The Incredible Human Journey
Dr Alice Roberts travels the globe to discover the incredible story of how humans left Africa to colonize the world.
How did we get here? Following a trail of clues from the latest scientific research, Dr Alice Roberts re-traces the greatest ever journey taken by our ancestors.
Thousands of years ago one small group of our species, Homo sapiens, crossed out of Africa and into the unknown. Their descendants faced baking deserts, sweat-soaked jungles and frozen wildernesses and risked everything on the vast empty ocean.
Within 60,000 years they colonized the whole world... How did they do it? Why do we, their descendants all look so different? And what did we have that meant we were the only human species to survive?
Using the evidence from genetics, fossils, archaeology and climatology, Dr Alice Roberts uncovers five epic routes our ancestors took across the globe and the obstacles and brutal challenges they encountered along the way.
It reveals how our family tree grew and spread out across the world, producing all the variety we see in the human species today – but despite all that diversity, Alice reveals how astonishingly closely related we all are.
This playlist bellow contains all 5 episodes from this series: Out of Africa, Asia, Europe, Australia, and The Americas.
Alice Roberts' coverage is excruciatingly annoying. Her perky attitude and voice are so annoying. Her presentation of facts and story through locale shoots and imposing herself as some Indiana Jones type great white hope figure is annoying. The whole thing reeks of colonialism, and white British woman privilege. She seems ill equipped compared to peers in both the scientific and journalistic community. Why is the story being told as though she is an investigator n the ground when she is discovering nothing and finding nothing that hasn't already been discovered, explained, or unexplained? It's very childish and cookie-cutter style of presentation of facts. The whole thing seems like an excuse for her and her crew to go on a trip around the world on the BBC dime. Going to people around these parts then footnoting it with over-narration of random facts or hyperbolic speculation of one-sided viewpoints, isn't a good way to tell the complicated scientific story. Furthermore, the whole endeavour is to prove the Out of Africa theory, when in actuality there has become growing evidence (or convoluted confusion) that either the Multiple Regional Evolution is true, or that there is a combination of happenings and intersections of possibilities. And, most importantly, the fact that genetic make ups show some African descent doesn't prove Africa as the source, nor can genes go backwards to all specific time intervals and trace in a linear fashion micro origins (i.e. if millions of years species were from Indonesia in one generation or even two, then came to Africa for 500 generations, and then back to Indonesia for the rest of time, there is no certainty that genetics can pin point which came first; and, being homosapien species can be proven but linear migrations in genetics can't....only fossil discoveries and radio carbon data can come close, but even then it's not exact either. If areas of migration intermingle but only the African way out of migration happened in a later stage that our records can actually prove, then all that was before is near impossible to prove. I think there were multiple evolutionary developments. One in the Americas, Europe, East Asia, Indonesia, and Africa. What stages came first is unbeknownst to me. I believe that these multiple developments migrated and intermingled with each other as homo-sapiens and as other homo species in early stages as well. Bottom line: there is much to be known and unknown for millennia to come. To be so certain goes against the scepticism of most scientists who vigorously test and search truth. Roberts is also a devout atheist so it is surprising to see such a lack of scepticism. Yet I then realized she WANTS to propagate a fixed 'one-is-all' theory to combat sceptics of evolution since evolution is her main ingredient to her devout atheism and scepticism of God as creator. I am also against God theory but I am not for replacing God Creator theory with God Evolution theory. Nor does evolution counter creation, and vice versa. Some other agenda seemed to be luring on her part. The entire show was informed and shaped by her biases and her choices of stylization and presentation of facts and story. Anything that tries unite all things into a neat package should be suspect. God nor evolutionary process can't possibly be understood by us even it were all true, and that that truth would become more and more a confluence of multiple truths forming our perception as a whole. This show doesn't present other scientists alternative theories, nor the debunking of many of the assumed taken-as-is facts by Roberts. She is a glorified tv talking head with a cute smile. She is no different then the dolts in American news who backed by a degree and privileged upbringing and experiences and network of power, they get to host important things with zero credibility and ability all for the sake of ratings and image.
Why did they leave Africa in the first place ?
