To add comments or start new threads please go to the full version of: ORIGIN OF WHITE PEOPLE
PhysForum Science, Physics and Technology Discussion Forums > General Sci-Tech Discussions > Puzzling questions
Pages: 1, 2

ianshive
I'm curious to know the current, widely accepted reason for the seperation of races - i.e. why caucasians have been seperated so greatly from those of darker decent (black, asian, etc.). To my knowledge, the currently accepted reason is that we all originated out of Africa as darkly pigmented beings. As some of our ancestors moved north, pigmentation became lighter due to a lack of Vitamin D and other UV related syndromes. Thus, spawned the lighter race we know as caucasians.

However, I have a major problem with this. Currently, the Inuit and other tribes that have for centuries if not millenia that have lived in the far north of Sibera, etc. are still of dark pigmentation.

Some theories - and I hate to suggest this - abound that the caucasian race could have originated from a mixed breeding or settlment of extraterrestrials that mingled into our genes seamlessly overtime. It would also align with some native american mythologies that suggest an underground race (the "greys") mingled with people long ago. Do we clearly know the seperation of races or is this topic still somewhat open scientifically?
photojack
I think I can solve your major problem. The Inuit and all native American peoples populating the American continents migrated relatively recently, (20,00 to 50,000 years ago + or -) by way of the Bering land bridge exposed during glacial periods from Asia. DNA studies and cladistics have answered most of the questions of when, where and how far back most races differentiated from the original stock. I would definitely not look for mixed breeding with extraterrestrials or to mythology for any coherent explanation. Keep up the inquisitive mind, but focus on the plausible.
okp
If I am not mistaken, most of the currently recognized "Racial" characteristics developed after man had spread throughout the world. In other words, our ancestors did not look African or what Americans consider to be Black. Rather, the common ancestor of all the "races" would not be recognizable as belonging to any modern "race". Features that we typically associate with being African, such as the dark skin, or that we identify as European like light skin did not develop until after this initial radiation.

Also, you will notice that I use the word race in quotation marks. The so called races of humans are really false divisions. There is no scientifically valid reason to divide us into races. In light of modern genetic evidence, it is clear that we are much more related than previously believed. In other words, at the genetic level, where it really counts, there is no race. It is culture rather than race that separates us.
gmilam
This one's fairly easy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skin_color

ianshive
Right. Genetically though we are similiar to chimps, too, yet there are obvious differences. I agree, we are all very similiar on a fundamental level, but really skin color is something that develops over time under the guise of evolution - or if we think of it - darwin's "survival of the fittest" - but really - would a white skinned person be the fittest? You are more exposed to the elements, suceptible to skin cancers, lack warmth and protection and as one of the first caucasians, you'd have been somewhat ostracized.

As for looking to mythologies - I agree we need to be careful - but I wouldn't be surprised if somewhere in all of it there could be some merit...

thanks everyone for the replies
Nick
There are some muslims that believe that white people were made by a mad scientist in Africa in order to destroy the black people.

Funny stuff. It just shows what we are dealing with.
MITCH RAEMSCH

AlphaNumeric
QUOTE (Nick+Dec 12 2006, 09:37 PM)
There are some muslims that believe that white people were made by a mad scientist in Africa in order to destroy the black people.

Do you have a citation for this?
QUOTE (Nick+Dec 12 2006, 09:37 PM)
Funny stuff. It just shows what we are dealing with.
And theres some Christians who think that atheists are a sect of Islam!

There's stupid people in every religious denomination. wink.gif
N O M
QUOTE (Nick+Dec 12 2006, 08:37 PM)
Funny stuff. It just shows what we are dealing with.

Yes, an idiot - you.

It's the sort of nonsensical response that can be expected from Nick as he tries to lower the intelligence level of a discussion to one he can understand. At least his caps-lock isn't stuck on yet.

Islam is probably one of the religions that is least concerned about race. They do unfortunately have a few of their own idiots.
gmilam
QUOTE (AlphaNumeric+Dec 12 2006, 02:55 PM)
QUOTE (Nick+Dec 12 2006, 02:37 PM)
There are some muslims that believe that white people were made by a mad scientist in Africa in order to destroy the black people.
Do you have a citation for this?

Amazingly, some people do believe this.

Yakub
N O M
QUOTE (AlphaNumeric+Dec 12 2006, 08:55 PM)
There's stupid people in every religious denomination.

Not just religions.

Let's take a random example of an internet community. How about a physics forum. Even this group of people with an interest in physics might be expected to have members on the left of the bell curve. Let's pick one from the dumbest of the dumb - hey look it's Nick.
N O M
QUOTE (gmilam+Dec 12 2006, 09:20 PM)
Amazingly, some people do believe this.

Yakub

While you are there, follow through to the link on the Nation of Islam. They were a political group in the US opposed to the current oppresion of black people. It started in the 1930s, at time there was an idiot in Europe who trying his own experiments in eugenics.
Doesn't excuse them from being nutters though.
gmilam
QUOTE (N O M+Dec 12 2006, 03:50 PM)
While you are there, follow through to the link on the Nation of Islam. They were a political group in the US opposed to the current oppresion of black people. It started in the 1930s, at time there was an idiot in Europe who trying his own experiments in eugenics.
Doesn't excuse them from being nutters though.

Never said they were sane, or that they represent mainline Muslim belief...

But, for once, Nick is right and we should acknowledge that. wink.gif
okp
QUOTE (ianshive+Dec 12 2006, 05:44 PM)
Right. Genetically though we are similar to chimps, too, yet there are obvious differences. I agree, we are all very similar on a fundamental level, but really skin color is something that develops over time under the guise of evolution - or if we think of it - Darwin's "survival of the fittest" - but really - would a white skinned person be the fittest? You are more exposed to the elements, susceptible to skin cancers, lack warmth and protection and as one of the first Caucasians, you'd have been somewhat ostracized.

As for looking to mythologies - I agree we need to be careful - but I wouldn't be surprised if somewhere in all of it there could be some merit...

thanks everyone for the replies

Your understanding of genetics and evolution seems to be incomplete. As far as chimps go, they are out closest relatives but we are still far more closely related to one another. Of the Primates, chimps and gorillas are our closest living relatives. In fact, chimps are more genetically similar to humans than they are to gorillas. However, within in the chimp species, there is a tremendous amount of variation genetically, enough to even have true races or subspecies. They are a old species and are really not that closely related for a species. Humans on the other hand, are much more closely related on a genetic level to one another.

Fitness, in evolutionary terms is commonly misunderstood. Fitness does not necessarily equate to physical fitness (as in faster, stronger, smarter). Fitness in evolutionary terms is a measure of reproductive success. The more offspring you have that survive to produce offspring of their own, the more fitness you have. Stronger and faster does not always increase evolutionary fitness. With evolution, nature makes due with whatever works, and it is not always predictable as to what will provide fitness, or more offspring. For example, humans can carry a deadly disease known as sickle-cell anemia. If you get a double shot of the recessive gene for it, you will get SCA and without treatment, you will die. However, if you are a carrier of the gene you will not be affected the SCA, you will also have immunity to malaria. So, SCA which is a deadly genetic disease, also provides evolutionary fitness to people living in areas where malaria is traditionally a threat. As you can see, it is not so easy to say that this or that trait should or should not provide fitness.

