Studies of a Skin Color Gene Across Global Populations Reveal Shared Origins

Medical Xpress, January 3, 2014

All instances of a gene mutation that contributes to light skin color in Europeans came from the same chromosome of one person who most likely lived at least 10,000 years ago, according to Penn State College of Medicine researchers.

While the genetics of skin color is largely unclear, past research using zebrafish by the College of Medicine’s Keith Cheng identified a key gene that contributes to lighter skin color in Europeans and differs from West Africans. In 2005, Cheng reported that one amino acid difference in the gene SLC24A5 is a key contributor to the skin color difference between Europeans and West Africans.

“The mutation in SLC24A5 changes just one building block in the protein, and contributes about a third of the visually striking differences in skin tone between peoples of African and European ancestry,” said Cheng, distinguished professor of pathology. Lighter skin color may have provided an advantage due to for the better creation of vitamin D in the lesser sunlight characteristic of northern latitudes.

{snip} This specific mutation in SLC24A5, called A111T, is found in virtually everyone of European ancestry.

A111T is also found in populations in the Middle East and Indian subcontinent, but not in high numbers in Africans. Researchers found that all individuals from the Middle East, North Africa, East Africa and South India who carry the A111T mutation share a common “fingerprint”—traces of the ancestral genetic code—in the corresponding chromosomal region, indicating that all existing instances of this mutation originate from the same person.

{snip}

The pattern of proportions of people with this lighter skin color mutation indicates that the A111T mutation occurred somewhere between the Middle East and the Indian subcontinent.

{snip}

This mutated segment of DNA was itself created from a combination of two other mutated segments commonly found in Eastern Asians—traditionally defined as Chinese, Japanese and Korean.

“The coincidence of this interesting form of evidence of shared ancestry of East Asians with Europeans, within this tiny chromosomal region, is exciting,” Cheng said. “The combining of segments occurred after the ancestors of East Asians and Europeans split geographically more than 50,000 years ago; the A111T mutation occurred afterward.”

{snip}

The differences in skin color affect skin cancer rates. Europeans have 10 to 20 times more instances of melanoma than Africans. However, despite also having lighter skin, East Asians have the same melanoma rates as Africans. The reason for this difference can only be explained after the gene mutations for both groups are found. This understanding could lead to better treatments for melanoma.

Topics: , , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • David Ashton

    Origins of clear blue eyes and fair hair?

    • Bossman

      There are albino Africans. What is interesting about albinos is that they are generally more intelligent but weaker physically and sexually.

      • M.

        What does melanin have to do with physical strength? Albinos are still of the same Negro descent. They just don’t produce melanin.
        Can you refer me to the study?

        • Kit Ingoldby

          He’s a troll, ignore him.

        • MikeofAges

          This an opinion forum. Do you own research, you bassoon*. There is no high ground, and if there was, you wouldn’t occupy it anyway.

          *The use of the word “bassoon” is a deliberate malapropism, borrowed from a “Peanuts” cartoon. In one panel, Charlie Brown complained, “I’m tired of being the bassoon all the time.”

          • M.

            He just made an unfounded nonsensical connection between albinism and IQ/physical strength. A quick Google research suggests that there isn’t.

            What’s with the name-calling?! And you went on “explaining” the name-calling hahaha wtf dude! That’s gonna make a fun story.
            “The use of the word…” =D

          • MikeofAges

            I explained the “name calling” because I have used the same deliberate malapropism in the past, and people have corrected me because they did not understand that it was a deliberate malapropism.

            I don’t know what the subtle manifestations of albinism are, or whether they differ with race or subtype. Or with gender. I don’t demand “proof” of people and then assert that the contrary position must be deemed correct until they provide it. No less a source than the great Robert Heinlein said that it is okay to say you don’t know, when you don’t. One thing I do not believe is that a “quick Google search” would provide much of an answer, though. I even went to a school with a black kid who was albino. And have seen many of my own color. I don’t imagine there are radical differences between individuals with albinism and other people. But that does not rule out average differences in entire populations. Please.

