Trending Topics

6 Arguments That Prove The First Man Was Black

The recent African origin of modern humans, frequently dubbed the “Out of Africa” theory, is the most widely accepted model describing mankind’s geographic origin and early migration. The theory asserts that humans first evolved in Africa, and most of man’s time on earth has been on that continent.

Here are six reasons why scientists believe humans originated in Africa and why they have abandoned the notion we evolved separately and independently in different parts of the world.

homo sapiens idaltu

Nature Doesn’t Strike Twice

There exists two theories of human origin: monogenism and polygenism. The monogenic view, which today is referred to as the “out of Africa theory,”  states that there is one source for mankind; man was born in one place but evolved differently due to the climatic conditions to which he was exposed.

The polygenic theory, or multiregional origin of modern humans,  claims that man has several locations of origin, which would explain the physiological differences between the races. Followers of this theory believe that man was born in Africa, Europe and Asia, and there was no evolutionary or climatic development.

World renowned historian, anthropologist, and physicist Dr. Cheikh Anta Diop states one important reason why the polygenic theory is faulty is that Mother Nature never strikes twice; she doesn’t create the same being twice.

What people are saying

22 thoughts on “6 Arguments That Prove The First Man Was Black

  1. Great Article. I'm making it available on my page for African Brazilians to read.
    The only point I would disagree is that the first human being was a black man, once also for the most advanced data on human fossiles we have that the first human (the ancient hominid ashes found) was a woman, that scientists called Lucy and our brothers and sisters from Ethiopia call"dinknesh" . Isn't that right?

  2. Só posso concordar!!!

  3. For sure, but according the History on a serious point of view the "first civilization" (the oldest recorded) was also an Afrakan Civilization, the Kemitans (Ancient Egyptians) whose native accounts from native works such as the Manetho "History of Egypt" and says from famous foreigners such as Herodotus, are from 30.000 to 50.000 B.C. And through geological debate is a complex society from at least 10.000 B.C. once the Sphinx has geologic brands consistently related to climatic conditions and calcifications of that amount of time according to the most advanced techniques of defining age of archaeological finds. So it doesn't matter if we are talking about the first hominids or first "civilized human societies" we are talking about Afrakan people.

  4. Shawn Mc says:

    Lua Nascimento whoa whoa whoa you mean 3000 to 5000, 30000 we was still very much primal.
    predynastic egypt did develop 3000-5000 but 10000-4000 bc there were development of cities and methods of cultivation in Mesopotamia.
    you can never say one group was the first because during ancient times many groups were advancing in different areas.
    Sumerians develop a city-state civilization (c. 3000) B.C.First year of Jewish calendar (3760 B.C.)
    there is no single cradle but several civilizations that developed independently.

  5. Shawn Mc says:

    Lua Nascimento i get it that we as African descendants want to lay claim as the first but we must remember not to throw out all factual information for beliefs.
    many black people have a strong belief in one author like Diop and tend to not research other sources.
    to me Africa is just a large land mass with different groups of people who reside in it, they are not all the same people or practice the same customs so its not logical to group them all as one. melanin or lack of is not the sole criteria for an african, its more complex than that

  6. Shawn Mc I respect any point of view as long as it respect all others too. Its not serious to consider eurocentric academic data true, and Diop not. Diop has worked throughout his life with factual research, much as Dr. Yosef Ben Jochannan, Jonh Henrik Clarke, and Ivan Van Sertima, and much more of researchers from African Descent and point of view. If someone don't like an afrocentric approach that's not problem, but affirming that this approach is not factual but based on believes, and then saying that several civilizations developed independently without any database is at least hypocrite.
    I cited the sources: Manetho's History of Egypt, the geological analisys of the time of the Sphinx and the accounts of Herodotus and I can add also the accounts of Diodorus (also a greek visitor) about the anteriority of Black Civilizations considering all the others. Where are your sources for saying that poligenese is a fact?
    And also who said that melanin is the only criteria to define african descent besides you?
    Melanin is key to understand and track the ancestors of all humankind, and Black People specifically, but I know that craneology, features and other demographic traits are necessary to look at race. But one thing doesn't erase the other.
    Last but not least, I don't think we must have a response for everything ultimately, but we must base our believes on solid data to be consider. And today we don't have any solidier data than Kemet/Kamit archeological and written material in terms of civilization seniority and, than Lucy's skull in terms of Humanid seniority. And they are both on account of Africa. That is the fact.