Also, the transition from dark skin to light skin would have been more gradual, not likely a sudden appearance of European features, that would get a person ostracized.
N O M
QUOTE (gmilam+Dec 12 2006, 10:36 PM)
But, for once, Nick is right and we should acknowledge that.

Now I really do feel like an idiot, but fair dos...

Nick had a point.
Your fellow human (yfh)
What skin-color do most apes have? wink.gif
kaneda
Yet another argument against "Intelligent Design":

Why do people who live in cold countries have white skins which reflect away the needed heat while people who live in hot climates have dark skins so can absorb more heat?
AlpineR
The explanation I've heard involves vitamin D. Humans synthesize this essential vitamin by exposure of the skin to the ultraviolet rays in sunlight. Pigmented skin blocks these rays and reduces damage from sunlight. In sunny areas (nearer the equator) enough ultraviolet light still gets through to synthesize vitamin D. In less sunny areas (northern latitudes) dark skin would block too much light, so lighter skin is necessary.

The importance of synthesizing vitamin D while protecting skin from sun damage outweighs the possible benefits of heat absorption/reflection. Besides, in cold climates humans wear clothing so the skin isn't exposed to sunlight anyway and dark skin would do no good.
pauldentler
I guess I've never understood the logic that having "white skin" has something to do with "white snow" in the northern climes. The DNA studies I've seen tend to prove that white Europeans migrated from Northern Europe & spread southward after the Ice Ages 10,000 years ago then mixing with other races occurred, no evidence I've seen that they were ever in Africa prior to that & migrated to the north. New DNA haplogrouping by race shows no contact between northern Europeans & Africans indicating they lived in isolation to one another for a longer time than they have not lived in isolation.

The human body, being amazingly adaptable, could just as well have put black skinned humans in isolation in northern Europe and their DNA would have dictated they would stay black and they would have done just as well. It's your DNA that determines your skin color, not the climate one lives in, or the amount of vitamin D you absorb through your skin. Gee, would you suggest that if I don't like my skin color that I should either take vitamin D pills, or if I want to go the other way on skin color that I should take "anti-vitamin D pills"? The whole issue about how the different races came into existence in different parts of the world needs to be "re-thunk", the present theories do not comport with the DNA evidence.
resuccess
This is a little off the rocker but it's kind crazy to think but i belive that in another 1000 years we may possible be all the same color. probably like a mocha skinned color.
swimmer
QUOTE (pauldentler+Dec 13 2006, 03:54 PM)
I guess I've never understood the logic that having "white skin" has something to do with "white snow" in the northern climes. The DNA studies I've seen tend to prove that white Europeans migrated from Northern Europe & spread southward after the Ice Ages 10,000 years ago then mixing with other races occurred, no evidence I've seen that they were ever in Africa prior to that & migrated to the north. New DNA haplogrouping by race shows no contact between northern Europeans & Africans indicating they lived in isolation to one another for a longer time than they have not lived in isolation. 

The human body, being amazingly adaptable, could just as well have put black skinned humans in isolation in northern Europe and their DNA would have dictated they would stay black and they would have done just as well. It's your DNA that determines your skin color, not the climate one lives in, or the amount of vitamin D you absorb through your skin. Gee, would you suggest that if I don't like my skin color that I should either take vitamin D pills, or if I want to go the other way on skin color that I should take "anti-vitamin D pills"?  The whole issue about how the different races came into existence in different parts of the world needs to be "re-thunk", the present theories do not comport with the DNA evidence.

are you a creationist or similar?
Hadra
Do you guys ever read books? Those things that come with hard ends and paper in the middle- They're full of excellent information and when read in great numbers one is capable of drawing his or her own conclusions!

Here is the official party line. Everyone currently alive can be traced to one particular geneological line of human beings that once lived on the east coast of Africa. Some of these fellows migrated northward over a very long period of time, which effectively isolates them from their point of departure. Now keep in mind these travels would have taken thousands of years, with people nesting in an area and moving onward. These humans produced far less melanin as time went on because they were hit by less and less solar radiation.

Those with less melanin production absorbed vitamin D more efficiently as these humans migrated, causing the ones with lighter skin to have a small albeit distinct advantage over those that did not. Now, since our human travellers would have had to settle down in areas and only some of them would continue northward, you would get a gradual 'whiteout' in skintones as the northward migration continued.

This phenomenon didn't just happen with people moving northward from Africa, it also occured in other regions line the sino-indonesian territories, where it becomes quite obvious that people who lived northward were lighter and people who moved southward were darker, etc.

Also, consider this- Our chimpanzee relatives generally have light pigmentation- Therefor it is a possibility we actually became dark and then unbecame dark when we weren't dealing with those pesky radioactives.
chrisrivos
I have my own theories about the origins of Northern Europeans. The Male Y chromosome carries stature and quantified skeletal structure information. Have a look at the thumb nails and fingers of your father and you will see the ancestrally recurring male bloodline correlation. Essentially we are all recurring incarnations of dad mummified in mum genes (sugar coating that can wash off with generations)
You cant make a silk purse out of a sows ear!.

The theories that Europeans came from Africa directly are difficult to believe. I think our male blood lines come from the regions of India and was a case of fairer skinned people moving north north west like through Pakistan Afghanistan Iran Iraq Greece Italy Germany Holland etc. When you have a look at the skeletal structure of some northern Europeans you can see that they are just a white wash of some southern European specimens wink.gif
fivedoughnut
QUOTE (resuccess+Dec 13 2006, 05:01 PM)
This is a little off the rocker but it's kind crazy to think but i belive that in another 1000 years we may possible be all the same color. probably like a mocha skinned color.

resuccess,

Yup, my conclusion too .... we'll probably all look chinese; however with genetic engineering / the technological snowball affect, the chances are we'll be totally unrecognizable i.e, polymorphic cyborg weirdo beings.
oracle1
i think of it like this....you can mix two dark people and get somone lighter but two light people don't produce someone darker. To think that our origins were dark and due to climate and other conditions became lighter through time is not far fetched to me.
Insyght
Interesting advertising Google pulled up for us:

Avoid skin cancer with self tanning Dermatologist recommend Fake Bake.

What on earth is fake bake?

oracle1
haha its the stuff the people who look orange at the beach wear.
theorist
White people are a direct result of a genetic mutation. The proof is in all of the white or yellow albino baby's that are being produced at a high rate in Africa by black African people. Albino baby's give us proof that the opposite of black is white. White people can not reproduce black babies nor brown baby's Therefore all color shades in humans are result of a mutation process beginning from black, to brown, to yellowish brown, to white. White people are at the end of the mutation in skin process. White people do not have melanin where as all of the other races on this planet do have melanin to some degree. The only way a white person can get melanin is to mix in with someone who already has the melanin and reproduce.

Because of the melanin factor, it has lead many people to considering white people as the end of the times sense they are at the end of the melanin genetic mutation, they in fact are symbolic to death of the human race and death of this planet. The proof of this is in how they have continuously exploited people of color to get to the top as the people who are on top of all economic affairs. White people have participated largely in slavery, colonization, the theft of land by the use of murder and total annilation. These people have created atomic bombs and nuclear deposits. These people and their genetic defect has caused them to have a anti social behavior Which is very destructive. They don't have the capacity to be objective about their self yet they are objective about everyone else. This is why they do actual human studies where they go into foreign countries which are not white countries to watch colored humans at their daily lives, white people are the only so called humans who study other humans. What are these alleged white humans trying to figure out about people who have melanin?

