teeth have been found in Bulgaria and Greece, dating to 7.2 million years ago.”
See: Europe was the birthplace of mankind, not Africa, scientists find
Contrast the substantial statistical evidence against mutations quantified by Doug Axe. e.g., see:
As a basis for calculation, we have assumed a bacterial population that maintained an effective size of 10^9 individuals through 10^3 generations each year for billions of years. This amounts to well over a billion trillion opportunities (in the form of individuals whose lines were not destined to expire imminently) for evolutionary experimentation. Yet what these enormous resources are expected to have accomplished, in terms of combined base changes, can be counted on the fingers.
7.2 million BC is a HUGE jump back in time that negates MOST of the African fossils. If proto-humans were already living in Bulgaria, or in sites now sunk under the Mediterranean Sea, the ENTIRE collection of African fossils is meaningless.
That is, some Europeans wandered SOUTH around 1 million years ago instead of some Africans wandering NORTH. It would also explain why negroid features exist only in Africa: they’re mutations from the common European stock from which the rest of the world descends.
It should be interesting to see what else turns up in Europe.
vmahuna – if mankind originated from European stock, why are we (Europeans) so much less diverse than Africans?
Bob O`H- Why don`t the palaeontologist who think this is wrong and believe the out of Africa model just say to these guys , ah here is a test to show you are wrong, hmm I wonder why they don`t do that.