Science vs white supremacists

It's theorized that the body's need for vitamin D synthesized from the sun is what dictated the genetic drift in the DNA that produces melanin. In tropical and many subtropical climes, the need for clothing was minimal and the exposed skin of the body produced much of the vitamin D it needed from sunshine. There was so much sunlight in those climes that man's skin remained dark to reflect the unneeded sunlight.

As man moved into cooler climes, there was less intense sunlight and they adapted to cooler weather by wearing more clothing. Less intense sunlight and more clothing blocked the sunlight reaching the skin. As time went by, those men whose skin was lighter, a beneficial trait since light skin absorbed a greater amount of the sunlight that was available, were more genetically predisposed to produce the amount of vitamin D the body needed, and they endured better than those who didn't. As the generations went by, it was precisely this group that came to dominate the gene pool; thus, passing along this altered gene to their offspring. And the genetic drift towards white skin continued as long as the populations remained separated.

That said, white skin doesn't make white skinned people genetically superior to black or dark skinned people. It's wrong headed to believe that it does.
Originally Posted by I B Hankering

I assume that this trait was found only in neanderthals and homo-sapiens and quite possibly the Dravidians and Cro-magnons.


theres a trait thats absent in Negroids of africa but present in the above races, but I don't remember what that was. I don't think they have the neanderthal gene, I think that is it. the lack of it is pretty curious.

I assume that this trait was found only in neanderthals and homo-sapiens and quite possibly the Dravidians and Cro-magnons.


theres a trait thats absent in Negroids of africa but present in the above races, but I don't remember what that was. I don't think they have the neanderthal gene, I think that is it. the lack of it is pretty curious. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

No. Every creature is predisposed to adapt to its surroundings. A genetic deformity sometimes enhances a creature's ability to exploit and survive in a certain environment. The more advantageous the deformity (deformity meaning deviating from the norm), the more likely it'll be passed on to the next generation. Subsequently, each successive generation rewards the follow-on generations with genetic characteristics (especially the deformities that enhance survival) that make their survival easier -- and it's the survivors that pass their genes on to the following generations.

Neanderthals are thought to have contributed stout, thick body types that retained heat in cold climes to mankind; whereas, Africans retained a tall, lithe body type that allowed the body to better radiate heat away from the body in tropical and subtropical climes.

Hence, light or white skin facilitated man's survival in colder, low-sunlight climes and black or dark skin facilitated survival in warmer, intense-sunlight climes. Each group had adapted to their own environment, but that doesn't make one inherently superior to the other -- just better able to exploit, in their own way, the ecological niche they each found themselves living in.

Amateur Anthropologists unite!

You mean you don’t ascribe to the milk test?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

you know, that milk is sour.

I think the milk-chugging had a lot more to do with triggering vegans than "white supremacy."

If I remembered correctly, that screenshot is from Shia's "he will not divide us" stream in New York.
I followed that whole thing and it was hilarious, basically a bunch of people(of all races) with nothing to do suddenly discovered a way to be seen by many around the world - by trolling Shia's stream.

Most memorable was this one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtAyu8m7DTo

No. Every creature is predisposed to adapt to its surroundings. A genetic deformity sometimes enhances a creature's ability to exploit and survive in a certain environment. The more advantageous the deformity (deformity meaning deviating from the norm), the more likely it'll be passed on to the next generation. Subsequently, each successive generation rewards the follow-on generations with genetic characteristics (especially the deformities that enhance survival) that make their survival easier -- and it's the survivors that pass their genes on to the following generations.

Neanderthals are thought to have contributed stout, thick body types that retained heat in cold climes to mankind; whereas, Africans retained a tall, lithe body type that allowed the body to better radiate heat away from the body in tropical and subtropical climes.