One must also consider that one needs melanin to be on earth because earth is where the sun rules. With out melanin, the sun will give you all kinds of skin problems which in many cases can result in death.
Resurebu
QUOTE (theorist+Dec 27 2006, 02:20 AM)
What are these alleged white humans trying to figure out about people who have melanin?


If white aliens from planet vitiligo came to earth to farm melanin, wouldn't the darker people still be enslaved in melanin factories while us pale-ians enjoyed and maintained Earth as it was back then?

Please tell me you dont have access to weapons?
Theorist
unsure.gif unsure.gif unsure.gif unsure.gif unsure.gif
Theorist
QUOTE (Resurebu+Dec 27 2006, 05:10 AM)
If white aliens from planet vitiligo came to earth to farm melanin, wouldn't the darker people still be enslaved in melanin factories while us pale-ians enjoyed and maintained Earth as it was back then?

Please tell me you dont have access to weapons?




Were you delivering sarcasm or a satire?


What do you think the palians have been doing? They have been going around the world manipulating their way into superior form. They pretend like they hate the opposing melanin people who they don't really hate but they want and need to mix in with. For them, mixing in with people who have melanin is like being washed in the blood of the lamb. In fact, the palians promote mixing in the media. You hardley if ever these days see romance movies that have black people loving black people unless it is some kind of comedy. The real love and romance movies always consist of a white woman and a Black, Hispanic or Asian man, mostly black though. They either mix in forcibly which took place during the enslavement of Black people and the take over of America. To this day, they find forms and ways to take over and when they do this, they mix in with whom ever it is they conquer.


You say you hope I don't have weapons, I think you better open your eyes because the palians already have weapons of mass destruction. You should have made your hope wish a long time ago. i am not the one you should be worried about in terms of owning weapons. tongue.gif
tikay
QUOTE (ianshive+Dec 11 2006, 03:23 PM)


Some theories - and I hate to suggest this - abound that the caucasian race could have originated from a mixed breeding or settlment of extraterrestrials that mingled into our genes seamlessly overtime. It would also align with some native american mythologies that suggest an underground race (the "greys") mingled with people long ago. Do we clearly know the seperation of races or is this topic still somewhat open scientifically?

Sounds like you have maybe already heard of ths Tales Of Enoch, a sort of new Age Philosophy...where angelic/extraterresstrial male hosts mated with (chromosonally superior) female populations, at a particular time in history...leading to suggestions that whites are somehow superior...to other races.

I dont know what the White Brotherhood hopes to accomplish with these possible myths, but i believe that any religious text that undermines all races but the lighter (toned) or paler skinned peoples is a bit on the biased side from the get go.
Not many religious orders exclude one, on the basis of race.

In that philosophy any who have been born of this mix of beings, are to have originated from the Orion Nebula. If you look to this star system and feel a sense of longing to be home again then....maybe you are one of these superior beings.
So share something great with the rest of us ! wink.gif

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_White_Brotherhood


http://www.holyorderofmans.org/White-Broth...brotherhood.htm
tikay
Oh~ but the new Great White Brotherhood is more interesting.

http://www.reptilianagenda.com/research/r120399a.shtml

http://www.ascendedmasters.ac/gwb.html

http://www.ufoindia.org/article_chrishamilton7.htm


These are cooler. biggrin.gif
DiamondJim
To AlpineR. That is the scientific explanation but God can do anything so why didn't he give people who lived in the hot places white skin and the cold places brown skin (as well as better rhythm)?
Justin
This whole thing on race is somewhat of a mystery. Black people make sense on this planet maybe even appropriate for warmer equator climates. On the other end of the spectrum is not white anglos but, asian. The reason for their double folded eyelids was a means of self-preservation. The asians migrated north into the frigid artic climates. The double folded eyelids were meant to prevent frost-bite to their eyes. Of course their eyes remained brown because of sun exposure and dark eyes/skin is definitely a defense mechanism to the sun. Those asians that stayed north became eskimos.All creature on this earth adapt to their climates, the brown grizzly bear of the northwest became the white polar bear of alaska to blend in with the snow. Most people fall into the categories of black/african, Asian, or in between. The only people that do not seem adept to the earth climates are white/anglos. Are the anglos possibly related to some form of alien dna? I don't know.... Blonde haired blue eyed and red hair green eyes do not make any sense to me on this planet. I have blond hair blue eyes white skin. I can't tolerate cold or the heat. 75 degrees and sunny suits me just fine. Has anyone heard of the " Gods" of the bible and DNA genetic experiments on earth natives using their own DNA. Created in their own image as it has been spoken. Any input?
Iman
The so-called "white/pale man" as the trump card of earthly destruction is not too farfetched. What has been misnamed "history" proves this. But to step back in time a bit, I theorize that this planet consisted of dark peoples, people of the sun if you will. Most of you have heard your fathers or mothers say "It takes 2...." Well, it does take two to make thing happen, and this can explain the color stratification we have today.
Internal strife within the dark family of man lead to many splits. (call this the Cain and Able theory). Once divided a family usually falls. I believe that "outside" influences kidnapped, raped and held captive those of us who had split from the larger tribe(s) of Kemet. These beings were probably not of this earth, or at least not from the topside of earth. I believe this took centuries if not longer to bring about a large number of pale, non-melanin producing species, called mankind. The (adulterated) bible calls this species beast (Other ancient cultures make reference to this 'beast' man that walked 'with' real man)
This species was prone to diseases of all kinds. Read historical reports of how indigenous peoples died after encountering these hybrids, post-dark ages (what history misnames Europeans). Read also how ancient Rome was plagued with diseases that did not effect other nations. Make no mistake, however, these pale peoples are/were not the original inhabitants of Europe. I believe they had help wiping out the smaller darker inhabitants. One of the previous posts so eloquently states that darker peoples had sense enough to live and dwell in warmer climes. Some of us probably weren't so lucky when they migrated to southern Europe. This no doubt put their smaller tribes at risk of attack by underground/cave dwelling pales.

The other familial split occurred when some of our dark tribes began bowing down to these pale beings for whatever reasons or perhaps they got tricked by some acts of illusion, or maybe they revered the pale color and hated their own natural dark skin. All it takes is some good magic to fool the weak minded.

So the pale species went from cave dwellers to cold climate residents. This pale species grew and eventually became nomadic factions that spread east, west then south from the caucuses. They spread from other areas where the climate had little influence from the sun. I believe no matter where they migrated they somehow remained under the influences of their ancient captors. This migration was as a matter of survival. Otherwise the pale race would not be where it is today. They would have remained small clans of theives, killers, lepers etc. They would have eventually become extinct.
I believe over time their re-recreators continued to assist them either through technology and outright miseducation by use of occult "magic" which the pale power stucture uses to this day.
In short, the socalled white race was born out of its fathers and mothers, the socalled black race with a little genetic injection from some "bright" outcasts. The people of Kemet gave birth to all forms of man and mankind, from Asiatic to Indio etc. All other modern groupings are a mix of the diaspora gene pool (i.e. hispanic, south east asian, polynesian, arab, etc).

