Can you elaborate? What I've read from him seems fairly reasonable, but I am open to updating my model.

I wouldn't have said "shit source", but I think he's better viewed as a reasonable populariser than a proper source. He is up with the literature (in the sense that the day after a new paper is published, he blogs about it), but he's not an authority in any way, and some of what he writes about e.g. the gendered aspect of IE migrations is a bit florid and unsupported by facts, as far as I can tell. You'd never find a reputable scientist in the field (lets say someone from Reich or Willerslev's labs) pushing lines like that.

Regarding the Out of Africa (OoA) model, that is definitely still the consensus model. What is becoming clearer is that subsequent to the OoA event, there was substantial admixture within OoA populations, backflow into Africa, and introgression from Archaic Humans (i.e. interbreeding with Neanderthals etc). Razib refers to this as the "Braided streams" model, rather than a model where populations split and then remained isolated.

The real revolution in understanding seems to me to be the role played by human migrations in hte formation of modern populations (i.e. the refutation of the "pots not people" view popular since the 60s.

Not GP, but a brief search turned up this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2015/03/...

He's definitely a shit source that comes from "racial realist" fringe.