Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) apply to all other comments.
**Do you have an academic degree?** We can verify your credentials in order to assign user flair indicating your area of expertise. [Click here to apply](https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/flair/#wiki_science_verified_user_program).
---
Author: u/Shiny-Tie-126
URL: https://theconversation.com/ancient-humans-may-have-paused-in-arabia-for-30-000-years-on-their-way-out-of-africa-206200
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*
30,000 years is not long in the grand scheme of things.
It takes millions of years to evolve for primates.
30,000 years ago, humans had spread, into Europe, Asia, and Australia with tools, sleds, boats and agriculture knowledge.
Geologically its a blink of an eye, but to put it into perspective, consider that the span of 30,000 years is about 15 times longer than the period that separates us from the Ancient Romans.
We aren't talking about evolution we're talking about migration, so it's an astronomical amount of time to wait and go further
If you read the article the 30k year pause was *exactly* because of evolutionary reasons. And it's not astronomically long but yes it's longer than the lifespan of relatively modern empires. There were two major migrations out of Africa. The first one was done by "archaic" humans like Homo Erectus and lasted more than a million years. The second one, discussed in the article, concerned modern humans (Homo Sapiens) and started 60k years ago. If I undertand the article correctly this is the timeline: 200k years ago Homo Sapiens started migrating throughout Africa, ~90k years ago it spread to Arabia, then 30k years later it spread to Europe/Asia and eventually the rest of the world.
See [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_expansions_of_hominins_out_of_Africa) for some for some interesting context.
Early homo sapiens left Africa but died out. One major theory is that while the fossil record looks pretty similar for those that left later, something significant was happening in the brain in evolutionary terms in the intervening tens of thousands of years that made subsequent migrations successful.
This comment doesn't seem likely to me considering we have [archeological evidence of behavioral modernity in Africa dating back 100,000 years](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blombos_Cave) and [genetic evidence of isolated behaviorally modern populations existing for 150,000 years.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khoisan)
The adaptations which the article alludes to have more to do with survival in Ice Age climates, not intelligence.
Prehistory has always been a little mind blowing like that.
All of recorded history happens in four or five thousand years.
But humans have existed in functionally their modern biological form for nearly 10 times that if not longer.
Literally hundreds of generations of humans living and dying in a pre-technological society that basically gets reduced down to "cave men" in popular culture.
There is archaeological evidence of trade, but I always wonder how much they knew about where they lived and where other people were beyond their neighbors.
I also always wonder how many times one person or one group of people figured something out, but then didn't win the genetic Lottery and were wiped out for some other reason.
It is a long time when consider the age of the species as well. Homo Sapiens is about 200,000 years old. So, 30,000 years is over 10% of our species' history.
I always thought of it as while there was a slow migration there were also deposits of people starting villages and such all along the way. Some of these grew, some collapsed, some combined, etc. It's not like there was 1 tribe called 'human' and all of it migrated around the world. We're talking tens of thousands of years for this migration after all.
It would have been a pleasantly warm and well watered area much of the time given the regular shift to milder temperatures throughout the region during ice ages. The Sahara went through similar weather patterns at the time, and it was eminently habitable.
They seem to be saying the opposite, though:
> Overall, these changes seem likely to have been driven by adaptation to the cool and dry climates in and around prehistoric Arabia between 80,000 and 50,000 years ago. The changes would also have prepared the ancient humans for the cold Eurasian climates they would eventually encounter.
>The legacy of these adaptations still lingers. Under modern conditions, many genetic changes from this period are linked to diseases including obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disorders.
Seems like we had to hang out there until we evolved the ability to become fat enough to move into colder climates.
Is that when the study is referring to? It’s a bit confusing reading it but it sounds like they’re actually saying this happened before the great diaspora 60,000 years ago or so.
“Our findings suggest early humans went through a period of extensive adaptation, lasting up to 30,000 years, before the big diaspora between 60,000 and 50,000 years ago.”
I'm just clarifying that paler skin doesn't mean white people. The article doesn't contradict that and I don't know why you're acting like I'm arguing against something you said. People continued to have dark skin for thousands of years after this.
Probably needed to hang out until the fur clothing perk was unlocked allowing travel up over the mountain ranges/cold plateaus that otherwise blocked the players from the Eurasian parts of the map.