What better way for the "bright" outcast to "F--up" the creation cycle than from within. I think it/they have done it before and they are trying to do it again. Perhaps the desolate planets above us stand as testament to what can befall us.

In this day of the great reckoning, the socalled white/pale species aka the prodigal sons & daughters have a last chance to turn on their "Dr Moreau" before the final cleansing cycle that the Olmecans taught the Meso-indigenous peoples of this continent takes place. This warning also applies to those of dark, brown, brown-yellow, red-brown, and beige etc hues who have followed in the destructive pale species ways.

That's my take on the subject of how the pale "mutation" came into being. I don't see it as a mutation, because a mutation could not grow to the numbers it has today. No, something not of this world helped that socalled mutation along.
I'll give you one guess as to who and what...(hint: a "bright" outcast)
koko
All people..whether white, black, chinese, indian etc. ALL have the SAME amount of melanocytes (cells which produce melanin) in their skin. The difference in skin color comes about as a result of the melanocytes producing varying amounts of melanin. Therefore, it's wrong to say that white people don't have melanin because they do.
josie
QUOTE (ianshive+Dec 11 2006, 10:23 PM)
I'm curious to know the current, widely accepted reason for the seperation of races - i.e. why caucasians have been seperated so greatly from those of darker decent (black, asian, etc.). To my knowledge, the currently accepted reason is that we all originated out of Africa as darkly pigmented beings. As some of our ancestors moved north, pigmentation became lighter due to a lack of Vitamin D and other UV related syndromes. Thus, spawned the lighter race we know as caucasians.

However, I have a major problem with this. Currently, the Inuit and other tribes that have for centuries if not millenia that have lived in the far north of Sibera, etc. are still of dark pigmentation.

Some theories - and I hate to suggest this - abound that the caucasian race could have originated from a mixed breeding or settlment of extraterrestrials that mingled into our genes seamlessly overtime. It would also align with some native american mythologies that suggest an underground race (the "greys") mingled with people long ago. Do we clearly know the seperation of races or is this topic still somewhat open scientifically?

that is just so rediculous that it's hilarious...if that were true, there'd be no white ppl. Facial features wouldn't be so dramatically different.
Precursor562
QUOTE
However, I have a major problem with this. Currently, the Inuit and other tribes that have for centuries if not millenia that have lived in the far north of Sibera, etc. are still of dark pigmentation.


Just something to keep in mind. The dark skin protects against the sun. As long as the species is exposed to intense UV light then the skin will remain dark. Those within the species who move to places where the sun is not as strong/intense will over time through evolution develop lighter skin. In those far north places the ice and snow does a wonderful job at reflecting the suns rays. You could get a sun burn from the reflection alone. This may have kept their skin slightly darker than your average Caucasian but being so cold they wear lots of clothes which shades them from the sun. This may be why they are not as dark skinned as people in places like Africa where it's hot and so more skin is exposed to the sun.
mr_homm
Actually, we came from the planet Krypton to enslave the earth. We never lived in caves, we only pretended to, and pretended to evolve along with the rest of you . All the time we were watching you, our eyes filled with secrets. It is these secrets that have turned our eyes blue.

You can tell we are extraterrestrials because we have extra nostrils on the tops of our heads. When white men become bald, these nostrils must be surgically closed so that we can remain undetected. That is why there are more hospitals in white neighborhoods in US cities.








OR NOT.


tongue.gif
(all)atomearthwind(all)
you people have no understanding, i will tell you the truth but thats only if you want to know. first you should learn about genetics and natural selection. your own people hind the truth from you. after you read this, instead of debating get knowledge. read and learn , and then sort out the information today's theories are that the white came about because moving north, because of less uv light, false, by the way im not that good in spelling or punctuation's --theories are : their is a natural mutation in the genes of human that causes lighter skin. the mutation rate in this gene is the same for all races ,african,euoupean, etc, but they claim that the mutation in this gene wouldnt cause people to get lighter in Africa because of the high uv rays(would kill the lighter ones out). but when people move north to europe less uv rays allowed people to get lighter and lighter (false). they say people wouldn't get lighter in africa because every time a mutation would happen and someone would get lighter skin they would have a less servival rate do to cancer, not true because the death age of skin cancer would be above the age of reproduction(child birth :so they would have the same chance to have children as other people ) <second why this is not true.if people moved to euorpe with less uv rays ,,,they say because of the less uv rays, the mutation in the gene that cause lighter skin was allowed to servive then over time it would get lighter and lighter....not true because ,let me explain it to you in a simple way.. let me give you an example of this mutation: two dark dark black people of the same color have a baby thats lighter than them that has brown skin... now what they dont tell you is this mutation can happen both ways,, two dark dark people can have babys that have brown skin / and two brown skin people can have a child with dark black skin..... they say people turned white this way. let me tell you why this couldnt happen in a simpler way.... take a very very very big tub of black paint this represents a larg population of black people . now take a dripper and drip small drops of white paint in the black tub this is the mutation .. now if you do this for hours the paint would get grey intill it turn white... now the white race could have come this way but no remember what i just told you,, the mutation happens both ways .....so for example if you dripped in a drop of white paint and then a drop of black paint you could do this forever and it wouldnt turn white.

so where do white people come from, i will tell you but you wont exept it because you have no understanding . i am not here to down you . i am here only to give the truth......... ALBINOS ......it is simple i dont even have to explain it in detail it is very simple. people will tell you that white people are not and can not come from albinos because albinos have no pigmentation at all . this is tru white people do have just a little bit more pigmentation than albinos. but let me explain that , self expiriment on albino mice . albino mice have white fur and red eyes. the fur is whit because of no pigment,, their eyes are red because of no pigment. you can take a whole population of albino mice put them in a box and they will breed only albino mice. but if you put in black or brown mice with the albino, but not too much, because it would wipe out the whole population of the albino mice if you put to much dark mice. but if you put in just a little of dark mice every so often and let them breed for generations...it would breed pigment into the albino mice.. you would start to see white mice with black eyes. and you can see this example in the human population ......most albinos are born with blonde hair and blue eyes...

example this is how you can breed pigment into albinos::::if you take todays white people (not albinos,, plain white people) but get all white people with blonde hair and blue eyes and put them on an island and do the same example above after years and years and years all the white people would have dark hair and dark eyes. but you cant put in to much dark people at a time you have to take it slow or the facial features of the white people would be lost because of the dominant features of dark people. so if its done slow they would remain white people but have darker hair and eyes

and i know you are looking for another answer:: when black people in africa have albino they still look like black people. this is very simple if you just learn a little about genetics and natural salection and evolution. it is genetic facts that the dna coding in human and all animals have natural mutations . the resond why people have differient facial features is because of natural salection...the enviroment has some affect on natural salection but mostly for animals . and people too. but when people deveoped intelligence they can play a larg roll in thier own natural salection from what they choose most of. if a population would begend to favor shortness and choose that,, over time all would be short
midniteangel
I am most comfortable with what i had been taught in school. There were 4 races of ppl...white, yellow, red and black. As i see it, they were never meant to mix. Animals do not mix as they know to keep their own bloodline strong they can not interbreed.
NeoNo.1
Diamond Jim
God is color blind.
yor_on
And our gene pool contains the same :)
Shandooga
White people are white because they said so.
wcelliott
I really hate to jump into a discussion that's got so much potential for misunderstanding and abuse, but I think that the "Out of Africa" hypothesis, where we're all descended from blacks, is basically wrong and fundamentally racist.

