What is /sci/'s opinion on the oldest human remains identified at Jebel Irhoud, Morocco?
These remains were originally believed to be 40 000 years old, they are now understood to be 300 000 years old, possibly 350 000. It is a strange case of elephant in the room. If you perform a image google search for "out of Africa map" you will notice they are nearly all maps are outdated. They do not take the Morocco remains into account. Unlike the skull found in Italy, the Morocco remains are not new, they are not hotly debated, they are not a single specimen. There is no risk to rushing to a conclusion here. Yet these remains are methodically ignored because they do not fit in the big picture. Someone who looks up the out-of-Africa theory will find 50 articles that do not mention these remains. Even the wikipedia page on the out of Africa theory is incomplete and does not mention them. These remains have a wikipedia page on their own, therefore wikipedia does accept their legitimacy, it just doesn't seem interested to mention them when talking about the origins of humanity.
Morocco is part of Africa and therefore the oldest human common ancestors would still be from Africa, the name of the theory remains correct, but the details are very different. Humanity does not hail from Subsaharan Africa anymore. There is but a small geographic leap between Morocco and Spain, humans could have split from mother Africa to walk the north european soil up to 350 000 years ago for all we know. This would give a lot of time for european and african populations to grow genetically distinct. At very least, we know the current maps are wrong. Yet there seem to be very little interest to correct the theory about the origins of humanity, why is that?
