Am i reading this wrong or didnt homosapians not descend

>>9045521
Yes.

>>9045540
yes im reading this wrong?

>>9045549
Both. Depends. It's complicated.

>Debate also continues about the classification, ancestry, and progeny of Homo erectus, especially vis-à-vis Homo ergaster, with two major positions: 1) H. erectus is the same species as H. ergaster, and thereby H. erectus is a direct ancestor of the later hominins including Homo heidelbergensis, Homo neanderthalensis, and Homo sapiens; or, 2) it is in fact an Asian species distinct from African H. ergaster.

>>9045557
oh thats intresting, thanks for the info

>>9045521

>Neanderthals
>Europe only

Okay, this was made by a complete retard. If they got such a basic fact wrong it's fair to assume the rest is nonsense too.
Better just delete it and forget you saw it.

>>9045585
oh really, i found this on the wikipedia page on human evolution

>>9045588

So it was made by some hobbyist?

File: peniscactus02.jpg (247KB, 1280x1024px) Image search: [Google]

247KB, 1280x1024px

>>9045521
Homo erectus became Homo flacidus then could not reproduce anymore, then became extinct.

Then They could not even compete.

File: german.png (76KB, 394x476px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 394x476px

G*rmans descend from homo erectus.

>>9045521
Denisovans ... missing? Old diagram?

>>9045585
I think that just means where admixture with H sapiens occurred?

>>9045595
Not necessarily. BBC News has a lot of coverage about prehistoric humans and ancestry and my impression is that the origins of Homo Sapiens is continuously changing.

Neanderthals are now so rehabilitated that once can even state Africans have some Neanderthal genes without being crucified by the PC crowd. This is because these genes have been beneficial.

Also Denisovans are a relatively new branch of humanity and new knowledge is continuously being published.