It's just codifying the notion that blacks are more primitive than whites/Asians.

I don't buy it. I think blacks evolved from whites.

Blacks have a curved thigh bone that allows the leg muscles to act in a more efficient manner. This is how forensic medical examiners determine whether a skeleton is from a black person or a white person, the white person's thigh bones are straight, like chimpanzees' thigh bones.

There's no rationale for why a superior structure would evolve to an inferior one. There's no evolutionary advantage to having a straighter upper thigh bone. It's simply less efficient. The Blacks' upper thigh bone is a more efficient design, it's therefore a refinement in evolution. Blacks descended from whites. They adapted to the environment of Africa, which caused the characteristics we identify with the black race. They all provided survival advantages in the African environment. Blacks are inherently better adapted to living in Africa than whites.

It may be that Caucasians adapted further in separate ways to their northern European environments, too, which would only make sense, evolution never stops, but it seems more likely to me that blacks started out as whites, perhaps more Sicilian-looking than Nordic, but with white skin and curly hair (and variations about that median), but the harsher sun would've weeded-out the lighter-skinned whites in that population via skin cancer, which can, indeed, kill at an early child-bearing age, and the curlier hair would've provided extra protection against the hotter sun against heat-stroke, which can kill at any age. The man-eating predators caught the slowest runners of the population, and the blacks descended from the survivors.

Incidentally, I also have a theory that male-pattern baldness is an evolved trait which provides extended lifespan via providing new, fresh skin that generates Vitamin D in the later years of life, at a time when the rest of the sun-damaged skin would be providing insufficient Vitamin D to protect against cancer and maintain muscle and bone strength. (The more sun-damaged skin gets, the less Vitamin D it makes. Vitamin D helps prevent cancer, and helps maintain muscle and bone strength. All recent findings.)
Bloy
QUOTE (wcelliott+Sep 11 2007, 02:40 AM)


I don't buy it.  I think blacks evolved from whites.


..equally racist...

...so you are saying that because blacks evoled from whites they are inferior?

Your theory would conclude that in present time, the whites are superior for the simple fact that the "jump" on evolution they enjoy makes them more experienced in the scheme of time.

hmmmm. Tough to swallow YOUR ideas... sad.gif

p.s. and you don't mention the reds or the yellows. Is this the result of cross breeding early in the evolutionary process? dry.gif
wcelliott
QUOTE
...so you are saying that because blacks evoled from whites they are inferior?

Your theory would conclude that in present time, the whites are superior for ...


Re-read my post. Especially the part where I said I was reluctant to jump into the discussion because of the potential for misunderstanding and abuse.

Where did I ever say that whites are superior? Please point that out, I'd like to see where I said anything of the sort.

Maybe you assume that I said it because you believe that,

What I said is that blacks are more evolved than whites, that whites are closer in physiology to chimpanzees than blacks are. That was the whole point that I was making with whites having straight thigh bones like chimps do. In what sense could that be considered "superior"?

The "Out of Africa" theory is precisely the opposite, "Chimps - Blacks - Whites". This theory presumes that blacks are closer to chimps than whites are, but I'm saying they've got that backwards. Blacks have the genetic advantages, they've evolved more than whites.

adoucette
The whole "evolved from" is a tad misleading.

The only thing one can deduce from the curved thigh bone is that the change occured AFTER the populations that led to separate groups of white and black populations had split.

The BEST concept to be kept in mind is that we ALL are one species, and now that the populations are no longer physically separate they will once again move towards a common phenotype.

Arthur
wcelliott
QUOTE
The whole "evolved from" is a tad misleading.


I basically agree with this statement, I just take issue with the prevailing "Out of Africa" theory that seems to imply that blacks are more primitive than whites.

We've all evolved to incorporate traits that have better-adapted us to our respective environments. There are significant advantages to all of the traits we've all independently incorporated.

A thousand years from now, the human species will probably have incorporated the best of each of the traits that are now unequally distributed.
gmilam
QUOTE (wcelliott+Sep 14 2007, 02:40 PM)
I basically agree with this statement, I just take issue with the prevailing "Out of Africa" theory that seems to imply that blacks are more primitive than whites.

Do you object to it for scientific reasons... as in older human remains have been found elsewhere? Or do you object to it because of the implication that you see?

BTW - As far as I can tell, the implication is only in your mind. I've never interpreted that to mean blacks are more primitive.
carterelliott
QUOTE
Do you object to it for scientific reasons... as in older human remains have been found elsewhere?


My objection is based on the recognition that evolution generally doesn't discard improvements in physiology, and blacks have improvements in physiology over us whites. This would seem to imply that they started out as whites, and evolved their "black" traits over time in the African environment.

Being white, myself, I have no vested interest in making the "chimps-whites-blacks" argument, I don't feel inferior, but I still feel that the implicit assertion of the "Out of Africa" theory is that blacks are more similar to our ape ancestors than whites are. This, I see as implicity racist, even if you, personally, don't.
Derek1148
Edit.
meBigGuy
I agree that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skin_color pretty much answers the skin color thing. If you disagree, have a go at editing it. We want it to be correct and your knowledge may be important.

Now, a bit off-topic, is the question of why cultures evolved differently. Why the northen europeans developed technology while the africans didn't. People mix skin color and culture, cross them, and correlate them. There may be correlations, but maybe not for the reasons you think.

The classic expert in this regard is Jared Diamond.

Here is a link to a talk of his:

http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/diamond/diamond_p2.html
NoCleverName
I haven't bothered to read the entire thread, but I should point out that "evolution" does not have a "direction" towards "improvement"; merely "adapation".
carterelliott
QUOTE
Now, a bit off-topic, is the question of why cultures evolved differently.


Different environments present different challenges.

In an African environment, where large predators exist, it is vital for survival to be able to run quickly, as the slowest person in the group is likeliest to be killed. The descendents are from the ones who managed to get away, so the fleet-footed live to have more offspring, and their traits become more common in the population.

In the European environment, agriculture is the essential survival strategy, as food isn't readily available in the harsh winters. Farming and domesticating animals is the best way to survive. There is no real need for farmers to run fast, so that trait tends not to change over time. The traits that make people better farmers will tend to be incorporated into the general population.

meBigGuy
cultural evolution

I post a link to a talk by the expert in the field. Nobody reads it, and they comment anyway. Why am I not surprised? Welcome the physorg.com forums.

Sheesh

wcelliott
QUOTE
Nobody reads it, and they comment anyway


OK, I read it. Sorry, not tremendously impressed.

Evolution has been happening for a very long time, technology is relatively recent. The major factors in the different characteristics of different races are environmental, not technological.
Soultechs
In my opinion white people can be from what ever male bloodline.

Whilst there are 6 billion people on Earth there are plenty of male y chromosomes incomon.

Your male y chromosome is in common with your grandfathers(Fathers Father) with that being your bloodline that has discrete bone feature/stature characteristics that won't wash of in thousands of generations.

However they can be obscured by the genetic of the females in your recent family tree.

There could be problem in see what your doing in the dark. Like with dark people. I think it has much to do with testosterone.

Given that your ancestral male y chromosome is passable the stature of your children's bones will be proportionally chiseled. However women are the fairer sex whilst having less testosterone than yourself as-well.