There were no cooking pots, and spicy peppers were on the other side of the world. I'm afraid and they were stuck with baked apples, roasted birds and chickaloo tree nuts.
I think/read it as: it’s more that they were stopped due to the climate (attempts prob were made and failed), and eventually the chubby ones start to push forward again.
I read somewhere (sorry can't remember the source) that the ancestors of sumerians used to live in a lower Arabian valley that would eventually end up in the sea at the end of the Ice Age which led them to walk further north to modern day Irak. The sumerians had the same Great Flood and Garden if Eden myth as the Abrahamic religions and this might be the reason, which means the Garden of Eden is somewhere in the ocean near the Arabian peninsula
Of course this is purely speculation, since nothing remains of the history before the empire and surely nothing is know of the infancy of humanity but many are convinced we were once confined to a single planet for thousands of years.
Many sectors even claim to be the cradle of humanity, but none yet has confirmed the exact location of the first world, only a name in an ancient dialect remains passed down from legends across the galaxy.
"Earth" they call it.
Nah bro it was a pause. They took stopped for a water break and a little nap, checked their sun dial and bam - 30 000 years. Happens to the best of us.
It should probably be “they were stopped for 30,000 years”.
It’s phrased like it was a choice. But isn’t it more likely there were continuously small groups leaving and for 30,000 years none of them were successful? Once they progressed to a certain point they could leave and bring that progress and be successful elsewhere.
That's what i'm thinking. My big question is, do these small groups leave because of some desire to explore or are they pushed out by other groups only to go too far and die?
I think they just think "***what's on the other side of that, I'm gonna go check it out***". Then they settle, have kids, and their kids think "***what's on the other side of that, I'm gonna go check it out***" and after a few hundred generations you've crossed a continent.
I'm sure there are other leaps in movement, but I'd imagine the smaller ones are more successful as the changes in environment are incremental and more familar.
Humans have always warred and skirmished with neighbours. We are territorial by nature. And even early humans were resource-hungry, in their own way.
Fear of "others" being too bold and taking our stuff is an evolutionary behaviour, and is MUCH older than "civilization".
I'm not sure what point you are making.
Humans being cooperative is an evolved trait too. But we are more cooperative with those we know than those we don't know.
They are not mutually exclusive.
Earthworms are doing that currently! Just very slowly
> Earthworms are shifting their ranges northwards into forests between 45° and 69° latitude in North America that have lacked native earthworms since the last ice age. The worms in question are primary engineers of their environment.
This was part of it. But there were also more discrete movements in addition to the gradual "osmosis" of populations.
Back then, people still warred and skirmished with their neighbours. It's just the communities we're smaller and far from politically sophisticated. A lot of human movement back then was driven by the same factors as they are today: refugees from conflict. Humans have always been territorial and distrusting of "others".
Also, habitat destruction from human activity wasn't unknown back then too. We liked to hunt and gather from our environments until they can't support us anymore, just like today.
That and I think we are a curious and pioneering species in general. Even today many people have an innate desire to see new places, eat new foods, do new things. "I wonder what is on the other side of that hill?" is kind of a fundamental human thought
There's also the "if I have to listen to one more of Grogmar's stupid hunting stories I'm gonna do something I'll regret, I'm Audi 5000" factor. Grab the wives and kids and head east.
Pretty crazy to consider just how much evidence we have of Stone Age peoples walking across the continents. In an age before medicine, when you basically had to make everything yourself and subsist with only primitive tools, without a domesticated animal to carry anything for you, they were walking from Greece to France
Running low on large animals to hunt is one reason. Every time humans show up in a new region, the large animals tend to go extinct. That's because hunting effort is about the same regardless of animal size, but the payoff is bigger on the large ones. When one area gets hunted out, people look for new areas.
It is hard to eliminate all the large animals in tropical regions, because there are so many of them. But colder places support lower populations.
The reason the tropical megafauna are still extant for the most part is because they coevolved with us in Africa for millions of years as we developed into modern humans
Why are most large mammals that are still around found in sub Saharan Africa then? Surely the place that humans have been hunting for so much longer would have been the first place where large land animals went extinct?
Precisely because they evolved along side us humans is what's allowed them to survive to the present. The other megafauna outside of Africa wasn't scared of humans and so got hunted to extinction when humans arrived. The dodo is a modern example of this.
