Posted on 12/15/2005 10:05:07 PM PST by RWR8189
Scientists said yesterday that they have discovered a tiny genetic mutation that largely explains the first appearance of white skin in humans tens of thousands of years ago, a finding that helps solve one of biology's most enduring mysteries and illuminates one of humanity's greatest sources of strife.
The work suggests that the skin-whitening mutation occurred by chance in a single individual after the first human exodus from Africa, when all people were brown-skinned. That person's offspring apparently thrived as humans moved northward into what is now Europe, helping to give rise to the lightest of the world's races.
Leaders of the study, at Penn State University, warned against interpreting the finding as a discovery of "the race gene." Race is a vaguely defined biological, social and political concept, they noted, and skin color is only part of what race is -- and is not.
In fact, several scientists said, the new work shows just how small a biological difference is reflected by skin color. The newly found mutation involves a change of just one letter of DNA code out of the 3.1 billion letters in the human genome -- the complete instructions for making a human being.
"It's a major finding in a very sensitive area," said Stephen Oppenheimer, an expert in anthropological genetics at Oxford University, who was not involved in the work. "Almost all the differences used to differentiate populations from around the world really are skin deep."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
That's a good point. Seems like conservative blacks who leave the liberal plantation are highest on their hit list.
And vice-versa in a tropical jungle.
Skin color is almost entirely an adaptation to sunlight levels below about 45 degrees north latitude. There is a need to balance UV protection of the skin vs. production of vitamin D.
The exception to this is the extreme north latitudes, where no amount of skin lightening would produce the needed vitamin D, and the extreme cold would kill anyone trying (it would also kill a naked white-skinned hunter). In those areas the skin color is more world-average brown, and vitamin D is obtained from things like fish oil.
Do you think that animals in the wild select mates based on appearance?
"What is it then?"
Adaptation is man's, (and plants and animals), ability to gradually indergo minor changes in chemistry in order to adapt to climate, disease, etc, but the species remains the same species, there is no 'transmutation' process but rather an inherent set of genetic instructions fostering their own development and reproduction of the next generation. Evolution as it's presented today, (organic evolution/ Darwinism), is a pagan religion. It's a doctrine which believes and proselityzes to young people in public schools that man was once a completely different species.
Darwinist 'evolution' also claims that life came from non-life, that nothing produced something, which paralells the Christian faith that God created everything out of nothing. The evolutionist theory of nothing creating everything is impossible, and it takes a massive leap of faith to believe in. This is why it's a new-age religion. For more information on 'adaptation' ask the U.S. Marines, they understand the concept of adaptation very well. Their motto is "improvise, adapt, and overcome".
An example of adaptation which the Darwinists once tried to present as 'proof' of evolution is the finch of Galapagos. The beaks of these finches were observed to grow during drought, something that really tickled the Darwinists fancy because they claimed that a "new species" of finch had rapidly 'evolved'. What they didn't know at the time, however, was that the finches beaks later returned to normal size when it rained.
It becomes very plain to see that a political agenda exists with the Darwinists, because they will trip over theselves to present every new observation as 'proof' of evolution, before they are even finished with their observations and studies.
Now google "ring species" and see what you find. This is a very simple outgrowth of adaptation.
I once remarked to a friend that most touring golfers were white. He scoffed, "What about Tiger Woods"?
I said Tiger isn't black.
Ask him some time.
He isn't. He's of a mixed racial/ethnic background. I suppose a person could get into 'who' is into the golf game. Boy I remember how Tiger had a press conference about it so he'd not have to discuss it anymore.
Then again because of how race was/still is in this country with some people, I could see how someone who isn't completely white will stand out from a crowd of whiteness.
I'll get excited when they find the gene that makes Swedish Bikini Team babes.
I read once that there is a town in England where a large fraction of the population has six fingers.
My post to you was not about this gentleman's race, but your use of "dominance" vs. "recessive" in your original picture.
Dark skin color is neither dominant nor recessive. It is controlled by several genes. Light people having children with dark people almost always produce children with an intermediate color. Your picture is a case in point. Even the article says that this mutation "largely" explains the emergence of light skin color - not that dark is dominant over white.
This same effect is observed in eye color.
Do you believe all 1,100 species of bats were created seperately?
What about the 350,000 species of beetle?
Tiger says he is a Cablinasian. It's in Wikipedia.
Cablinasians make good golfers.
Well, it's true. You wouldn't have racism of any kind of people all looked the same. You'd still have plenty of other problems, just not racism.
I'm sorry you fixated on one clause without comprehending the overall drift of the story.
And I thought you hated me because I'm beautiful.
No, I lust for you because you are beautiful.
And I smell you because you smell like tangerines.
By the power of Zeus, I thought you'd never catch on to us.
Darwinist 'evolution' also claims that life came from non-life,
Actually, the theory of common descent says exactly the opposite, that all extant populations evolved from earlier populations. Creationists, on the other hand, actively promote the idea that life came from non-life, witness Genesis 2:7
And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground...
For more information on 'adaptation' ask the U.S. Marines,
I wasn't aware that the U.S. Marines had adopted a position on evolution.
The beaks of these finches were observed to grow during drought
Huh? Have you read The Origin of the Species? I have, and I have no idea what you're talking about.
I was thinking the exact same thing. Unless that single white skin individual REALLY "got around the block".
How is it racist to acknowledge that if there weren't races there wouldn't be racism? That seems so self-evident it isn't worth commenting on.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.