That means your wife might look pretty good. Your daughter could look like an improvement on your wife because of the way your genetics have remodeled the ova. However what was in your wife's genetics could become obvious when testosterone peaks in your son activating the traits that were partially chiseled by your wife's fathers y chromosome.

In my opinion white people evolved from darker people tracing thousands of generations to the regions of India.

In civilizations involving dowry systems it would pay to examine the gal someone has to pay a lot of money to dump in whomever lap bar going bush where the hillbillies wont want so much money.
eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Whites are all ghosts of REAL people.
wcelliott
QUOTE
Whites are all ghosts of REAL people.


That would certainly explain a lot.

tongue.gif
TheEnd
QUOTE (wcelliott+Sep 14 2007, 07:40 PM)

A thousand years from now, the human species will probably have incorporated the best of each of the traits that are now unequally distributed.

I doubt that! Man has (and will continue with increasing frequency) stepped in and changed the course of natural evolution!

Humans that would have died without reproducing due to disease(weak immune systems), weakness(genetic deficiencies) or injury(stupidity) among others, are now able to reproduce due to human intervention into the normal process' of evolution. This is not a judgment on the morality of mans tampering, just an observation. This is not to say that evolution has been halted, just that man through his tampering with man, will make natural selection irrelevant. Man will not allow evolution to take us where he does not want to go! Genetic Engineering will make even mans current tampering irrelevant. A thousand years from now, Man will most likely not be recognizable as humans to us humans. Human diversity may be even more than it is now due to being able to "select" who we are through GE. Peoples tastes have always varied more then the physical differences between us.

One could argue that it was natural selection that selected humans to be intelligent (no laughs please) enough to change the course of evolution, so it is still natural selection, just a modified version of it! that is at the controls! (I've always had a problem saying that what humans do is not natural, but this is a topic for a different discussion).

QUOTE (wcelliott+Sep 14 2007, 07:40 PM)

I basically agree with this statement, I just take issue with the prevailing "Out of Africa" theory that seems to imply that blacks are more primitive than whites.


I'm not an anthropologist but it seems to me that blacks and whites have common ancestors and neither one evolved from the other. Whites ancestors left Africa and settled in colder climates and blacks stayed in Africa which is a warmer climate. The OoA theory just states that whites left at an earlier time (I believe). After the whites ancestors left Africa, both lines continued to evolve separately. The difference is (again, I believe) that they were under different environmental pressures, so we look different (adapted different evolutionary upgrades), even though we are the same species. So neither one is "better" or "more evolved", just different. This can be said of all races (nasty word).

TEOTW(AWKI)
Sapo
QUOTE (carterelliott+Sep 19 2007, 12:31 PM)

Different environments present different challenges.

In an African environment, where large predators exist, it is vital for survival to be able to run quickly, as the slowest person in the group is likeliest to be killed. The descendents are from the ones who managed to get away, so the fleet-footed live to have more offspring, and their traits become more common in the population.

In the European environment, agriculture is the essential survival strategy, as food isn't readily available in the harsh winters. Farming and domesticating animals is the best way to survive. There is no real need for farmers to run fast, so that trait tends not to change over time. The traits that make people better farmers will tend to be incorporated into the general population.

Consider the environment of Europe during the tail-end of the last glaciation, when the presumed ancestors of whites _weren't_ running from the cave bear, dire wolf and sabre-toothed cat. I'm surprised that Europeans _ever_ ate mastodon steaks.

Now, if they had run, the Irish wouldn't have been given whiskey by the gods, and it would be a sad world...

Sorry, I read recently that our ability to sweat freely and run long distances was one of the advantages that makes humans, (not black, white, red or yellow), the meanest SOB in the valley.

Wasn't farming first practiced by the folks in what is now Iraq and the Indus Valley? They were white, hm?

Too much of this thread seems to be justifications of preconception, and not honest discussion.
midniteangel
So some of you are saying that Asian and American Indians also started out black? I think not... ppl started out in caves and had alot of hair on thier bodies to protect from the sun. So that theory of all ppl came from Africa just isn't so. The skeletons of all races are diff as well. There are certain diseases that are only in one peticular race also, such as sickle cell and tay sachs.
kaneda
I would think past ice ages account for Man surviving so well in Africa. I would be surprised if it was only "out of Africa". As midniteangel showed, we were all pink skinned beneath our original fur as animals are. Losing the fur tanned the skins of people who stayed in hot climates and other characteristics evolved over time to cope better with local environments.

There have till fairly recently been other species of "Man" living alongside each other and there is still debate on whether they could interbreed. It seems that our species was the ones who survived in a close race between us and the neanderthals. Considering our warlike nature and fear of differences, I think we were instrumental in wiping them out before they wiped us out.
Sapo
QUOTE (kaneda+Oct 21 2007, 09:58 AM)
Considering our warlike nature and fear of differences, I think we were instrumental in wiping them out before they wiped us out.

The last part of your quote speaks worlds! '...before they wiped us out' says more about our xenophobia than any Neanderthal desire to make war on us. If for a moment we assume that yeti, or bigfoot, is a remnant of one of our 'cousins', they'd be wise to hide and run. ph34r.gif
Derek1148
Many animals demonstrate aggressive behavior against different species (or even the same species having slight variations) with whom they come into contact. Aggression and violence is not exclusive to man. Man is just particularly effective at it.
Rabbit
I agree with Derek .... it's perfectly 'natural' to be racist. However, we must rise above this 'inbuilt' shite and start to love each other as equals.

smile.gif
Rusty Shackleford
The level of ignorance in this thread is mindnumbing. Could someone please provide a biologically valid definition of race in humans? What is a black person? What is a white person?

There are no races, only cultures. The human species exists as a continuum of phenotypes. There are no distinct groupings that could be truely called races.
Derek1148
Nothing personal Rusty but that sounds suspiciously like politically correct psycho-babble.
Rusty Shackleford
No it is scientifically correct babble! biggrin.gif

Can you provide the definition of race I asked for?

All of the "races" blend into one another on the edges. Even within the "races" that are commonly accepted, there are always individuals that display "non-typical" features.

Race is an illusion of perception. A manifestation of our brains tendency to generalize and categorize. All modern analysis have shown the concept of race in humans to be a fallacy.
Derek1148
Scientific research on the subject of race is not always welcome.
Rusty Shackleford
QUOTE
The term race refers to the concept of dividing people into populations or groups on the basis of various sets of characteristics and beliefs about common ancestry.[1] The most widely used human racial categories are based on visible traits (especially skin color, facial features and hair texture), and self-identification.[2]

Conceptions of race, as well as specific ways of grouping races, vary by culture and over time, and are often controversial for scientific as well as social and political reasons. The controversy ultimately revolves around whether or not races are natural types or socially constructed, and the degree to which observed differences in ability and achievement, categorized on the basis of race, are a product of inherited (i.e. genetic) traits or environmental, social and cultural factors.

