The most recent common ancestor for humanity has been estimated at 1400 BC, and the point where we have no uncommon ancestors at 5300 BC. The only exceptions would be tiny populations of fully isolated peoples such as the North Sentinelese Islanders.
yes, but the fundamental insight here is that human populations didn't stay separate. the human family tree loops back on itself continually, and even if we can identify a point of relative density and homogeneity from which those populations originated, there was still a point later when the species was spread throughout the globe and from which we nevertheless share the same ancestors.
yes, in the article they refer to it as the identical ancestors (IA) point. to be clear this is based on a mathematical model. they go into some of the limitations of it near the end.
:bugs-no:
It was 4000, tops.
The most recent common ancestor for humanity has been estimated at 1400 BC, and the point where we have no uncommon ancestors at 5300 BC. The only exceptions would be tiny populations of fully isolated peoples such as the North Sentinelese Islanders.
I thought we left Africa around 70k years ago at the latest due to the Toba explosion?
yes, but the fundamental insight here is that human populations didn't stay separate. the human family tree loops back on itself continually, and even if we can identify a point of relative density and homogeneity from which those populations originated, there was still a point later when the species was spread throughout the globe and from which we nevertheless share the same ancestors.
Wow. That is really cool.
What does uncommon ancestor mean here? In 5300 BC there were no individuals that some modern humans but not all modern humans descend from?
yes, in the article they refer to it as the identical ancestors (IA) point. to be clear this is based on a mathematical model. they go into some of the limitations of it near the end.
That's incredibly cool. It's shocking that it's that recent.