>>11948309So we are just going to ignore the...
>Non-African populations (Han Chinese in Beijing and Utah residents with northern and western European ancestry) also show analogous patterns in the CSFS, suggesting that a component of archaic ancestry was shared before the split of African and non-African populations....because why again? If non-african populations have parts of that same archaic ancestry then what is your argument behind them not being considered H.Sapiens? Especially if the archiac ancestry admixture occurred before the split between the two populations? This could easily be interpreted as them retaining more archaic ancestry in specific populations in West Africa if the range is as wide as 2-19% percent as you pointed out.