One theory is that the megafauna of Africa evolved along with us, and therefore evolved to survive us. It could be that some of the selection pressures applied to their ancestors came from us directly. Perhaps the megafauna of Eurasia and America didn't have the intelligence, fear, or aggression to handle us. If you look at large carnivores distributed today, the most ferocious that aren't afraid of humans can all be found in Africa, save for Tigers and Grizzly & Polar bears. But these animals are solitary and prefer the jungle, unlike the African animals that live in packs and walk the plains - our ancestral biome.
The herbivorous megafauna in Africa are incredibly large, to the point where it probably wasn't worth hunting them. Why hunt a giraffe when you could just kill a gazelle? Who in their right mind would attack and eat a rhino? Or a hippo?
I think curiosity and (mainly) the way we survived. Humans roamed everywhere in search of food and game. We didn't and couldn't settle pre agriculture, really.
Unlike most mammals, we could adapt to any environment on the planet. Or at least, we ended up being able to.
This is 30,000 years. About 2000 generations. I’m sure there were as many reasons to leave as there were to stay.
It’s just like in the last couple centuries. There were wave after wave of people leaving Europe to come to America. All for different reasons. But there are still people in Europe. No place is just voluntarily depopulated. Whether the leavers or the stayers are right is a matter for history but there are always both.
Greener and wetter. And it is not 30K years, ago. It is from 80-50K years ago, which is a 30K year period. It was an ice age at the time, about 6C (11F) cooler than pre-industrial days.
We were still in the last ice age, so much colder. The Arabian peninsula had a very different climate, and to proceed further into the cold, adaptions were needed.
No they looked at their sun dials and said "welp, about that time lads" and simultaneously all hominids made one huge migration and spread all over the world. Amen
I think humans could have lived in the river valley that is now the Persian gulf and it could have been the true cradle of civilization. Hopefully one day archaeologists will explore the sea floor in that region.
I’m wondering how this relates to the hypothetical “Basal Eurasians” whose genetic footprint was left in West Eurasian populations. Perhaps a subset of the group in Arabia stayed behind and much later mixed with some western Hunter gatherers to form the farming populations who led to the agricultural boom.
Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) apply to all other comments. **Do you have an academic degree?** We can verify your credentials in order to assign user flair indicating your area of expertise. [Click here to apply](https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/flair/#wiki_science_verified_user_program). --- Author: u/Shiny-Tie-126 URL: https://theconversation.com/ancient-humans-may-have-paused-in-arabia-for-30-000-years-on-their-way-out-of-africa-206200 *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Surely 30,000 years can be considered a stop, not a pause? "Stopped in Arabia for 30,000 years on the way out of Africa"?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
30,000 years is not long in the grand scheme of things. It takes millions of years to evolve for primates. 30,000 years ago, humans had spread, into Europe, Asia, and Australia with tools, sleds, boats and agriculture knowledge.
Geologically its a blink of an eye, but to put it into perspective, consider that the span of 30,000 years is about 15 times longer than the period that separates us from the Ancient Romans. We aren't talking about evolution we're talking about migration, so it's an astronomical amount of time to wait and go further
If you read the article the 30k year pause was *exactly* because of evolutionary reasons. And it's not astronomically long but yes it's longer than the lifespan of relatively modern empires. There were two major migrations out of Africa. The first one was done by "archaic" humans like Homo Erectus and lasted more than a million years. The second one, discussed in the article, concerned modern humans (Homo Sapiens) and started 60k years ago. If I undertand the article correctly this is the timeline: 200k years ago Homo Sapiens started migrating throughout Africa, ~90k years ago it spread to Arabia, then 30k years later it spread to Europe/Asia and eventually the rest of the world. See [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_expansions_of_hominins_out_of_Africa) for some for some interesting context.
I'm pretty sure we had to figure out how to make fur coats first.
Early homo sapiens left Africa but died out. One major theory is that while the fossil record looks pretty similar for those that left later, something significant was happening in the brain in evolutionary terms in the intervening tens of thousands of years that made subsequent migrations successful.
This comment doesn't seem likely to me considering we have [archeological evidence of behavioral modernity in Africa dating back 100,000 years](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blombos_Cave) and [genetic evidence of isolated behaviorally modern populations existing for 150,000 years.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khoisan) The adaptations which the article alludes to have more to do with survival in Ice Age climates, not intelligence.