  7. Mike Forester says:

    Anytime I think of an ancient North African, I don't think of the present Caucasian population. I think of US.

  8. Carl Sharp says:

    AND YOU SAY THAT, TO SAY WHAT

  9. Heru Salmon says:

    Shawn Mc No such thing as sumerian. No they didn't had a civilization prior before egypt. kushite/Egyptians civilization the whole of mesopatamia.

  10. Heru Salmon says:

    Shawn Mc No such thing as sumerian. No they didn't had a civilization prior before egypt. kushite/Egyptians civilization the whole of mesopatamia.

  11. Shawn Mc says:

    Heru Salmon yes there were in modern day iraq and kuwait
    http://www.ancient.eu/sumer/

  12. Theodora Anagor says:

    The term Sun Saharan African was coined by white supremacists, and if you knew what you were actually talking about you would know the further soth you got in Africa the more concentrated the African part of their genome is. The more East North and West the less concentrated. West Africans are called Afro Asiatics because subsequent from leaving South Africa into Eat Africa (The middle East, they migrated into North Africa into what is now Egypt, through various issues migrated to West Africa. The reason why they "Sub-Saharan" African is because they are related to the people the group who migrated East via the horn of Africa, they all lived in isolation. Your explanation does not make sense, in fact it is a shambles.

  13. Theodora Anagor says:

    The term Sun Saharan African was coined by white supremacists, and if you knew what you were actually talking about you would know the further soth you got in Africa the more concentrated the African part of their genome is. The more East North and West the less concentrated. West Africans are called Afro Asiatics because subsequent from leaving South Africa into Eat Africa (The middle East, they migrated into North Africa into what is now Egypt, through various issues migrated to West Africa. The reason why they "Sub-Saharan" African is because they are related to the people the group who migrated East via the horn of Africa, they all lived in isolation. Your explanation does not make sense, in fact it is a shambles.

  14. Theodora Anagor says:

    Lua Nascimento Is that why the remains of a 200,000 year old city and a goldmine of the same age were found in South Africa, Egypt was not the only empire in Africa.

  15. Theodora Anagor says:

    Lua Nascimento Is that why the remains of a 200,000 year old city and a goldmine of the same age were found in South Africa, Egypt was not the only empire in Africa.

  16. Theodora Anagor says:

    Lucy was not a Homo Sapien. She was a Australopithecus afarensis.

  17. Theodora Anagor says:

    Lucy was not a Homo Sapien. She was a Australopithecus afarensis.

  18. Darwinism can not be abandoned how can you explain our differences (race) without mutation/evolution?

  19. Glyne Dawson says:

    I am just a man: you are just a woman. The problem with mankind is ethos, not race.
    All of us have contributed to the species; we are the species The question of race becomes a question of braggadocio. Who is the superior one? Who is the great inventor of technological instruments? Who has the heel on whose neck? Namely, we are in a foolish race to destruction.

  20. Kwamla Hesse says:

    @ Jonathian Lee Few.

    Look around you and into the sky at night. We cannot pretend we live in isolation around an isolated star we call our sun. There are millions, billions, trillions etc, etc of other stars in our immediate galaxy, universe, multiverse etc,. To pretend they do not exist or support other forms of life like our own is like wanting to believe in fairy tales as a child. Abandoning theories of Darwinian evolution is no different!

  21. Here's the caption for the supposedly Chinese women on page six:

    "SISTERS OF A REMOTE TIBETAN NUNNERY IN WIGS, BEADS AND BRACELETS.
    It is rare indeed for such folk to see a camera. Living in complete isolation in an isolated land, difficult of access, the nuns of Tibet's religious houses have perforce to keep themselves strictly to themselves. The aged women wearing caps are lay sisters, old almost beyond humanity and inhumanly dirty. The rest are full-fledged nuns. These must shave their heads and assume great mop-like wigs. The largest of these matted coverings conceals the bald head of the abbess seated in the centre and wearing at her throat a charm-box studded with turquoises ".

    Source:
    THE SECRET MUSEUM OF MANKIND.
    Volume 3
    Page 84.

Leave a Reply

Back to top