I am not the type of individual who has the time to watch an hour long video.
If you would be so kind as to provide a synopsis of the video, since you obviously watched it, that would be great.
OK ... there are actually a total of 5 videos, this one being the one dealing with Africa (the earlier phase). Well we know more and more about Paleolithic humans and pre-humans, how there was more than one species, but we could interbreed. A bit like the fact that tigers and lions are clearly different but they can interbreed. Genetic studies as well as new fossils are making this a rapidly changing subject, just in the last 10 years. So basically, there were anatomically modern humans, in E Africa, as long as 200,000 years ago. The Sahara was wet, so they were also found in N W Africa at that same time. But genetic studies show, that there are some Africans and African-Americans today, that have Y-chromosome and M-DNA that is over 300,000 years old.
So in middle Paleolithic times, there were not only new humans, but pre-humans, all living in Africa at the same time. This is not surprising, since there the Homo Erectus came out of Africa way before that, to Europe and Asia. There had to be some proto-humans living in Africa after the first migration out. That is what these rare Africans/African-Americans are, from equatorial Africa .. they are hybrid humans. The people most likely to be pure, are the Africans who stayed in Africa, almost everyone else outside of Africa is a hybrid. The inverse of Aryan race mixing theory ;-) The Nazi Aryans in fact have the highest amount of Neanderthal ancestry (appropriately named after a find site in Germany).
This same thing happened, during the time when the new humans also left Africa, like their predecessors long before ... and migrated all over Europe and Asia. Turns out that almost all humans are hybrids outside of Africa ... we are like "ligers" we are mixed species, not pure. Europeans specifically are a mix of new humans and Neanderthals. There were at least 3 species of porto-humans in Asia, when the new humans arrived, and new humans interbred with them too. This hybridization led to the absorption, not killing off, of the proto-humans. We intermarried and out bred them (this is also how the Indo-Europeans colonized Europe). Hunter-gather warfare could occur between any two groups, but not on racist difference ... because clearly often new humans and porto-humans not only got along, they intermarried.
This hybridization has been shown to have helped new humans adapt more rapidly to the various environments, the proto-humans had colonized for many millennia. For example European skin come from the Neanderthals. The new humans who came to Europe were dark skinned, and light skin is an advantage ... there hasn't been enough time, since new humans came into Europe, for Europeans to evolve light skin by themselves. It is also thought for example, that the inter-breeding of Denisovans and new humans led to the high altitude tolerance of the Tibetans. Denisovans and Neanderthals were both derivative of Homo Erectus (see Peking Man). And there may even have still been ancestral Homo Erectus in China, only 100,000 years ago, when the first new humans arrived in China, that the new humans interbred with.
Racist theory is exactly opposite of what actually happened, and it actually injurious because of inbreeding and preventing useful hybridization. Though other studies have shown, the much later superiority of ME and Egyptian people, Indian and Chinese people .. is due to the practicality of agriculture in those locations, not due to any genetic benefit.