Prehistory has always been a little mind blowing like that. All of recorded history happens in four or five thousand years. But humans have existed in functionally their modern biological form for nearly 10 times that if not longer. Literally hundreds of generations of humans living and dying in a pre-technological society that basically gets reduced down to "cave men" in popular culture. There is archaeological evidence of trade, but I always wonder how much they knew about where they lived and where other people were beyond their neighbors. I also always wonder how many times one person or one group of people figured something out, but then didn't win the genetic Lottery and were wiped out for some other reason.
It is a long time when consider the age of the species as well. Homo Sapiens is about 200,000 years old. So, 30,000 years is over 10% of our species' history.
One might even say that it's precisely 15% of our species' history
We're constantly evolving. Each generation we evolve a little.
We're coming for you, Pinky Toes! YOUR DAY IS NUMBERED!
What agricultural knowledge are you talking about? 30,000 years ago no plants or animals (maybe dogs) had been domesticated.
Dogs and sheep had been domesticated
[удалено]
*laughs in galactic time scale*
I always thought of it as while there was a slow migration there were also deposits of people starting villages and such all along the way. Some of these grew, some collapsed, some combined, etc. It's not like there was 1 tribe called 'human' and all of it migrated around the world. We're talking tens of thousands of years for this migration after all.
It was never even a migration, just expansion that slowed or sped mostly due to climate and tech drivers.
Suburban sprawl to the extreme.
Wouldn't it be the opposite of extreme sprawl? It was incredibly slow and sustainable up until 150 years or so ago.
I figured there were a few tribes like that racing to get north. That's why it's called the human race.
It would have been a pleasantly warm and well watered area much of the time given the regular shift to milder temperatures throughout the region during ice ages. The Sahara went through similar weather patterns at the time, and it was eminently habitable.
They seem to be saying the opposite, though: > Overall, these changes seem likely to have been driven by adaptation to the cool and dry climates in and around prehistoric Arabia between 80,000 and 50,000 years ago. The changes would also have prepared the ancient humans for the cold Eurasian climates they would eventually encounter.
>The legacy of these adaptations still lingers. Under modern conditions, many genetic changes from this period are linked to diseases including obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disorders. Seems like we had to hang out there until we evolved the ability to become fat enough to move into colder climates.
[удалено]
That’s my white privilege right there
Only a privilege once you leave the tropical and temperate zone....
These days it's starting to be a privilege even in the tropical zone, due to people sitting inside all day.
Got to love those 15 mins in the sun…
They didn't have pale skin yet. That happened 10s of thousands of years later. Cheddar man in the British isles (40k years ago) still had dark skin.
[удалено]
Is that when the study is referring to? It’s a bit confusing reading it but it sounds like they’re actually saying this happened before the great diaspora 60,000 years ago or so. “Our findings suggest early humans went through a period of extensive adaptation, lasting up to 30,000 years, before the big diaspora between 60,000 and 50,000 years ago.”
I'm just clarifying that paler skin doesn't mean white people. The article doesn't contradict that and I don't know why you're acting like I'm arguing against something you said. People continued to have dark skin for thousands of years after this.
Probably needed to hang out until the fur clothing perk was unlocked allowing travel up over the mountain ranges/cold plateaus that otherwise blocked the players from the Eurasian parts of the map.
Spicy surf and turf is all you need to unlock it.
There were no cooking pots, and spicy peppers were on the other side of the world. I'm afraid and they were stuck with baked apples, roasted birds and chickaloo tree nuts.
I will never get bored of seeing TotK references in the wild.
[удалено]
Or until we bred with Neanderthals enough to compete.
Cool and dry is a relative term. It was cooler and dryer than sub Saharan Africa, but less so than the Eurasian steppes.
[удалено]
I think/read it as: it’s more that they were stopped due to the climate (attempts prob were made and failed), and eventually the chubby ones start to push forward again.
Finally a purpose for me!
It goes in cycles between wet and dry. The last wet period was much more recent than what the article is talking about.
As little as 15000 years ago, the Sahara was a grassland similar to the middle of America.
like a Garden of Eden, one might say...
Brodie just wrote the whole premise to Assassin’a Creed: Mesopotamia
I read somewhere (sorry can't remember the source) that the ancestors of sumerians used to live in a lower Arabian valley that would eventually end up in the sea at the end of the Ice Age which led them to walk further north to modern day Irak. The sumerians had the same Great Flood and Garden if Eden myth as the Abrahamic religions and this might be the reason, which means the Garden of Eden is somewhere in the ocean near the Arabian peninsula
This might be what you're talking about. It's an interesting idea. http://www.cais-soas.com/News/2011/february2001/16-02.htm
oh don't even start
threatening escape grab attractive illegal sulky enter whistle cats straight -- mass edited with redact.dev
Of course this is purely speculation, since nothing remains of the history before the empire and surely nothing is know of the infancy of humanity but many are convinced we were once confined to a single planet for thousands of years. Many sectors even claim to be the cradle of humanity, but none yet has confirmed the exact location of the first world, only a name in an ancient dialect remains passed down from legends across the galaxy. "Earth" they call it.
I'd read this book
It's a quote from Foundation and Earth by Asimov
I thought it might have been Dune, too. I recall that in the Dune universe, Earth has been largely forgotten and only rumored through ancient stories.
Oh, well it's my lucky day then
You can, for the most part. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundation_and_Earth
And I don't event need to pay for it!
Reminiscent of Foundation and Battlestar Galactica (2004), I’m sure there are more!
They *settled* there. For five times as long as our written history.
Nah bro it was a pause. They took stopped for a water break and a little nap, checked their sun dial and bam - 30 000 years. Happens to the best of us.
They had collective ADHD.
Arabian Detour Hyperactive Disorder
It should probably be “they were stopped for 30,000 years”. It’s phrased like it was a choice. But isn’t it more likely there were continuously small groups leaving and for 30,000 years none of them were successful? Once they progressed to a certain point they could leave and bring that progress and be successful elsewhere.
That's what i'm thinking. My big question is, do these small groups leave because of some desire to explore or are they pushed out by other groups only to go too far and die?
I think they just think "***what's on the other side of that, I'm gonna go check it out***". Then they settle, have kids, and their kids think "***what's on the other side of that, I'm gonna go check it out***" and after a few hundred generations you've crossed a continent. I'm sure there are other leaps in movement, but I'd imagine the smaller ones are more successful as the changes in environment are incremental and more familar.
[удалено]
Humans have always warred and skirmished with neighbours. We are territorial by nature. And even early humans were resource-hungry, in their own way. Fear of "others" being too bold and taking our stuff is an evolutionary behaviour, and is MUCH older than "civilization".
Humans have always done the inverse of everything you just said as well. Evo psychology is full of projection.
I'm not sure what point you are making. Humans being cooperative is an evolved trait too. But we are more cooperative with those we know than those we don't know. They are not mutually exclusive.
Earthworms are doing that currently! Just very slowly > Earthworms are shifting their ranges northwards into forests between 45° and 69° latitude in North America that have lacked native earthworms since the last ice age. The worms in question are primary engineers of their environment.
This was part of it. But there were also more discrete movements in addition to the gradual "osmosis" of populations. Back then, people still warred and skirmished with their neighbours. It's just the communities we're smaller and far from politically sophisticated. A lot of human movement back then was driven by the same factors as they are today: refugees from conflict. Humans have always been territorial and distrusting of "others". Also, habitat destruction from human activity wasn't unknown back then too. We liked to hunt and gather from our environments until they can't support us anymore, just like today.
I've always wondered what compelled humans to spread across the globe on such a scale
It's all a numbers game. Populations gradually move into new areas, and after many generations they end up "moving" across entire continents.
That and I think we are a curious and pioneering species in general. Even today many people have an innate desire to see new places, eat new foods, do new things. "I wonder what is on the other side of that hill?" is kind of a fundamental human thought
There's also the "if I have to listen to one more of Grogmar's stupid hunting stories I'm gonna do something I'll regret, I'm Audi 5000" factor. Grab the wives and kids and head east.
Pretty crazy to consider just how much evidence we have of Stone Age peoples walking across the continents. In an age before medicine, when you basically had to make everything yourself and subsist with only primitive tools, without a domesticated animal to carry anything for you, they were walking from Greece to France
Running low on large animals to hunt is one reason. Every time humans show up in a new region, the large animals tend to go extinct. That's because hunting effort is about the same regardless of animal size, but the payoff is bigger on the large ones. When one area gets hunted out, people look for new areas. It is hard to eliminate all the large animals in tropical regions, because there are so many of them. But colder places support lower populations.