Some argue that although "race" is a valid taxonomic concept in other species, it cannot be applied to humans.[3] Many scientists have argued that race definitions are imprecise, arbitrary, derived from custom, have many exceptions, have many gradations, and that the numbers of races delineated vary according to the culture making the racial distinctions; thus they reject the notion that any definition of race pertaining to humans can have taxonomic rigour and validity.[4] Today most scientists study human genotypic and phenotypic variation using concepts such as "population" and "clinal gradation". Many anthropologists contend that while the features on which racial categorizations are made may be based on genetic factors, the idea of race itself, and actual divisions of persons into groups based on selected hereditary features, are social constructs.[5][6][7][8][9][10][11]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race

Derek1148
Maybe you’re right. I would still suggest you be careful when walking through certain neighborhoods.
Rusty Shackleford
I agree, you can encounter some nasty cultures in the wrong neighborhoods.
Guest_macaronee
QUOTE (gmilam+Dec 12 2006, 09:20 PM)
Do you have a citation for this?
Amazingly, some people do believe this.

Yakub

I'm in agreement with AlphaNumeric giving the most intellectually sound answer earlier here. All religions/thought-lines have their problems to one extent over another. Nowadays a religion is "what you do and believe in" personally, simple as, and each person has his or her own religious model in their own head they follow. Count how many people there are, and that's how many different opinions and more, are possible for each thing. In the same way, are the number of beliefs=religions. What's held or done by a person cannot be ascribed to anything but that persons own belief, understanding and doing.

The reference cites a people who were enslaved for centuries and fought against white barbaric, tyrant and primitive supremacists and thus they obviously developed their own "understanding" and "traditions" to explain skin color difference, origins and why evil existed against them on the basis of nothing but skin color. You should visit Africa some time, their Jesus was also a typical African with Rastafarian hair in case you didn't know.

Probably the most ignorant thing still around is how Western religions depict their forefathers such as Adam, Eve, Abraham, Jesus and so on to all be white skinned and looking like artistic impressioned Romans, whereas they were known to be Middle Eastern and many of them to be African; brown skinned/dark haired, Middle Eastern/African people, even the Egyptians. Just like how the Greek, Phoenician, Macedonian (etc) used to look and many still are, such as most native Jewish people. Even Italians and Spanish are not pale skinned/pale eyed/pale haired, they are dark eyed, dark haired and more browny tan skinned. I was born typical American Christian where such things are very deep in their root beliefs.

White skin tones with pale hair, and pale iris are believed to be a defective mutation in genetic research and our modern biological understanding, which came about only due to the tribes of our ancestors who moved into the Northern Hemisphere for survival; colder, sunless and harsher environments. You can see Scandinavia for example, and how blonde hair and pale eye color/skin color is a common theme for the natives there due to the environment and less so in many other places further South. Furthermore, you can witness ANY country and people who when they move to colder Western countries from hotter more Southern countries, they start to become paler over time, through generations and develop similar facial features to those they reside around.

This is part of human complexity and perfectness in many ways; adaptivity.

When you compare how little of this there was before British rebels chose to create another country on an invaded land (US/CAN) and colonize Earth, you can see black/brown hair, black/brown eyes and skin color that is pale brown to dark brown is what prevailed everywhere in the world regions. China, Japan, Mongolia, Russia (Serbia), Australia, Indonesia, Fiji, all Asia, Spain, Middle East, Africa,, Americas, all the way to Greece and Yugoslavia. Above that you had bits of modern day EU, Scandinavians, Slavs and Bulgars who were opposite colored; notably paler.

Not that any of it should matter. wink.gif
Derek1148
What is your point?
Grasshopper
QUOTE (theorist+Dec 27 2006, 02:20 AM)
Because of the melanin factor, it has lead many people to considering white people as the end of the times sense they are at the end of the melanin genetic mutation, they in fact are symbolic to death of the human race and death of this planet. The proof of this is in how they have continuously exploited people of color to get to the top as the people who are on top of all economic affairs. White people have participated largely in slavery, colonization, the theft of land by the use of murder and total annilation. These people have created atomic bombs and nuclear deposits. These people and their genetic defect has caused them to have a anti social behavior Which is very destructive. They don't have the capacity to be objective about their self yet they are objective about everyone else. This is why they do actual human studies where they go into foreign countries which are not white countries to watch colored humans at their daily lives, white people are the only so called humans who study other humans. What are these alleged white humans trying to figure out about people who have melanin?

I normally read an entire thread before responding, but this is not science here. This is politics. Please post science on a science forum. This is a discussion on evolution, not racial relations or who's to blame, etc. There are plenty of other places for that.


IMHO.
Sapo
QUOTE (Rabbit+Oct 21 2007, 01:33 PM)
I agree with Derek .... it's perfectly 'natural' to be racist. However, we must rise above this 'inbuilt' shite and start to love each other as equals.

smile.gif

Hassenpfeffer, Longpig, Parson's Nose, frog's legs, what's the difference? All you need is garlic. laugh.gif
midniteangel
QUOTE (NeoNo.1+Sep 3 2007, 03:52 AM)
Diamond Jim
God is color blind.

God is colorblind? LOL...only if you believe in a God...LOL..Ok, then why did he create 4 distinct and SEPARATE races? Does the bible say that people should mix? It does not...
Rusty Shackleford
Try these links:

Race- The power of an Illusion

Race- Are we so different?

particularly this portion of the link
Human variation
phyti
QUOTE (midniteangel+Nov 29 2007, 03:13 AM)
God is colorblind? LOL...only if you believe in a God...LOL..Ok, then why did he create 4 distinct and SEPARATE races? Does the bible say that people should mix? It does not...

He didn't.
There were two people, who are the common ancesters of all others, therefore a common genetic makeup.
The command was to populate the earth and manage it.
After the flood, the descendants of the original four families of Noah, attempted to build the tower of Babel ('to make a name for themselves'), i.e. rebellion. This was followed by the confusion of their languages, causing them to migrate to different regions and develop their own cultures. This leads to gene pooling which restricts the hereditary factors, thus resulting in what people refer to as 'race'.
As to human rights issues, look around now and in history. All 'races' at some time have mistreated others. It started with Cain and Abel.

To restrict mixing people would be counterproductive to the purpose.
The only restriction from associating with others was if it concerned worship.
xtrmn8r
Just my 2 cents worth.

Rusty Shackleford Posted: Oct 21 2007, 10:36 AM

QUOTE

There are no races, only cultures. The human species exists as a continuum of phenotypes. There are no distinct groupings that could be truely called races.


http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/11/stereotyping_101.html
Corvidae
Wow, the voodoo is deep in this pond.

White skin developed due to living in northern latitudes. Dark skin protects from sunlight and lowers vitamin D production. Light skin is damaged by heavy exposure to sunlight, but produces vitamin D more efficiently. Lack of vitamin D makes you susceptible to cancer. It can also be absorbed from food rather than from sunlight.

Genetically there is no significant difference between any of the human skin variations. We're all far more closely related to each other than the 94% of our genes we share with Chimps. (Homo Sapien cannot cross breed with Pan troglodytes the DNA won't match up.)

And the myth of white people being related to or descended from aliens is the basis of the Nazi Aryan myth. A myth I would hope we can agree should stay dead.

And no, the human race didn't develop from 2 people. While there is genetic evidence of low population stress, at our lowest point we numbered in the thousands.
xtrmn8r
QUOTE
And no, the human race didn't develop from 2 people. While there is genetic evidence of low population stress, at our lowest point we numbered in the thousands.


