Evolution of races

[TagliatelliMonster]

Put away political correctness and safe spaces. Sometimes its good to discuss controversial issues.

This thread isn't about who's better, or who's anything. its simply about different races, how they evolved and curiosity of what others think.

Whether you accept evolution or believe in creation.. IMO all race didn't arise simultaneously.

If its offensive to you skip on by. I don't expect much but .....

We evolved from apes. But did all races evolve simultaneously? Did one race evolve before the others?

On the other hand...

If you believe humans were created by a god, what race were they created as? Where did other races come from?

PS: IMO whites did not evolve first. So lets put that racism, white supremacy, or whatever BS to rest.
Oh and I'm not white, I'm Native American.

I don't think there's anything controversial about the simple obvious fact that in general, you can instantly tell what the general geographic location was of people's ancestry, just by looking at them.

Asian.

Africa

European

Oceanic

The americas

Middle eastern.





These differences are genetic. They exist because of prolonged genetic isolation through human history. What was unfolding there were all speciation events.
If the isolation would have continued for another 10s of thousands, or +100.000 years, then speciation of these various homo sapien populations would have been the inevitable outcome.


The fact that traits / genes / genetic sequences / genetic markers are traceable in correlation with geographic location, and the fact that they also match phenotypic difference and similarities, complety fits the narrative of nested hierarchies and a branching tree.

It's exactly what you would expect from an evolutionary process if you have several remotely settled populations that don't interbreed, or at least very very little, for a prolonged period of time.

For example, Neanderthal DNA will also only, or primarily, be found in people with european ancestry.
Your average european will share some 2% of neaderthal DNA. Your average aboriginal will share much much less, if any at all.



I don't see what is controversial about this. It's clear as day, and it's okay.
It's not a crime to state the obvious. Nor is it controversial

 

[We Never Know]

I don't think there's anything controversial about the simple obvious fact that in general, you can instantly tell what the general geographic location was of people's ancestry, just by looking at them.


View attachment 70932

Asian.


View attachment 70933

Africa

View attachment 70934

European

View attachment 70935

Oceanic

View attachment 70936

The americas

View attachment 70937

Middle eastern.





These differences are genetic. They exist because of prolonged genetic isolation through human history. What was unfolding there were all speciation events.
If the isolation would have continued for another 10s of thousands, or +100.000 years, then speciation of these various homo sapien populations would have been the inevitable outcome.


The fact that traits / genes / genetic sequences / genetic markers are traceable in correlation with geographic location, and the fact that they also match phenotypic difference and similarities, complety fits the narrative of nested hierarchies and a branching tree.

It's exactly what you would expect from an evolutionary process if you have several remotely settled populations that don't interbreed, or at least very very little, for a prolonged period of time.

For example, Neanderthal DNA will also only, or primarily, be found in people with european ancestry.
Your average european will share some 2% of neaderthal DNA. Your average aboriginal will share much much less, if any at all.



I don't see what is controversial about this. It's clear as day, and it's okay.
It's not a crime to state the obvious. Nor is it controversial

Evidently some back tracked(or watever) more than previously thought.

Africans Have More Neanderthal DNA than Previously Thought

Africans Have More Neanderthal DNA than Previously Thought

 

[gnostic]

Ok. Thats what I am asking. All races, black, yellow, white, brown all existed in Africa and then spread across the globe?

Skin colours or tones are hard to define conclusively, if there are only skeletal remains or fossils of humans.

It may have been dark, but how dark is guesswork.

But whatever the colours, races don’t define them as “species”.

Today, races aren’t just focused on looks, alone, but also by cultures and languages, which also don’t define them biologically as separate species. Foreigners can learn and adopt new cultures and new languages.

Of course, it is harder to change skin tone than it is with cultures and languages. Goodness knows, Michael Jackson tried to do the former, but he is a mental case. Jackson cannot change the genes that inherited from both sides of his parents.