There are two main hypotheses when it comes to explaining the emergence of
modern humans. The ‘Out of Africa’ theory holds that homo sapiens burst onto the scene
as a new species around 150,000 to 200,000 years ago in Africa and subsequently
replaced archaic humans such as the Neandertals. The other model, known as multi-
(5)regional evolution or regional continuity, posits far more ancient and diverse roots for our
kind. Proponents of this view believe that homo sapiens arose in Africa some 2 million
years ago and evolved as a single species spread across the Old World, with populations
in different regions linked through genetic and cultural exchange.

Of these two models, Out of Africa, which was originally developed based on fossil
(10)evidence, and supported by much genetic research, has been favored by the majority of
evolution scholars. The vast majority of these genetic studies have focused on DNA from
living populations, and although some small progress has been made in recovering DNA
from Neandertal that appears to support multi-regionalism, the chance of recovering
nuclear DNA from early human fossils is quite slim at present. Fossils thus remain very
(15)much a part of the human origins debate.

Another means of gathering theoretical evidence is through bones. Examinations of
early modern human skulls from Central Europe and Australia dated to between 20,000
and 30,000 years old have suggested that both groups apparently exhibit traits seen in
their Middle Eastern and African predecessors. But the early modern specimens from
(20)Central Europe also display Neandertal traits, and the early modern Australians showed
affinities to archaic Homo from Indonesia. Meanwhile, the debate among
paleoanthropologists continues , as supporters of the two hypotheses challenge the
evidence and conclusions of each other.