Heyo
Veteran Member
Yes, but populations split. It is not, as you seem to think, that one population stays the same and the other branches of. Both daughter populations are equally old.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Evolution of races
- Thread starter We Never Know
- Start date
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
"Race" is a social construct, besides the very minor differences of skin color and nose shape. Those are due to the local environment.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
It is more of a Vitamin D adaptation. There have even been experiments run on people of different races to test their Vitamin D production:The white skin was an adaption of humans in colder climates as camouflage in areas covered in snow. Think polar bears. This is why in the winter our skin gets more pale than in the summertime without the snow, when we become tan, so we can blend into taller grasses better in order not to be eaten by killer rabbits.
Ask Mr. Science! He knows.
Skin color is relevant to vitamin D synthesis - PubMed
We Never Know
No Slack
But it started with "one population". That population eventually had a race/skin tone
NewGuyOnTheBlock
Cult Survivor/Fundamentalist Pentecostal Apostate
In biology, there is no such thing as "race". This is a social construct, not a scientific one. There was no "evolution of races"; only extremely minor genetic differences regarding small parts of the whole of humanity: The amount of melanin in the skin, hair texture, etc. In fact, there can be more genetic difference between two people of the same "race" as there can be between two people of differing "races". This is why there are no such things as medical care providers who specialize in given "races" because there is no such thing as "race" in biology.
Moreover, just because we started in Africa does not mean that the first "race" was black. In fact, as we once had fur, there would be no need for the skin to have lots of melanin to protect us from the sun. If you google for Egyptians, you find that they are often pretty light-skinned; yet they are natives to Africa.
Egyptian Man Stock Photos, Pictures & Royalty-Free Images - iStock
The entire pretext of the question is an incorrect one; "races" did not evolve but "races" were created solely in the minds of men. In the greater context of this topic, I don't find it offensive; I find it misguided.
Moreover, just because we started in Africa does not mean that the first "race" was black. In fact, as we once had fur, there would be no need for the skin to have lots of melanin to protect us from the sun. If you google for Egyptians, you find that they are often pretty light-skinned; yet they are natives to Africa.
Egyptian Man Stock Photos, Pictures & Royalty-Free Images - iStock
The entire pretext of the question is an incorrect one; "races" did not evolve but "races" were created solely in the minds of men. In the greater context of this topic, I don't find it offensive; I find it misguided.
We Never Know
No Slack
That population had a skin tone. Light, dark, yellow, or whatever. It was dominate at that time within the population.
Heyo
Veteran Member
Does it even make sense to speak of races when there is only one?
Lamarckism and Darwinism are both correct. Ethnic groups are the result of climate and other external factors.
We Never Know
No Slack
I use race because its how we are divided in reality. Lets use skin tone...
"But it started with "one population". That population had a skin tone that dominated"
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
So you're saying that it took time for Lucy to get a larger brain?
Right. But that reality of "race" also varies based on what country you are located in (what's a race in one place inst a race in others) is politically divided, not genetically.
I believe that the DNA of humankind had all the varieties colors there even thought the insides were all the same.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Not genetics?
Heyo
Veteran Member
If you put it that way, yes, and it probably was a light brown and they had fur. Those who migrated to the north got lighter skin to better produce melanin in the winter. Some of them later migrated back south and got darker skin to better absorb UV radiation.
Think of the native Americans. They started with light skin (Inuit) and as they migrated south got darker (Inca, Maya, native Amazonians).
We Never Know
No Slack
I'm saying IMO the black race evoleved first, While the majority of that population stayed put in Africa, small groups broke off and migrated out of Africa and then kept migrating creating the different races we see today.
We Never Know
No Slack
South of Africa?
We Never Know
No Slack
Which is why I said in the OP "Put away political correctness and safe spaces"
Right. And as I've tried pointing out "race =\= skin tone"