Incredible that people (i.c. Alice Roberts) keep repeating the old savanna idea without scientific evidence. According to all fossil, paleo-environmental, physiological etc.data, our ancestors during the Ice Ages (Pleistocene Homo) did not run over open plains, sweating water + salt (both scarce in savannas), but simply followed the coasts & rivers (at least as far as Java, Georgia, Turkana & Algeria 1.8 mill.yrs ago), beach-combing, diving & wading bipedally for littoral, shallow aquatic & waterside foods. For recent evidence on human evolution, google e.g. researchGate marc verhaegen
Pardon my sarcasm, but this series almost has a Lonely Planet feel to it: 'Alice Roberts, our sexy MD and part-time anthropologist, takes us on a global journey in search of the roots of our species.' Unfortunately, we are left with poor science and scenes that smack of racism and/or 'specism.' The Neanderthals are misrepresented, and I was horrified at her saying that they far too 'ugly' for her to consider as a sexual mate. In reality, it is highly doubtful that looks would have deterred interbreeding between the two humanoids, especially young males with females. The jury is still out on this issue, in fact, but the most plausible answer to the riddle of why there is a lack of Neanderthal DNA in modern home sapiens is because there were very few Neanderthals living in Europe, even at their peak. It is quite conceivable that the two groups rarely crossed paths. The Neanderthals may have become extinct without being 'outcompeted' by humans anyway. We just don't know. The homo erectus theory in China is also glibly dismissed despite archeological evidence (no DNA evidence yet) that homo erectus may have contribute its genes to the homo sapiens gene pool as well. There is no evidence at all however to support a separate evolution. From a dark perspective, modern humans capture, show off, and domestic wild animals all the time- why wouldn't they have exhibited similar behavior toward fellow hominids? Humans are extremely curious, and you can bet that where they met other hominids both fighting and other interactions occurred. Some beneficial for both, but often not (look at how so recently and even today human tribes have enslaved each other). Whatever the case, fighting and capturing, or cooperating and absorbing, it is puerile and unprofessional for a scientist to act grossed out about having sex with a Neanderthal. Grow up please! I am an 'ugly' man by the way (though not Neanderthal!), yet I married a 'beautiful' wife and we have two offspring. Nature certainly didn't disfavor 'ugliness' in our case.
Well done Alice. This series give knowledge & wisdom as to who we are, where we came from & our place in the family of life. I have watched it several times to really absorb its significance. The jig saw puzzle eof the nature of humanity now has a major chunk revealed. Thankyou Alice.
Wait, the Red Sea parted, and one tribe left Africa and went on to colonise the world?
There are 6 types of evo. One of which has been proven fact. All other types are just the same as creationism, they're a religion... Get over it.
That was fairly enjoyable. Would have been more enjoyable without the Hans Zimmer rip-off music blaring in places to ad dramatic effect but that's just a personal taste thing i guess.
Alice Roberts is good looking, thrives in the outdoors and has a bit of spunk that comes across well on the screen. I watched the entire series and it was well done.
just simply enjoy the miracles of earth to be so diverse and always changing to let life evolve. If the forest never grew the people wouldn't have traveled and if the water hadn't moved there wouldn't have been a path for the people to follow!! Amazing things happen to this earth every day so believe in that! Why are religious groups not the first people to stand up to environmental issues that are stopping natural miracles from happening and killing life, we are destroying the things we need to live, water, air, food, no god is going to bring them back once they are gone!
I'd prefer to watch a documentary that flows from facts and evidence then some conrived "adventure story" about Super Woman discovering the secrets of life.
Why can't we leave religion out of this? The two theories CAN work together and it doesn't have to be so cut-an-dried as creationism or evolution. Why are we as humans so arrogant as to think we even know which one it is or if it's both? Just enjoy an amazing documentary for what it is and stop arguing about this.
are humans that amazing ? post your coomet on facebook page super scary
worth 5 hours of my time and I didnt even fall asleep as is usually the case with docs - geez my life sucks :)
each episode was interesting and insightful - irregardless of your beliefs, cultures, values or interests...
thx 2 alice,vlado and our ancestors
GREAT Documentary Weldon BBC, Can someone tel me what is the name main tune at the start of episodes ? Thanks
Come here in Sindh - Moen Jo Daro and c how they were living - you will be amazed
dont u think it's about time u did get involed
Brilliant documentary with amazing EVIDENCE of the original of humans. Please spread this documentary film to all the Christians and Muslims in the world in order to stop the virus of Christian and Muslim faiths that destroying our humanity.