Hence, light or white skin facilitated man's survival in colder, low-sunlight climes and black or dark skin facilitated survival in warmer, intense-sunlight climes. Each group had adapted to their own environment, but that doesn't make one inherently superior to the other -- just better able to exploit, in their own way, the ecological niche they each found themselves living in. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Sickle Cell Trait is a genic mutation that seems to reduce the severity of Malaria. It is believed that the “Black Death” may have come from rats that followed grain shipments onboard ships coming from Northern Africa or the Middle East. This plague killed millions in Europe but not in Northern Africa or the Middle East. I read a paper while I was in school that suggested the Sickle Cell Trait may have been a genic mutation that assisted the exposed individual a protection from Malaria and the Bubonic Plague. I don’t remember the study nor can I find it. Have you heard of this suggestion?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

You have copied my HA's for years, but you still do it wrong. Too fucking lazy to do it right. Just a second rate leftist Marshall-wannabe...

Sickle Cell Trait is a genic mutation that seems to reduce the severity of Malaria. It is believed that the “Black Death” may have come from rats that followed grain shipments onboard ships coming from Northern Africa or the Middle East. This plague killed millions in Europe but not in Northern Africa or the Middle East. I read a paper while I was in school that suggested the Sickle Cell Trait may have been a genic mutation that assisted the exposed individual a protection from Malaria and the Bubonic Plague. I don’t remember the study nor can I find it. Have you heard of this suggestion? Originally Posted by theotherguy1

Yes, I've heard of it. The part about the plague you mention is covered in Catastrophe: An Investigation into the Origins of Modern Civilization by David Keys. Keys relates that a major volcanic eruption in Southeast Asia area near Java and Sumatra caused cataclysmic climate change: drought, crop failures, etc. Keys argues the first major instance of plague in Europe -- the Justinian Plague -- occurring about 541 was caused by a drought in Eastern Africa, Ethiopia: if I remember correctly (it's been nearly 20 years since I read the book), because of that volcanic eruption.

Crop failures occurred world wide, but also the cause of a decline in the rodent population in Ethiopia. Predators that fed on the rodents also, in turn, perished. On the rebound, new harvests of grain fed new generations of rodents which grew unchecked in the absence of predators whose recovery lagged behind that of the rats, etc. Keys argued that the rats and the plague bearing fleas were indeed borne in the caravans of grain shipped to Egypt and on to Rome and eventually Northern Europe. That was the first major instance of plague in Europe.

The Black Plague of 1347 to 1351 that killed something like 50 million Europeans is related to the first documented instance of biological warfare. The plague was introduced to Europe by ship by Genoese merchant-traders who were deliberately infected with the plague by Muslim besiegers at Kaffa in Crimea. The Muslim besiegers at Kaffa catapulted plague infected bodies over the walls of Kaffa in 1346. From Kaffa, the Black Plague found its way to Europe, via Genoese trade vessels, where it claimed upwards of 1/3 of the entire European population.

The Black Plague did spread to other points in SW Asia and North Africa, but record keeping of that age was poor and was made worse by the mortality inflicted on the resident populations by the plague. It's not known how many others outside of Europe were afflicted and died. The number, however, had to be great.

The sickle cell trait was a mutation that beneficially allowed Africans to survive in zones where malaria was common. I never heard or read that it provided any relief against the plague, however.

I did read, in 1493: Uncovering the New World Columbus Created, by Charles C. Mann, that the domestication of cattle also helped thwart malaria. It seems that in European climes the malaria bearing mosquitoes preferred to feast on cattle rather than men. Communities with cattle, which are not affected by malaria, tended to fare better than communities that did not have cattle.

Malaria is an Old World disease of African origin that was introduced to the New World by trade. Malaria was also a contributing factor to the rise of the African slave trade in the New World. Many Africans had become inured to the ravages of malaria that contemporarily wiped out the genetically unprepared populations of Native Americans and Europeans -- who weren't so supreme in the face of an African disease. But Africans were enslaved because they were resistant to malaria. A factor, though not the only factor, that contributed to 300 years of misery.

I B Hankering, thank you for that information. I am a layman in this field, but highly interested. I have read numerous papers on the adaptations of man.