          • M.

            There’s nothing wrong with demanding references when an assertation that ridiculous is put forward. I don’t know why it ticked, much less why you resort to name-calling for something as futile as “Do you have any references?”

            You sure you’re not an a Negro albino?

          • MikeofAges

            Because it’s a “coffeehouse” argument. This is a very large topic which calls for some research. I don’t know the answer, beyond assessing what I have seen with my own eyeballs. You don’t know. “Bossman” doesn’t know either, but he may have seen seen an article, book or documentary. I just don’t accept that because people with albinism are not otherwise highly different, that there are not statistical differences. I’ve noted this already. This is the substantial part of your assertion I am disagreeing with.

            Melanin deficiency? Well, I have some familiarity with black nationalist pseudoscience going way back. All I can say about it is that I have never been sure whether the intention of it was to mock white-produced racial pseudoscience or folk beliefs or whether the authors thought what they were saying was true. I think, really, that they wanted what they were saying to be true, but that their primary intention was to foment discord.

            The classic in my mind was the comparison of white rats and black rats (fur color, not skin color). The black rats in question were noted as having longer lifespans and more apparent intelligence than the white rats. What was not pointed out was that the white rats in question were not some breed of normal rats with light or white fur, but specially bred albino white rats. These had been created for use in laboratory experiments and morever had been bred to be extremely uniform genetically. They were not at all like any viable wild population, or even a domestic breed capable of surviving in the wild. Old story. Set up a straw man, and then start beating it.

          • Bossman

            “M”. It is up to you to prove me wrong. I did not go to Google to get this information but I read it somewhere and it comes from personal observation by some people. Charles Darwin described white blue-eyed cats as having poor eyesight. Not all good things come with white skin and blue eyes.

          • Who Me?

            Actually blue-eyed cats with long, white fur have a 5 or 6% chance of being born stone deaf. (Compared with the normal 0.3% of other color/fur cats.) I have observed this myself with colonies of feral cats.

          • Bossman

            Very interesting observation. I didn’t know that.

          • Actually it isn’t. The burden of proof is always on the person making the bizarre assertion.

          • “You sure you’re not an albino? I heard melanin deficiency causes poor impulse control. Just ask Pr. Bossman.”

            Nothing like encouraging further malapropisms.

      • So CAL Snowman

        Oh yes the lack of melanin increases african IQ, are you freaking serious?

        • MikeofAges

          Why not? It’s raised yours. A little.

  • Oil Can Harry

    Yo G, dis be bull. Minister Farrakhan says da white man wuz created in a labo-mo-tory by a black mad scientist named named Dr. Yakub. Nome same? Nah mean?

    • Bossman

      I once read a book put out by the black Muslims describing the origins of the white man. That book was so bizarre that I couldn’t stop laughing.

  • ben no

    Whites particularly of north-west and central European ancestry and living outside of Europe are most at risk since they moved to hotter climates that their light skin hadn’t
    adapted to in North America and Australia. Now they’ve ended up with high incidents of melanoma. The use of sunscreen and its importance is certainly more rampant among American whites and Australian whites than it is for their ancestral cousins in Europe
    who often hail from colder and damper climates or mildly warm climates.

    The skin of the north-east Asians is actually light-medium, not light. It is
    clear that they don’t quite approach the fairness and whiteness of Anglo or
    Nordic European skin for example. Truthfully-speaking, north-east Asians are
    more comparable with south Europeans for skin lightness than they are with
    other peoples. I think it would be intellectually dishonest to claim otherwise,
    though I’m sure any Asian supremacists lurking about will attempt to do just
    that, and that wouldn’t be surprising either.

    We all know they have issues with not being the lightest-skinned peoples on earth as it’s what they’d like to be. Their obsession has even taken on a delusional aspect. Many now are convinced that not only is their skin just as light, but lighter even. You’ll actually
    get them saying, “Asians have the whitest skin while European skin is not
    really white anyway.”

