I denne sammenheng blir uttrykket "potensiellt" ikke annet end en undskyldning for at repetere en gammel og mangelfull forklaringsmodell som påstår at vi alle er kommet fra Afrika.
Konklutionen som presenteres er altså prematur. Saken er langt fra så enkel - vilket et seriøst vitenskapsmagasin burde vite. He ren relastivt ny og oppaterende artikkel om æmnet fra nature.com.:
Human history defies easy stories
Homo sapiens first appears in the fossil record around 200,000 years ago in Ethiopia, albeit in a distinctly archaic form.
The earliest fossil is not the same as the earliest member of a species — H. sapiens is probably much older than this. Archaic forms of our species outside Africa first appear around 90,000 years ago, in the Levant. Another 45,000 years or so were to pass before our species made it to southeastern Europe, where it appeared amid a spectacular flourish of technology and what we would instantly recognize as art.
What happened between 90,000 and 45,000 years ago, a period ten times the length of recorded history?
Only the fossils can tell us, and they are few. It seems that the earliest modern humans got to the Levant and no farther. Mount Carmel in Israel hosts caves, such as Qafzeh and Skhul, where H. sapiens remains appear in levels older than those occupied by Neanderthals, Homo neanderthalensis. The replacement of our own species by Neanderthals seems to be an affront to our prejudices. So how did humans eventually make it to Europe?
http://www.nature.com/news/human-history-defies-easy-stories-1.16795