Archaeologists consider the theory of appearance erroneous first person in africa

Archaeologists believe the theory of the first man in Africa erroneousA photo from open sources

According to the well-established theory of the appearance and evolution of man, our civilization was born on the African continent, and only about 50-60 thousand years ago, homo sapien became gradually Settle throughout the Earth.

However, archaeologists have repeatedly proved the fallacy of this view. orthodox science. For example, German researchers of antiquity found in Europe in the old Rhine last year human teeth that are about 10 million years old. They are much older the remains of Australopithecus Lucy, who is considered the ancestor of modern of man and on the basis of which the theory of origin civilizations in Africa.

And more recently, archaeologists have discovered in Saudi Arabia petrified human finger, which is 90 thousand years old. Moreover Scientists have definitely determined that a homo finger was found in the Nefood desert sapien. It turns out that people or earlier than in the accepted orthodox science version, began to spread over the territory planets, or humanity nevertheless arose in a completely different way than scientists still believe. Here’s what the archaeologist says about this from oxford university hugh grokutt who participated in Arabian archaeological site:

Of course, we were very lucky because to find a human finger in the desert is much more complicated than a needle in a stack hay. However, it seems that nature itself is us “throws” the data necessary to revise the erroneous theory of the origin of man in Africa. And although this question has long been debated, Orthodox scholars do not want to admit obvious. This is understandable: based on the old theory, which is time already write off, as an erroneous, printed a bunch of scientific papers and books, and their authors will oppose the new until the last …

Grokutt emphasized that the structure of the finger does not cause any the slightest doubt that he belonged to the hand of Homo sapien. It, note, not even a finger, but a fragment of it, but so small detail can be a big argument in favor of necessity revision of the established view on the origin of man and our civilization as a whole.


Like this post? Please share to your friends:
Leave a Reply

;-) :| :x :twisted: :smile: :shock: :sad: :roll: :razz: :oops: :o :mrgreen: :lol: :idea: :grin: :evil: :cry: :cool: :arrow: :???: :?: :!: