How are people even black and white? Wouldn't there be a first proto-man who was either dark skinned or light skinned? Was the first man black or white? When did blacks turn into asians and whites? Or was it whites first, and they turned into asians and blacks.
evolution is so retarded.
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Bump
Answer required
>I can't understand this concept
>the concept is retarded, not me
Okay user kek
In my opinion , the first man was not black and not white , at least not like whites and blacks these days , climatic changes does the rest , black in hot zones , white in cold zones
Well it's not very complicated. The claim is man adapted and mutated slowly over time to get where we're at today.
Logically, the early homo sapiens wouldn't have popped up in different colored pockets in different regions. There would be a traceable ancestry back to the first proto man.
So was he black or white?
Or was he black, white, asian, and hispanic and all other ancestors took on one of the trait.
It literally does not make sense.
>American education system
Whites didn't turn into blacks or vice versa. All races had a common ancestor that lived in the past. Anthropological studies are constantly investigating human origins and seem to agree that Homo heidelbergensis is our most recent hominid ancestor. You can Google the rest if you are genuinely interested but something tells me that your religious beliefs will prevent you from accepting these arguments so I won't waste any more energy trying to debate you.
So you think if we sent black to Antarctica, and made them breed there over 1000 years, they would turn white?
So then, the common ancestor turned into whites and blacks?
Africans = sapiens
Europeans = sapiens + neanderthal
Asians = sapiens + neanderthal + Denisovan-like
Abbos = believe it or not, neo-sapiens
Maybe , melanine is not necessary where is cold , maybe they turn paler and their body can absorb more warm from sunrays
>So you think if we sent black to Antarctica, and made them breed there over 1000 years, they would turn white?
Kinda, they would not "turn" white, only the whitest one will survive (Vitamin D deficiency), and reproduce, making the new breed "whiter" over time, same goes for whites going to Africe replace vitamin D deficiency by skin cancer.
You don't seem to understand how evolution works. If you sent blacks to Antarctica, assuming they survive, the dangerous environmental conditions would impose a strong selective pressure in favour of 'whiter' blacks with shorter limbs that are better able to retain heat, survive the cold, and make do with less sunlight. I'm sure you know about "survival of the fittest." The fittest in this case would be as I described: traits that favour survival and hence successful reproduction such as whiteness and shorter limbs (to retain heat by lowering surface area) and other such traits in the extreme cold and barren desert of Antarctica. 1000 years is like a blink of an eye, but over many years, this population would evolve to look similar to whites in some respects.
Don't darker colors retain more heat?
Exactly, but only if the selective pressure persists. Whites in South Africa remained white because they managed to combat that pressure by staying indoors and applying sunscreen.
The common ancestor evolved into all the races we see today (much like how wolves evolved via artificial selection into all the dog breeds we see today).
Black absorbs light, which is just energy, thereby retaining heat. This is true, but Vitamin D deficiency may be more impactful, which means that whiter colour will be more beneficial than darker ones. Any traits that lead to individuals surviving long enough to reproduce will be favored (some more than others). Over time natural selection may eventually lead the black turning into whites.
>proto-man
Ik, we're talking about thousand of years of selective breeding ofc.
Just for fun, do you know the theory for Asians slanted eyes?
Selective breeding has constraints, and doesn't apply to the situation as much as natural selection does. The constraint is that you rely on genes that are already a part of the gene pool, but you need mutations which are very rare, as they are the only way of introducing genes that are completely new to the population. Albinism is probably what will be favoured a lot here. But again, mutations are rare which is why you need a lot of time.
Slanty eyes? Go on...
Because of the snowy landscape during last Ice Age -.-
Lol I thought it was because they were ayy lmaos that need to be gassed. Fear not, they will hang on the Day of the Rope just like OP.
OP should hang because he's dumb, but you should keep some Asians, the ones with human emotions at least, if you find any.
en.wikipedia.org
read up, dumbass.
Out of Africa is not accurate, whites originated somewhere in the modern middle east. Asians somewhere in middle Mongolia. Negros somewhere in modern Congo. The out of Africa hypothesis is kept as mainstream for political reasons. It helps the 'we're all the same' egalitarian nonsense going. Imagine if it was accepted we do not descend from a common ancestor, that we're actually seperate species entirely. People would start to question why we're forced to live together, if we're really the same after all. Research discussing differences alone is suppressed or those who speak out black listed. Look at how one of the guys who discovered the double helix was treated by suggesting there might be differences, forced to almost sell his noble prize.
>everyone who has ever lived on the African continent has had black skin
Whites evolved from pic related
The 'i-it's evironment' arguement is not accurate either. But I normally don't care because at least it normalizes the conversation and acknowledges differences exist. I'll give two examples why it's not accurate - look into the natives of Greenland, and the origins of the "Native Americans" Both are of asian descent, both occupied northern areas with plenty of cold climate, yet both retained the physical characteristics. Native Americans look like Chinese rice farmers for a reason, and no amount of cold exposure will change that. But the reasoning for this goes into exploring flaws in many modern hypothesis in science accepted as fact. The bottom line we need to get across is that differences exist, and we're not related as much as is claimed.
blacks from gorillas
No, if anything it would be bonobos.