I should probably research this before I stick my foot in my mouth, but I recall something I read that said that we can be traced to four original pairs.(?)
Rusty Shackleford
QUOTE (xtrmn8r+Dec 1 2007, 10:51 PM)
Just my 2 cents worth.

Rusty Shackleford Posted: Oct 21 2007, 10:36 AM



http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/11/stereotyping_101.html

Let me add my two cents to the pot too. The author of the article attempts to argue that, generalizations made about people based on race are mostly valid but not necessarily universally true. However, the author comes off to me as just another uninformed person trying to validate their uninformed opinion. The author, like most people, is confused on the differences between race and culture. Simply put, you cannot make accurate generalizations about a person based solely on "race". You can begin to make generalizations about that person if you know what culture they belong to. Race simply doesn't carry the weight that is normally assigned to it. A child born to Mexican parents will only act like a Mexican if they are raised in a Mexican culture. Take the same child and have it raised by Irish or Tanzanian parents each in their respective cultures and it will not act like a Mexican when it grows up. So, once again I will state: There are no races, only cultures. The human species exists as a continuum of phenotypes. There are no distinct groupings that could be truly called races.

QUOTE
I should probably research this before I stick my foot in my mouth, but I recall something I read that said that we can be traced to four original pairs.(?)


Look up Mitochondrial Eve.
xtrmn8r
Rusty Shackleford Posted on 12/2/07 at 2:56 PM

QUOTE
You can begin to make generalizations about that person if you know what culture they belong to.


I'll buy this, but most people do not abandon their heritage for anothers' culture. So separating race from culture on an individual basis is a different matter than profiling a group. While it is commendable to ignore a persons' appearance in assessing judgment, I think it will be a long time coming before that becomes the norm.

Thanx for the link.
Rusty Shackleford
As far as appearance goes, style of dress and the way a person carries themselves are a better (but still imperfect) criterion for making generalizations about a person. Again though, things like clothing reflect upon the culture (or sub-culture) a person belongs to, and do not reflect racial characteristics.
hawksecho
Yes, all evidence we have postulates a distant human origin in Africa for all of us. We have white, and other races because over generations they adapted to differing climates. There is a reason some one from Kenya looks different then some one from the arctic. The reason is you adapt, or you die. This is easy to accept when one realizes that it just was not one or two people who migrated from Africa to northern climates, but many over thousand s of years. As far as segmenting people in to varied races, I'm only concerned with those that apply to all of us. The human race. Physical alterations between peoples are more or less window dressing. And for the record those idiotic enough to think of any racial group as "pure", genetic stagnation and limitation makes us as a species much more prone to disease and genetic defects. So, if one species wants to survive, mixing and matching is more likely to keep a population viable. The bigots don't like to hear that, and I really don't care.
xtrmn8r
hawksecho Posted on 12/04/07 at 2:59 PM

QUOTE
So, if one species wants to survive, mixing and matching is more likely to keep a population viable.


Maybe. However this assumes only the beneficial genes remain dominant. For instance, some diseases seem to specific to a group. Sickle Cell Anemia comes to mind.

QUOTE (->
QUOTE
So, if one species wants to survive, mixing and matching is more likely to keep a population viable.


Maybe. However this assumes only the beneficial genes remain dominant. For instance, some diseases seem to specific to a group. Sickle Cell Anemia comes to mind.

In the United States, sickle cell anemia affects about 70,000 people. It mainly affects African Americans, with the condition occurring in about 1 in every 500 African American births. Hispanic Americans also are affected; the condition occurs in 1 out of every 1,000 to 1,400 Hispanic American births.
Rusty Shackleford
Actually, the genes that cause Sickle Cell Anemia can also be advantageous to carriers of the disease. There are several populations in which these genes are found. The common thread between them is that these groups (or their ancestors)are all found in areas where malaria is also a constant threat. People who carry the gene, but do not have the disease have an increased resistance to malaria.

The point is, you never know which genes are going to prove beneficial. The best way for a species to hedge it's evolutionary bets is to have as much genetic diversity as possible.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/01/2/l_012_02.html

mogeezie
At first you (Phalasophar) sounded like you were going to say something very profound after your mentioning of "your own opinion." But all you did was try to bash the whole idea of the dialogue by making a very controversial issue sound silly or stupid. A small sip of king james' jesus and people become philosophers. The topic is the origin of white people. You are taking the same ole' "white" stance of non self examination. You think none of that matters but it really does. To understand that white supremacy is a system that is out of control is to recognize THE world is in a war and losing. You must decide who is the enemy/oppressor. To debate the origin of white people is to go to the source of the oppressors power and maybe, just maybe, the source of white power may lay within this debate. And then maybe we can begin to make proper ajustments to the world to sustain reasonable lives in the future. Have you ever thought that both Islam and Christianity (along with a lot of other religions) have pieces of the truth within their knowledge? As well so does the color of people's skin. If anybody believes in a "god" do you think the entity is born on earth? For religious sake's a believer has to say of course not, right? Then doesn't that make the entity alien? Therefore religiously and scientifically speaking the image/DNA of "god" and the "man" he mixed with genetically or magically or spiritually (whichever makes you comfortable) would inevitably reduce melanin in the skin. As for the non-religious readers I read one of the postings, and one fellow mentioned a mutation from the darkness from the out of Africa theory occurred when the migration, or exodus took place, and the skin adapted to the exposure of the sun. This is a great explanation and evidence points to paranormal occurrances that happen today in the world, therefore considering weird things happening thousands of years ago, it would be impossible to explain accurately with no words to explain what they had never seen.
TheDoc
blink.gif !!!!!!
Sapo
Yeah, I know. This sort of crap is why I don't much bother with this place anymore. sad.gif
Corvidae
QUOTE (xtrmn8r+Dec 2 2007, 09:44 PM)

I should probably research this before I stick my foot in my mouth, but I recall something I read that said that we can be traced to four original pairs.(?)

I think you might be referring to genetic lines or common ancestry. In which case, yeah, we all share a common ancestor around 2-5000 years ago and going back further only a couple of genetic lines survived the ice age. That's genetic lines though, not total population. The other lines just didn't survive.
TheDoc
QUOTE (Sapo+Mar 26 2008, 08:19 PM)
Yeah, I know. This sort of crap is why I don't much bother with this place anymore. sad.gif

And as if to underline that point, Corvidae responds to a 3-month-old post dry.gif
yor_on
I hate this kind of Sh*.
It only seems to attract people filled with hate.

F* race, we are here together.
We all are born alone in P' and sh*.
We all die alone in P* and sh*

So in between, why not grow up?
And try to find something good instead.
gmilam
W T F? huh.gif
N O M
It looks similar to the type of spam posts that a particularly stupid troll, called Paula Niven - something like that - who cares, used to post until the mods booted him off and deleted most of his garbage. He sneaks back in every now and then.

I think he was from Atlanta.
Sapo
QUOTE (N O M+Mar 26 2008, 09:18 PM)

I think he was from Atlanta.

Thanks for the heads-up! laugh.gif Some one or two have been hitting me from Atlanta, too...
Moomin
QUOTE (N O M+Mar 27 2008, 02:18 AM)
It looks similar to the type of spam posts that a particularly stupid troll, called Paula Niven - something like that - who cares, used to post until the mods booted him off and deleted most of his garbage. He sneaks back in every now and then.

I think he was from Atlanta.

laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.