| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
#536 - N. Korean citizen (05/27/2012) [-]
So if we all originated from Africa, and africans arent humans, then humans arent humans?
#566 to #536 - senormegusta **User deleted account** (05/27/2012) [-]
The Out of Africa theory is just one theory for human evolution, it's not the sole theory, despite what the politically correct media wants us to think, they're just saying the Out of Africa theory is truth because it makes Africans and other blacks feel important.
#581 to #566 - freepaint (05/27/2012) [-]
Please suggest one of these ulterior theories for us to propound upon please.
#614 to #581 - senormegusta **User deleted account** (05/28/2012) [-]
The Out of India theory (showing the modern hominids came out of India or thereabouts) and the Multi-regional Theory (that humans developed partially separately within their own particular regions). But yeah, because of political correctness people are racist for even considering the other two choices.
#615 to #614 - freepaint (05/28/2012) [-]
And those 2 theories that you mention, do they have significant scholarly backing with well made claims of evidence to properly suggest that those 2 theories could be possible?If not then that's why the Out of Africa theory is so highly popular.Maybe it wasn't racist apologetic who suddenly decided to choose the OFT because they felt guilty for slavery so they wanted blacks to feel good about having a hand in human progress.Maybe its so widely believed because its true?Or maybe its the best we have.
#616 to #615 - senormegusta **User deleted account** (05/28/2012) [-]
We don't have a definite best, but the fact that the media completely ignores two other theories that have as much proof backing them (excluding the Afro-centric fantasies of modern times) shows some very biased bullshit in society.
#618 to #616 - freepaint (05/28/2012) [-]
I don't see how it can be biased if it has more reputable scholars who work within that field who support it.I would like to see more evidence before I personally give credit to the possibility of the other theories.I feel that if the other theories were possible the news would want us to hear about it.

And the fact that not one media source worldwide has offered to look at the other theories with much scrutiny tells me they simply haven't found enough evidence.

I remember seeing a program that lent credit to the idea that Europeans were the first to make it to America before Native Americans.The theory is called the Clovis culture theory.That's an example of the media willingly challenging preconceived notions.So if those 2 other theories you are talking about were backed with a fair amount of evidence people would definitely be talking about it as [url deleted] one is stopping them.
#619 to #618 - senormegusta **User deleted account** (05/28/2012) [-]
The Solutreans.
#620 to #619 - freepaint (05/28/2012) [-]
Right.

So even though there are some gaps within that theory, it was given mainstream access via [url deleted] shows that the world isn't trying to suppress possible accomplishments that may have been done by Whites or Europeans thousands of years ago because we're always learning something new.

Even though the Solutrean Hypothesis isn't the most highly popular it still was and is given consideration. I do agree that we should study the other alternative theories other than the Out of Africa one.But I don't think the reason that there is not enough exposure for those theories is because of fear of being called racist.I personally think its because people want more evidence.
 Friends (0)