Hi Total Science,
As I understand things, and I keep my eye on this subject, the experts date the appearance of anatomically modern humans to between 100,000 and 200,000 years ago. They then have their little arguments between themselves as to what constitutes 'modern' in the sense of levels of sophistication, e.g. technology and social organisation etc. These dates change on an almost monthly basis but are always in nice round figures.
Up until fairly recently, said experts believed that homo saps superceded neanderthals. But then they found evidence that the two co-existed for a period. So now they think that homo saps were responsible for the demise of the neanderthals, either through being smarter and better organised or by carrying diseases out of Africa and into Europe etc (homo sap being immune but neanderthal being new to the disease). There are other scenarios too.
I think I'm correct in saying that the reason the experts 'know' that humans emerged from Africa is because the earliest remains have come from there. I'll not insult your intelligence by stating the obvious flaw in that logic (I'm assuming you are over five years old).
I'm not quite sure what you are referring to in Q2. hat do you mean by 'evolutionary apologist'?
There are Darwinists and there are Neo-Darwinists but I don't really know what the differences are between the two (I tar 'em both with same brush). Evolutionary theory in biology is like the Big Bang in cosmology, you have to subscribe to it or you are gone.