© Lori Lappin, the Witch of WITCHCRAFTS ARTISAN ALCHEMY®

Skull of Australopithecus garhi

Human occupation of Western Asia dates to over 800,000 years ago.

"Kashafrud Basin is an archaeological site in Iran (in western Asia), known for the Lower Palaeolithic artifacts collected there; these are the oldest-known evidence for human occupation of Iran.

There are some collections of simple core and flake stone artifacts collected by C. Thibault in 1974-75. The tools are Olduwan-like and mainly made of quartz. Thibault suggested a Lower Pleistocene age (more than 800,000 years ago) for the localities."

Oldowan tools are associated with the human ancestor Australopithecus garhi which inhabited Eurasia as well as Africa.

"The Oldowan, sometimes spelled Olduwan, is the earliest stone tool archaeological industry in prehistory. Oldowan tools were used during the Lower Paleolithic period, 2.6 million years ago up until 1.7 million years ago, by ancient hominins across much of Africa, South Asia, the Middle East and Europe.

It is not known for sure which hominin species actually created and used Oldowan tools. Its emergence is often associated with the species Australopithecus garhi and its flourishing with early species of Homo such as H. habilis and H. ergaster. Early Homo erectus appears to inherit Oldowan technology and refines it into the Acheulean industry beginning 1.7 million years ago."

"Australopithecus garhi is a 2.5-million-year-old gracile australopithecine species whose fossils were discovered in 1996 by a research team led by Ethiopian paleontologist Berhane Asfaw and Tim White, an American paleontologist. The hominin remains are believed to be a human ancestor species and possibly the direct ancestor to the human genus, Homo."

To summarize so far, the tools of the probable direct ancestor of the genus Homo and subsequently of Homo sapiens have been found in Western Asia, supporting the idea that a human lineage (Australopithecus garhi) ancestral to Homo sapiens lived in Western Asia over 800,000 years ago.

And, given that the species Homo sapiens is believed to have evolved between 100,000 to 200,000 years ago, it is quite possible that a pre-sapien lineage of Australopithecus garhi evolved into Homo sapiens in Asia (as well as, or instead of, in Africa). What is the evidence for this?

I believe that the evidence supports that this Asian lineage of Homo sapiens is the group some paleoanthropologists are calling "Afrasians."

It is common to distinguish between Africans and non-Africans, with the former being much more genetically diverse than the latter. But, the real "gap" in human origins seems to be between the really old Africans ("Paleoafricans") and the rest ("Afrasians").

The Paleoafrican element is entirely confined to Africa, while the Afrasian one is found in both Africa and Eurasia. Indeed, modern humans can be entirely split into two groups: (i) a group of "pure" Afrasians which includes all non-Africans, and (ii) a group of Afrasian-Paleoafricans which includes all non-Caucasoid Africans. Human groups of entirely Paleoafrican origin, unhybridized with the younger Afrasians are no longer in existence.

The Afrasians are a recent branch of humankind, and one which was for a great length of time separated reproductively from the Paleoafricans.

A new paper has come along that provides further support for the ancient split among humans (putatively in Africa) ...

The genetic split in Africa resulted in distinct populations that lived in isolation for as much as 100,000 years, the scientists say. (I say that the evidence suggests that this isolation was because each population each lived on a different continent - one is Asia and one in Africa.)

"We don't know how long it takes for hominids to fission off into separate species, but clearly they were separated for a very long time," said Dr Spencer Wells, director of the Genographic Project.

The genetic data show that (two genetically distinct, separated reproductively for at least 100,000 years) populations came back together (in Africa) as a single, pan-African population about 40,000 years ago.

Taking all of this together, "Afrasians" are a lineage of Homo sapiens who likely evolved in Asia from a lineage of Australopithecus garhi, and then some from this Asian population of Australopithecus garhi derived Homo sapiens migrated back into Africa where they interbred with Paleoafricans (now extinct as a pure lineage). Modern non-Caucasoid Africans are a hybrid of varying degrees of Afrasian (which evolved in Asia) and Paleoafrican (which evolved in Africa) humans. Importantly, that modern Africans came together as a pan-African population only around 40,000 years ago supports the idea that the "Afrasian" population of Homo sapiens likely first arose in Asia. Equally importantly, the scientific data suggest that the "African" element of "Afrasians" is a "pre-anatomically modern" (archaic) Homo sapien hominid. Paleoafricans are described in the scientific literature as an archaic human lineage (within the genus Homo) native to Africa. It is possible that Paleoafricans are an African lineage which may have evolved in Ethiopia from a population of Australopithecus garhi in Ethiopia.

Whether or not the paleoafrican lineage is archaic Homo sapien or some other archiac hominid lineage, it is increasingly scientifically supported that the archaic lineage of Australopithecus garhi is ancestral to anatomically modern humans and that this archaic human lineage evolved in Asia.

Assumptions Versus Scientific Facts:

Genetic scientists claim we can trace the human family tree to a common ancestor (one for the male Y-chromosome lineage and one for the female mtDNA lineage). Unfortunately, the trend has been within science for genetic scientists to ASSUME that this common ancestor (for both the male and female lineages) lived in Africa based on the large amount of genetic variation found in Africa, but they have no real evidence to support that claim (other than a politically driven assumption). Their claim is entirely an assumption. And we all know that making unsupported assumptions tend to result in conclusions that are BS. But scientists need financial support to do science, so basing (public) scientific conclusions on assumptions rather than facts is something scientists have done to get grants from donors with a political agenda. I believe that the evidence that exists in reality (rather than in assumption) supports that the common human ancestor lived in Eurasia, and that some members of a Eurasian population migrated into Africa where they interbred with hominids native to Africa, which accounts for the large amount of genetic diversity among modern native Africans.

Additional Information:

Anatomically modern humans have been shown to have evolved from archaic hominins outside of Africa. This means that Homo sapiens may evolve from archaic ancestral human lineages living in isolation in places (like Asia and Europe) outside of Africa. Consequently, it is quite possible that Australopithecus garhi evolved into subspecies of Homo sapiens, one in Eurasia (the so-called anatomically modern Afrasians) and one in Africa (the so-called archaic Paleoafricans).

Anatomically modern humans dating up to 68,000 years old have also been found in New South Wales:

"Early last year, Australian scientists analyzed DNA taken from remains unearthed in 1974 at Lake Mungo in the state of New South Wales.

The analysis astonishingly revealed that neither "Mungo Man's" completely modern skeleton nor its DNA had any links with modern human ancestors from Africa found in other parts of the world.

The Australian researchers said that because Mungo Man is modern anatomically, yet has a vanished DNA line, it means at least one group of Homo erectus's descendants evolved outside of Africa.

Dating in May 1999 put the age of the skeletal remains at between 56,000 and 68,000 years, "