possible origin of Caucasians

[Asclepias]

Tundra fever:

Archaic human admixture with modern humans - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think I read this paper a couple years ago. It suggest that Asians were here first and then whites were a subgroup that developed from them.

No, you moron. The admixture theory suggests that post-migratory human populations may have interbred with Neanderthals. It's also hypothesized that the commonalities between modern Eurasian DNA and Neanderthal DNA could be explained due to migration from Africa early enough that would be consistent with a certain degree of multi-regional evolution of Homo sapiens. Certain alleles could have been retained as common in migrating late Homo erectus but became less common (possibly eliminated) among African populations. Subsequently, early Homo sapiens populations from outside of Africa would naturally have a higher rate of alleles in common with Neanderthals.

Hey dummy. I wasnt talking about the admixture. I was talking about the evolution after the admixture.

 

[Ravi]

I'm not a rocket scientist but I don't see how the gene mutation theory cancels out the fading theory. IMO it supports it.

 

[Asclepias]

I'm not a rocket scientist but I don't see how the gene mutation theory cancels out the fading theory. IMO it supports it.

The fading theory states people turned lighter because there was less sun in europe. Basically its saying the people there developed it as an adaptation to the environment. The problem with that is that the gene mutation is a fact and not a theory and that mutation occurred in the middle east area and india where its hot and the sun shines alot but not europe. Its spread to europe where the environment ensured its survival. In order for the fading theory to work the mutation would have first arisen in europe where it was colder. Also since this mutation only occurred 10k years ago why wouldnt it have developed sooner in europe? The natives in Alaska, Iceland for example are darker than white people and look at how short their daylight is.

 

[Ravi]

I'm not a rocket scientist but I don't see how the gene mutation theory cancels out the fading theory. IMO it supports it.

The fading theory states people turned lighter because there was less sun in europe. Basically its saying the people there developed it as an adaptation to the environment. The problem with that is that the gene mutation is a fact and not a theory and that mutation occurred in the middle east area and india where its hot and the sun shines alot but not europe. Its spread to europe where the environment ensured its survival. In order for the fading theory to work the mutation would have first arisen in europe where it was colder. Also since this mutation only occurred 10k years ago why wouldnt it have developed sooner in europe? The natives in Alaska, Iceland for example are darker than white people and look at how short their daylight is.

It could have occurred In someone that lived in a cave or under a long stretch of monsoons, no? Or to a child born to a couple under either of those conditions. Genes can and do mutate because of environmental conditions.

 

[Asclepias]

I'm not a rocket scientist but I don't see how the gene mutation theory cancels out the fading theory. IMO it supports it.

The fading theory states people turned lighter because there was less sun in europe. Basically its saying the people there developed it as an adaptation to the environment. The problem with that is that the gene mutation is a fact and not a theory and that mutation occurred in the middle east area and india where its hot and the sun shines alot but not europe. Its spread to europe where the environment ensured its survival. In order for the fading theory to work the mutation would have first arisen in europe where it was colder. Also since this mutation only occurred 10k years ago why wouldnt it have developed sooner in europe? The natives in Alaska, Iceland for example are darker than white people and look at how short their daylight is.

It could have occurred In someone that lived in a cave or under a long stretch of monsoons, no? Or to a child born to a couple under either of those conditions. Genes can and do mutate because of environmental conditions.

Thats true. However if it had happened it would have shown up in the genes of europeans. To date that hasnt happened but the mutation that occurred in the middle east/india has shown up in the DNA of europeans. I'm sure they havent tested all europeans but they havent found the mutation you describe as occurring in any living europeans as of yet.

 

[Ravi]

I'm not a rocket scientist but I don't see how the gene mutation theory cancels out the fading theory. IMO it supports it.

The fading theory states people turned lighter because there was less sun in europe. Basically its saying the people there developed it as an adaptation to the environment. The problem with that is that the gene mutation is a fact and not a theory and that mutation occurred in the middle east area and india where its hot and the sun shines alot but not europe. Its spread to europe where the environment ensured its survival. In order for the fading theory to work the mutation would have first arisen in europe where it was colder. Also since this mutation only occurred 10k years ago why wouldnt it have developed sooner in europe? The natives in Alaska, Iceland for example are darker than white people and look at how short their daylight is.

It could have occurred In someone that lived in a cave or under a long stretch of monsoons, no? Or to a child born to a couple under either of those conditions. Genes can and do mutate because of environmental conditions.