Amazing proven fact backed by evidence of Science! Brilliant documentary. I highly recommend for all the Christians and Muslim to watch this documentary!
pan thor you have managed to make yourself look even more a drooling half-wit that normal...what is the secret of your success!?
Not quite sure why the three main guys of this site would pay attention to "Pan Thor"...without attention he would have vanished into thin air.
I suppose we all have to have our fun....count on 50 4 40 to bring reality back in the discussion.
I got a huge cold...to top the wave i am on. I am trying hard to not sneeze on my screen so no one catch this!
You are like a little yapping dog :)
Not obvious to some :titter:
A bad loser? Anyone with half a brain could see I was on the wind up from the outset you simpleton. You should feel ashamed for allowing yourself to be drawn in.
Let's have a look at the scores before we put this to bed.
Pan Thor 10/10
Absolutely flawless display of Internet ownage. Controlled the others from post one and made them dance like glassy-eyed marionettes.
Bracketing monkeys with black people +3
Calling Admin a paedo three times + 4(3)
Pretty much a case study in what's wrong with 99% of atheists. Just parroting a few cliches does NOT give you the intellectual high ground. Creationist nutjobs claim the moral high ground in precisely the same way.
Calling me a bad loser after I have clearly won outright -5
A spirited and engaging start tailed off toward the end (may not necessarily be a bad thing (see below).
Massive fact-filled post with both questions AND answers +2
Demanding answers to the above +1
Withdrawing when my wind-up became impossible to deny +1
Oh....where do I start? The very epitome of what is wrong with the post-Dawkins atheist. I lost count of how many times he said he was 'clever' and 'scientific' while frantically cutting and pasting. Was he posting in a dressing gown? Did he have a semi-boner throughout? Alas I think the answer is 'yes' to both counts.
Not knowing the difference between 'few' and 'little' (if English is, as I believe, your second language please discount this rating)-2
Trying to pass off PBS primers (lol) as his own original thoughts -3
Being a humourless bellend from start to finish -4
Claiming victory at the end -4
I am literally speechless. :)
Unfortunately not. You came across badly here, I'm afraid.
Quoting a PBS primer (for a 25 second minivid for kids about the Cambrian Explosion) and trying to pass it off as a peer-reviewed piece from Berkeley was a notable low point.
I would have mentioned it at the time but i wanted to keep you on track with the frankly hilarious Applegate.
I believe that @pan thor was trolling, should of known with his pan thor handle.
Wonder what website he got kicked off? or maybe it was TDF website under a different handle HMM?
Edit: Probably was a guy named "Chris" some here know who I mean.
@ Epicurus & Vlatko
*raises hands in mock surrender*
Let this be a lesson to you in the potential wiliness of the Creationist nutjob. Stay on your toes, men, and NEVER allow them to evade a point.
Stay chilly. ;)
"now one thing the creationsit will ask is "why were there so little animals before the cambrian and then so many after"
Not this one, buddy. I would say 'few'. ;)
Of all the fantastic elements of the story of Adam and Eve (Adam being made out of mud, Eve being created out of one of his ribs, talking snakes etc) why are you fixating on whether or not it was an apple or a plum Eve ate?
I am quite prepared to concede that the story of the Garden of Eden is allegorical. :/
Let's play.....WHO SAID THIS ABOUT THE CAMBRIAN EXPLOSION? :)
"... [W]e find many of them already in an advanced state of evolution, the very first time they appear. It is as though they were just planted there, without any evolutionary history."
Silly me. I thought the 'theory' of evolution was about gradual incremental changes to species. I didn't realise you evolutionary THEORISTS had co-opted massive and sudden and wholly inexplicable change as well.
My bad. ;)
My apologies. I must have somehow got the wrong end of the stick when you wrote "where in the bible does it say anything about an apple?"
