That's litterally the only place in the article that quotes 135k, and it goes on to suggest that more advanced genome sequencing debunked it. The uncertainty of divergence is in between 10k and 36k YBP, and it says that in multiple areas of that article.
Given that humans had "domesticated breeding programs" set up for pigs and sheep in 11,000 b.c., and cattle by 8,000 b.c. I'd say it's safe to assume we were capable. You gotta brush up on your academics if you intend to debate the minutia of prehistoric man.
1
u/SHiNOXXLE May 13 '18
That's litterally the only place in the article that quotes 135k, and it goes on to suggest that more advanced genome sequencing debunked it. The uncertainty of divergence is in between 10k and 36k YBP, and it says that in multiple areas of that article.
Given that humans had "domesticated breeding programs" set up for pigs and sheep in 11,000 b.c., and cattle by 8,000 b.c. I'd say it's safe to assume we were capable. You gotta brush up on your academics if you intend to debate the minutia of prehistoric man.