Thats true. However if it had happened it would have shown up in the genes of europeans. To date that hasnt happened but the mutation that occurred in the middle east/india has shown up in the DNA of europeans. I'm sure they havent tested all europeans but they havent found the mutation you describe as occurring in any living europeans as of yet.

Then maybe there is more than one reason. An interesting topic.

 

[Asclepias]

I'm not a rocket scientist but I don't see how the gene mutation theory cancels out the fading theory. IMO it supports it.

The fading theory states people turned lighter because there was less sun in europe. Basically its saying the people there developed it as an adaptation to the environment. The problem with that is that the gene mutation is a fact and not a theory and that mutation occurred in the middle east area and india where its hot and the sun shines alot but not europe. Its spread to europe where the environment ensured its survival. In order for the fading theory to work the mutation would have first arisen in europe where it was colder. Also since this mutation only occurred 10k years ago why wouldnt it have developed sooner in europe? The natives in Alaska, Iceland for example are darker than white people and look at how short their daylight is.

It could have occurred In someone that lived in a cave or under a long stretch of monsoons, no? Or to a child born to a couple under either of those conditions. Genes can and do mutate because of environmental conditions.

Thats true. However if it had happened it would have shown up in the genes of europeans. To date that hasnt happened but the mutation that occurred in the middle east/india has shown up in the DNA of europeans. I'm sure they havent tested all europeans but they havent found the mutation you describe as occurring in any living europeans as of yet.

Then maybe there is more than one reason. An interesting topic.

Thats always a possibility. This has always been a very interesting topic to me.

 

[SwimExpert]

Tundra fever:

Archaic human admixture with modern humans - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think I read this paper a couple years ago. It suggest that Asians were here first and then whites were a subgroup that developed from them.

No, you moron. The admixture theory suggests that post-migratory human populations may have interbred with Neanderthals. It's also hypothesized that the commonalities between modern Eurasian DNA and Neanderthal DNA could be explained due to migration from Africa early enough that would be consistent with a certain degree of multi-regional evolution of Homo sapiens. Certain alleles could have been retained as common in migrating late Homo erectus but became less common (possibly eliminated) among African populations. Subsequently, early Homo sapiens populations from outside of Africa would naturally have a higher rate of alleles in common with Neanderthals.

Hey dummy. I wasnt talking about the admixture. I was talking about the evolution after the admixture.

Then that's even worse. You're just bouncing off the walls now.

 

[Asclepias]

"It has been at the root of division and persecution for centuries, but it seems that the white skin of most modern Europeans did not evolve in Europe at all.

Now genetic research has revealed that ancient European populations were dark skinned for far longer than had originally been thought.

Rather than lightening as early humans migrated north from Africa around 40,000 years ago due to lower levels of sunlight, these first Homo sapiens retained their dark skin colour



Read more: New study suggests white skin came to Europe from Near East
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook"

 

[SwimExpert]

Your opinion is not fact.

You're making excuses for your own ignorance being slapped down by someone who is actually informed on the matter. All you've done is spout some trite opinions of your own and are now trying to claim them as facts.

If that was true then you should have no issue showing me the supporting evidence. I have evidence homo sapiens begin with Black skin.

The problem here is that your ignorance confines you to such a small and narrow work space, you just can't get anything through your head. And that is why you're a god damned moron on this. You're no better than some creationist idiot.

No need to get emotional. It shows that your logic is compromised due to your emotional attachment to the belief that white people were here first which is laughable but shows the level of ignorance. There is no way you can get anything straight until you leave your emotions behind.

You've been slapped down with facts so now you're only recourse is to attempt to discredit me with this nonsense. It takes no emotion to call you out as a fucking idiot when you are in fact being a fucking idiot. It's just the facts.

Now you try and discredit science but still offer nothing whatsoever to prove your point.

What the? Dude, you're the one who is lacking in the science department. You're operating on a 7th grade level of knowledge and comprehension and you're stubbornly insisting that you should be some kind of expert. You don't know enough. Your knowledge is very limited. You are abandoning science in favor of your own ego which wants to believe your knowledge is substantial.

If its pop science as you claim I will need you to prove this.

It's the fucking Daily Mail. Enough said.

If you were a true scholar you would remain objective but I see you are only invested in trying to prove a point.

Says the one who can't see past his own nose!! Your projection is amazing. I'd be impressed at its strength, if it weren't so pathetic.

One doesnt have to assume an out of Africa theory. The Genome Project has proven it beyond a shadow of doubt.

*facepalm*

Wow. That you believe that demonstrates your fantastic ignorance.