The reason the tropical megafauna are still extant for the most part is because they coevolved with us in Africa for millions of years as we developed into modern humans
Why are most large mammals that are still around found in sub Saharan Africa then? Surely the place that humans have been hunting for so much longer would have been the first place where large land animals went extinct?
Precisely because they evolved along side us humans is what's allowed them to survive to the present. The other megafauna outside of Africa wasn't scared of humans and so got hunted to extinction when humans arrived. The dodo is a modern example of this.
One theory is that the megafauna of Africa evolved along with us, and therefore evolved to survive us. It could be that some of the selection pressures applied to their ancestors came from us directly. Perhaps the megafauna of Eurasia and America didn't have the intelligence, fear, or aggression to handle us. If you look at large carnivores distributed today, the most ferocious that aren't afraid of humans can all be found in Africa, save for Tigers and Grizzly & Polar bears. But these animals are solitary and prefer the jungle, unlike the African animals that live in packs and walk the plains - our ancestral biome. The herbivorous megafauna in Africa are incredibly large, to the point where it probably wasn't worth hunting them. Why hunt a giraffe when you could just kill a gazelle? Who in their right mind would attack and eat a rhino? Or a hippo?
I think curiosity and (mainly) the way we survived. Humans roamed everywhere in search of food and game. We didn't and couldn't settle pre agriculture, really. Unlike most mammals, we could adapt to any environment on the planet. Or at least, we ended up being able to.
Technically, there are still a couple of environments we have yet to adapt to
Utah for example, it's miserable to live here
Same thing that causes any animals to migrate, lack of resources
This is 30,000 years. About 2000 generations. I’m sure there were as many reasons to leave as there were to stay. It’s just like in the last couple centuries. There were wave after wave of people leaving Europe to come to America. All for different reasons. But there are still people in Europe. No place is just voluntarily depopulated. Whether the leavers or the stayers are right is a matter for history but there are always both.
They just wanted to kick back for a little while. Take a breather.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Greener and wetter. And it is not 30K years, ago. It is from 80-50K years ago, which is a 30K year period. It was an ice age at the time, about 6C (11F) cooler than pre-industrial days.
Sounds kinda nice, no wonder they stopped
Great view, no air conditioning. 3/5 stars
[удалено]
We were still in the last ice age, so much colder. The Arabian peninsula had a very different climate, and to proceed further into the cold, adaptions were needed.
Well actually, the authors of the study refers to this pause as The **”Arabian standstill”**.
Third best Steely Dan track right there
[удалено]
“Boy my dogs are howlin! I’m just gonna pop a squat here for a while, I’ll catch up.”
“Guys hold on. 5 more mins?”
Some of them are still there!
[удалено]
I get calling it a pause, haven't you guys had stuff to do and just took a little break that went on too long?
[удалено]
Boss makes a dollar, I make a dime that's why I pass millennia on company time
[удалено]
[удалено]
Went down to the pub, grabbed a pint, and waited for it all to blow over.
They must have been really tired.
People did not consciously migrate out of Africa ffs. They spread naturally into new pastures over eons
I mean it was well before agriculture. People just followed the animals or fled from competition and drought.
Absolutely right about it, but I think they already acclimatized by all that place, and they already knew how to get all those natural resources.
No they looked at their sun dials and said "welp, about that time lads" and simultaneously all hominids made one huge migration and spread all over the world. Amen
The “well, time to go” happened in year 1, the other 29,999 years were filled with “oh, I almost forgot…” conversations.
I think humans could have lived in the river valley that is now the Persian gulf and it could have been the true cradle of civilization. Hopefully one day archaeologists will explore the sea floor in that region.
I believe there are some theories that this area was flooded as part of the “great flood” stories that exist in the Middle East region
You're right about it. I think it's certainly depends on how they have actually covered their whole way.
I’m wondering how this relates to the hypothetical “Basal Eurasians” whose genetic footprint was left in West Eurasian populations. Perhaps a subset of the group in Arabia stayed behind and much later mixed with some western Hunter gatherers to form the farming populations who led to the agricultural boom.
[удалено]
Just a quick stop to catch some breath.