The origins of white skin discovered

[brazen]

Interesting article,


www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/15/AR2005121501728.html

[jam]

Interesting.

"Several sociologists and others said they feared that such revelations might wrongly overshadow the prevailing finding of genetics over the past 10 years: that the number of DNA differences between races is tiny compared with the range of genetic diversity found within any single racial group."

Also, if true, it proves that white people aren't descendants of albinos, as some afro-centrists websites claim (for some to me unknown reason.)
Not that it needed proof anyway

[stella22]

Good article, Brazen.

One thing that the article failed to mention is new evidence that dark skin maybe beneficial for people in warmer climates because it is less susceptible to disease (fungal, bacterial infections). Vitamin D absorption might have nothing to do with it. So therefore, a mutation that causes lighter skin could spread because there was less risk of disease in a colder climate. This is consistent with other research I've read that indicates Northern Europeans are the group most likely to suffer from Acne.

Another thing that doesn't make sense is the idea that light skin spread through sexual selection. Research was done that showed male and female faces with the variable being light skin versus dark skin. The tanned skin faces were said to be most attractive in both the female and male models.

[jam]

I also don't buy the sexual selection thing, as most people procreate, regardless of their looks.

It could have some meaning if, say, only the elite got whiter, but I don't think that's the case in northern Europe.

[aroundtheworld]

I had a friend who is pale white and always has eczema and rosace and fungus. Ewwwh. His doctor recommended he get small doses of sun and also he started tanning and either the problems cleared up or the tanning has covered it up. Plus he looks healthier now. Just a nice healthy glow

[tictactoe]

jam said:

Interesting.
"Several sociologists and others said they feared that such revelations might wrongly overshadow the prevailing finding of genetics over the past 10 years: that the number of DNA differences between races is tiny compared with the range of genetic diversity found within any single racial group."

what a joke. Sociologist have nothing to do with anthropology. Nobody really knows what they are doiing, however everybody knows that sociologist very often are leftists. This "sociologists" behave like the pope. Its redicolous. All the sociologists I know having problems even with the simplest calculus. I don't care what sociologist say.

[anodyne]

Interesting article but notice how political correctness plays a role. Denying racial differences at the end of the article: "geneticists' claims that race is a phony construct" and on the first page "fearing that the finding of such a clear genetic difference between people of African and European ancestries might reawaken discredited assertions of other purported inborn differences between races - the most long-standing and inflammatory of those being intelligence." It hasn't been discredited.

It's rather annoying that a can of PC had to be open so the information can go down smoothly for some people.

[jam]

Race is whatever we decide race to be, nothing more or less.

[anodyne]

Sure, if you want to ignore biological differences and make a new standard.

[jam]

I didn't mean "We", as in us here on dodona. I meant in general. It's whatever "we" decide it to be - Unless something is well defined,it has little scientific value.