1 - I don't think you even comprehend what the Out-of-Africa hypothesis actually means in the first place.

2 - It would be impossible for the Human Genome Project to have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt the Out-of-Africa hypothesis. The project sequenced the human genome. That is the end of it.

3 - The common school of thought most recently is that, in fact, Homo sapiens

I see in your last sentence you finally accept the fact that Black skin developed long before homo sapiens appeared. How can I brush off or back off the fact that our species is only one of the homo genus? My first sentence admits this. Youre flailing around using a logical fallacy to deflect from the fact you didnt know what you were talking about regarding skin color.

Once again you show how little you know, how narrow your perspective is, and how dumbed down your information is. There is more to human skin complexion than black or white. Melanin comes in many shades and quantities. Humans developed melanin before our own species. That does not mean that they were black. There are some scientists who subscribe to the Out-of-Africa theory but believe that our species arose in northern Africa. We have no the skin color of the earliest Homo sapiens. We can only speculate. For all we know, they were from the Egypt region, which would make it most likely that they were not dark skinned.

Just as I knew. You have no evidence and no links so you resort to name calling to hide your ignorance and lack of evidence. I will allow it.

I can't link you to a brain. You're the one who needs to be providing evidence. But not before you first get a clue. Yes, I just insulted you again. You have earned it. But that aside, you really, honestly, need to get a fucking clue. All you've done is throw a hissy fit and make wild claims, then try to shift the burden.

 

[Asclepias]

Your opinion is not fact.

You're making excuses for your own ignorance being slapped down by someone who is actually informed on the matter. All you've done is spout some trite opinions of your own and are now trying to claim them as facts.

If that was true then you should have no issue showing me the supporting evidence. I have evidence homo sapiens begin with Black skin.

The problem here is that your ignorance confines you to such a small and narrow work space, you just can't get anything through your head. And that is why you're a god damned moron on this. You're no better than some creationist idiot.

No need to get emotional. It shows that your logic is compromised due to your emotional attachment to the belief that white people were here first which is laughable but shows the level of ignorance. There is no way you can get anything straight until you leave your emotions behind.

You've been slapped down with facts so now you're only recourse is to attempt to discredit me with this nonsense. It takes no emotion to call you out as a fucking idiot when you are in fact being a fucking idiot. It's just the facts.

Now you try and discredit science but still offer nothing whatsoever to prove your point.

What the? Dude, you're the one who is lacking in the science department. You're operating on a 7th grade level of knowledge and comprehension and you're stubbornly insisting that you should be some kind of expert. You don't know enough. Your knowledge is very limited. You are abandoning science in favor of your own ego which wants to believe your knowledge is substantial.

If its pop science as you claim I will need you to prove this.

It's the fucking Daily Mail. Enough said.

If you were a true scholar you would remain objective but I see you are only invested in trying to prove a point.

Says the one who can't see past his own nose!! Your projection is amazing. I'd be impressed at its strength, if it weren't so pathetic.

One doesnt have to assume an out of Africa theory. The Genome Project has proven it beyond a shadow of doubt.

*facepalm*

Wow. That you believe that demonstrates your fantastic ignorance.

1 - I don't think you even comprehend what the Out-of-Africa hypothesis actually means in the first place.

2 - It would be impossible for the Human Genome Project to have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt the Out-of-Africa hypothesis. The project sequenced the human genome. That is the end of it.

3 - The common school of thought most recently is that, in fact, Homo sapiens

I see in your last sentence you finally accept the fact that Black skin developed long before homo sapiens appeared. How can I brush off or back off the fact that our species is only one of the homo genus? My first sentence admits this. Youre flailing around using a logical fallacy to deflect from the fact you didnt know what you were talking about regarding skin color.

Once again you show how little you know, how narrow your perspective is, and how dumbed down your information is. There is more to human skin complexion than black or white. Melanin comes in many shades and quantities. Humans developed melanin before our own species. That does not mean that they were black. There are some scientists who subscribe to the Out-of-Africa theory but believe that our species arose in northern Africa. We have no the skin color of the earliest Homo sapiens. We can only speculate. For all we know, they were from the Egypt region, which would make it most likely that they were not dark skinned.

Just as I knew. You have no evidence and no links so you resort to name calling to hide your ignorance and lack of evidence. I will allow it.

I can't link you to a brain. You're the one who needs to be providing evidence. But not before you first get a clue. Yes, I just insulted you again. You have earned it. But that aside, you really, honestly, need to get a fucking clue. All you've done is throw a hissy fit and make wild claims, then try to shift the burden.