"I've responded to you about the Cambrian Explosion below (track the conversation)"
"I couldn't say anything more on Cambrian Explosion than what is already said in any good book or school on the subject."
Trust me...I have read all about the Cambrian Explosion. The reason I asked YOU to reconcile it with evolution is because I don't think you have read much about it at all.
This is a common problem with arguing with the Dawkins clones. If Richard hasn't addressed the issue they literally have nothing to say on the topic :/
"where in the bible does it say anything about an apple?"
Song of Solomon
As an apple tree among the trees of the forest, so is my beloved among the young men. With great delight I sat in his shadow, and his fruit was sweet to my taste.
Who is that coming up from the wilderness, leaning on her beloved? Under the apple tree I awakened you. There your mother was in labor with you; there she who bore you was in labor.
I say I will climb the palm tree and lay hold of its fruit. Oh may your breasts be like clusters of the vine, and the scent of your breath like apples,
Sustain me with raisins; refresh me with apples, for I am sick with love.
The vine dries up; the fig tree languishes. Pomegranate, palm, and apple, all the trees of the field are dried up, and gladness dries up from the children of man.
A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in a setting of silver.
I know what my username means. :/
Stop cluttering this discussion please.
What are you talking about now?
I genuinely have no idea. :/
How are my panties in a knot? I am effortlessly batting away your slow balls while posing you both questions that you either ignore or try to deflect.
You really add nothing to this debate. Why don't you just pootle off in your tiny car and and squirt someone in the eye with your novelty flower?
You are so infantile i can hardly bring myself to respond to you.
"Don't use the bible as a reference" ???
I am not allowed to use books to back up my points now? Halfwit. How about you forget everything you read in 'The God Delusion' then? You utter, utter circus clown.
And I told you that Hinduism isn't a serious religion.
As an aside I would like to add that it is my belief that all the trippy Indian 'Gods' were the result of the practice of drinking 'soma' in that region of the world (a brew of poppy seeds, ephedra and cannabis).
Now back to the point, eh? The Cambrian Explosion. Kindly reconcile it with evolution.
Are you (a Dawkins-clone Darwinist) seriously resorting to asking me to prove a negative.
Are you Googling 'Cambrian Explosion'? Let me know and I'll start dinner. ;)
"I say there is karma and reincarnation. You don't believe in that? Prove me I'm wrong."
I take it you accept there is 'good' science and 'bad' science? By bad I mean the lunatics who claim that aliens built the pyramids (see left ===> ) and alchemy etc.
Similarly there is 'bad' religion. Hinduism, while admirable in its tenets of non-violence, generosity and compassion is not to be taken literally. The idea of a four-armed elephant man / god is simply absurd.
Jesus was a REAL man living in a REAL place.
Let's try not to purposefully muddy the waters to score cheap points, shall we?
Again...you seem to think that both sides of the debate must adhere to a different set of rules.
Why precisely can I not say that God exists for me? Does the theory of evolution not exist for you? Can you prove that God doesn't exist?
And don't bother with that 'proving a negative' nonsense. Your kind have been hiding behind that for too long.
So your theory of evolution might not be similarly trashed in the future because......?
Oh right... because you believe in it. *slow handclap*
I label you thus: Someone who cannot form a reasonable argument to back up their beliefs.
Why can't you people engage in a debate with people who disagree with you without resorting to insults?
You are another person who cannot form a logical argument.
Let's call flat earth THEORY A
and Creationism THEORY B
and evolution THEORY C
You are saying that because theory A has been disproved, theory B will also be disproved. What about theory C?
Just rehash something about a 'Spaghetti Monster'. At least then I can simply ignore your infantile comments.
I only watched the first part of this blasphemous nonsense before turning it off in disgust. Why do so many 'scientists' feel justified in trashing the beliefs of billions of people by presenting their flimsy evidence as some sort of PROOF that God's children are descended from monkeys and blacks???
Don't forget your sunscreen. I hear it's hot in HELL.
I fully regret starting to read the comments after I watched this documentary.. anyone thinking of doing so, I advise you to not waste your time. While not taking too seriously the style or personality of the narrator, I believe this was a very well done documentary. Also, that the evidence speaks for itself. What you take out of it, that's yours. I'll leave it at that.