I didnt ask for a brain. I asked for supporting evidence which you cant seem to show anyone. Now youre claiming I am throwing a hissy fit when you are the one that got all emotionally traumatized. Its ok but just know I know.

 

[SwimExpert]

I'm not a rocket scientist but I don't see how the gene mutation theory cancels out the fading theory. IMO it supports it.

You're correct in a very broad sense. A mutation could have been part of the transition. Though what Asclepius is attempting to posit would result in a dramatic change. A bunch of black people in your family tree, then BOOM! Out pops an Irish lass.

That being said, it is not necessary to posit any mutation at all. Skin color is not a "pick one" phenomenon. Asclepius seems to think that skin color is determined by some kind of [skinColor = black] command line in people's DNA. In reality there are many genetic factors that contribute to many separate biological mechanisms that yield an end result. For this reason, skin color in humans is inherently variant and flexible.

Here's an analogy: Imagine each human is represented by a factory. Each factory has room for 50 employees. Those employees have one job, which is to operate a machine that produces melanin. In your particular case, you might have 25 employees who are great at their job and are very productive. Of those, 10 produce black melanin because that's what they like, while the other 15 produce pink melanin, because that's what they like. The remaining 40 employees in your factory all pretty much suck at their jobs and produce very little melanin. They produce whatever color melanin they like but it doesn't matter much because they produce very little. At the end of the day all the melanin is mixed and is evenly spread out to paint the outside wall of the factory, even if there isn't enough to cover the surface very well. The result is your skin color. Now, when you eventually have a child you randomly select some of your workers and send them to your child's factory. Your partner does the same.

That is more or less the way skin color works. Nobody has a factory full of all stars. Even very dark black people have factory workers who might not produce very much, and who produce pigments other than black. The natural consequence is that human skin color has a natural ability to vary significantly across successive generations without the need to be triggered to do so by mutation. Scientists have already been able to demonstrate that natural selection is most likely sufficient to result in the varied color palette of human skin tones we.

 

[SwimExpert]

I didnt ask for a brain. I asked for supporting evidence which you cant seem to show anyone. Now youre claiming I am throwing a hissy fit when you are the one that got all emotionally traumatized. Its ok but just know I know.

Supporting evidence of the fact that you're an idiot? Okay, I'll give you a link.

possible origin of Caucasians

 

[Asclepias]

I didnt ask for a brain. I asked for supporting evidence which you cant seem to show anyone. Now youre claiming I am throwing a hissy fit when you are the one that got all emotionally traumatized. Its ok but just know I know.

Supporting evidence of the fact that you're an idiot? Okay, I'll give you a link.

possible origin of Caucasians

You must be having a real hard time finding anything to support your wild claims.

 

[Asclepias]

I'm not a rocket scientist but I don't see how the gene mutation theory cancels out the fading theory. IMO it supports it.

You're correct in a very broad sense. A mutation could have been part of the transition. Though what Asclepius is attempting to posit would result in a dramatic change. A bunch of black people in your family tree, then BOOM! Out pops an Irish lass.

That being said, it is not necessary to posit any mutation at all. Skin color is not a "pick one" phenomenon. Asclepius seems to think that skin color is determined by some kind of [skinColor = black] command line in people's DNA. In reality there are many genetic factors that contribute to many separate biological mechanisms that yield an end result. For this reason, skin color in humans is inherently variant and flexible.

Here's an analogy: Imagine each human is represented by a factory. Each factory has room for 50 employees. Those employees have one job, which is to operate a machine that produces melanin. In your particular case, you might have 25 employees who are great at their job and are very productive. Of those, 10 produce black melanin because that's what they like, while the other 15 produce pink melanin, because that's what they like. The remaining 40 employees in your factory all pretty much suck at their jobs and produce very little melanin. They produce whatever color melanin they like but it doesn't matter much because they produce very little. At the end of the day all the melanin is mixed and is evenly spread out to paint the outside wall of the factory, even if there isn't enough to cover the surface very well. The result is your skin color. Now, when you eventually have a child you randomly select some of your workers and send them to your child's factory. Your partner does the same.

That is more or less the way skin color works. Nobody has a factory full of all stars. Even very dark black people have factory workers who might not produce very much, and who produce pigments other than black. The natural consequence is that human skin color has a natural ability to vary significantly across successive generations without the need to be triggered to do so by mutation. Scientists have already been able to demonstrate that natural selection is most likely sufficient to result in the varied color palette of human skin tones we.

You do realize that Black people can have a white child but white people cant have a Black child right? The ability of the Black race to produce any skin color is coded into the genes. Since we have the scientific evidence that supports my claims we are still waiting on yours.

 

[SwimExpert]

I'm not a rocket scientist but I don't see how the gene mutation theory cancels out the fading theory. IMO it supports it.

You're correct in a very broad sense. A mutation could have been part of the transition. Though what Asclepius is attempting to posit would result in a dramatic change. A bunch of black people in your family tree, then BOOM! Out pops an Irish lass.

That being said, it is not necessary to posit any mutation at all. Skin color is not a "pick one" phenomenon. Asclepius seems to think that skin color is determined by some kind of [skinColor = black] command line in people's DNA. In reality there are many genetic factors that contribute to many separate biological mechanisms that yield an end result. For this reason, skin color in humans is inherently variant and flexible.

Here's an analogy: Imagine each human is represented by a factory. Each factory has room for 50 employees. Those employees have one job, which is to operate a machine that produces melanin. In your particular case, you might have 25 employees who are great at their job and are very productive. Of those, 10 produce black melanin because that's what they like, while the other 15 produce pink melanin, because that's what they like. The remaining 40 employees in your factory all pretty much suck at their jobs and produce very little melanin. They produce whatever color melanin they like but it doesn't matter much because they produce very little. At the end of the day all the melanin is mixed and is evenly spread out to paint the outside wall of the factory, even if there isn't enough to cover the surface very well. The result is your skin color. Now, when you eventually have a child you randomly select some of your workers and send them to your child's factory. Your partner does the same.

That is more or less the way skin color works. Nobody has a factory full of all stars. Even very dark black people have factory workers who might not produce very much, and who produce pigments other than black. The natural consequence is that human skin color has a natural ability to vary significantly across successive generations without the need to be triggered to do so by mutation. Scientists have already been able to demonstrate that natural selection is most likely sufficient to result in the varied color palette of human skin tones we.

You do realize that Black people can have a white child but white people cant have a Black child right? The ability of the Black race to produce any skin color is coded into the genes. Since we have the scientific evidence that supports my claims we are still waiting on yours.

 

[Asclepias]

I'm not a rocket scientist but I don't see how the gene mutation theory cancels out the fading theory. IMO it supports it.

You're correct in a very broad sense. A mutation could have been part of the transition. Though what Asclepius is attempting to posit would result in a dramatic change. A bunch of black people in your family tree, then BOOM! Out pops an Irish lass.

That being said, it is not necessary to posit any mutation at all. Skin color is not a "pick one" phenomenon. Asclepius seems to think that skin color is determined by some kind of [skinColor = black] command line in people's DNA. In reality there are many genetic factors that contribute to many separate biological mechanisms that yield an end result. For this reason, skin color in humans is inherently variant and flexible.

Here's an analogy: Imagine each human is represented by a factory. Each factory has room for 50 employees. Those employees have one job, which is to operate a machine that produces melanin. In your particular case, you might have 25 employees who are great at their job and are very productive. Of those, 10 produce black melanin because that's what they like, while the other 15 produce pink melanin, because that's what they like. The remaining 40 employees in your factory all pretty much suck at their jobs and produce very little melanin. They produce whatever color melanin they like but it doesn't matter much because they produce very little. At the end of the day all the melanin is mixed and is evenly spread out to paint the outside wall of the factory, even if there isn't enough to cover the surface very well. The result is your skin color. Now, when you eventually have a child you randomly select some of your workers and send them to your child's factory. Your partner does the same.

That is more or less the way skin color works. Nobody has a factory full of all stars. Even very dark black people have factory workers who might not produce very much, and who produce pigments other than black. The natural consequence is that human skin color has a natural ability to vary significantly across successive generations without the need to be triggered to do so by mutation. Scientists have already been able to demonstrate that natural selection is most likely sufficient to result in the varied color palette of human skin tones we.

You do realize that Black people can have a white child but white people cant have a Black child right? The ability of the Black race to produce any skin color is coded into the genes. Since we have the scientific evidence that supports my claims we are still waiting on yours.

Posting pictures of the pyramids built and designed by Black people has nothing to do with providing evidence to support your wild claim.

 

[Ravi]

Why can't white people have a black child? Here is an example of just that:

Sandra Laing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Asclepias]

Why can't white people have a black child? Here is an example of just that:

Sandra Laing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You almost got me there. I thought you found two pure white people that had a black child naturally.

 

[Asclepias]

This is her in the middle. Looking at her she has more than just one recent black ancestor.