    Of course it’s absolutely ridiculous! So they are undeniably jealous and take that jealousy out on whites with verbal abuse. They’ll also attempt to convince themselves with blatantly edited and airbrushed pictures of Asian girls with completely white skin, and then use those pictures as evidence against us. What is especially worse is their constant denial of our skin being the fairest or whitest. It is a clear indication that they have some very serious issue here and that should not be ignored.

    I’m not making this up to make them sound bad. This is literal. They really do this.

    • Skin bleaching creams are enormously popular all across Asia. In fact, many creams are labeled simply as moisturizer but have bleaching chemicals in them. Their “whiteness” comes in a bottle.

      • GeneticsareDestiny

        I wonder how well those creams work. They’re even becoming popular in Africa, and they’ve been popular for a long time in dark-skinned Asian nations like India, but the people don’t really seem to be getting any lighter by using them.

        I think their “whiteness” is largely a product of Photoshop, though some Asians, particularly Japanese females, are pretty light (females of all races are lighter than the males of their race).

        • ben no

          Japanese females, are pretty light? No. Japanese are not particularly light and their “lightness” falls within Mongoloid norms to which the Koreans and Northern Chinese will have to. I have seen the lightest NE Asian skin type, and it’s still darker and sallower than the Northern European norm. European female light skin can be as white as a plain sheet with remarkable blushing ability, you ought to know that.

          • GeneticsareDestiny

            I never said they were as light as white women. I said they were “pretty light”. Meaning compared to all the other non-white groups, including other Asian groups like Indians and Filipinos.

          • Sick of it

            Look at purer Mongoloid groups. Compare to Northeast Asians. Consider the archaeological evidence from Asia. Make a connection.

          • Max Krakah

            Some Japanese can be very dark. Some japanese also have frizzy hair.

    • Talltrees

      “What is especially worse is their constant denial of our skin being the fairest or whitest.”

      I’d like to see them stand beside my ghostly white skin for comparison. I look like a white sheet that’s just been bleached and dried in the sun.

      • ben no

        “I’d like to see them…”

        Who exactly?

        • Talltrees

          Weren’t you talking about Asians?

          • ben no

            Oh, yes! I think some Asians like to think of themselves as being ghostly ‘pearly’ white. Of course they are not. It will only ever be a fixed fantasy of theirs.

      • Who Me?

        That makes two of us! (In addition I have bright red hair and blue eyes, and have never, ever been able to tan–I just burn.)

      • Max Krakah

        I have Gilbert’s Syndrome. it is a benign congenital defect where there is more bilirubin circulating in my blood, or I have elevated levels of unconjugated bilirubin. I am yellower than others, but one doesn’t notice it unless one puts their arm right next to mine. This is actually beneficial. The unconjugated form of bilirubin acts as an antioxidant, and people with Gilbet’s Syndrome have less heart disease. When I’m sick or when I fast, my eyes look yellowish, which is how I got this checked out years ago. Someone thought I had hep. The yellowing from Hep is from the conjugated form of bilirubin, which is not healthy

        • Talltrees

          Inherited GS affects 3-7% of the population, mostly men. Relatively harmless, becoming ill, fasting, skipping meals, and exercise can exacerbate the condition. Some medications cause side effects.

          Fortunately, there are benefits as you say.

    • SirMe

      pale white skin is not that attractive, that’s why tanning is so popular…

      • ben no

        Nice tactic but it won’t work. A golden tan is too simply look sexy, and arguably it doesn’t work in many cases. The fact that whites wish to remain having fair white skin in their gene pool would strongly prove otherwise that tan isn’t the natural ideal.

        • Who Me?

          A tan is attractive because it implies health and a fair amount of wealth too. It implies that you have the health and wealth to spend time at a beach, or maybe a cruise to warmer climes in the winter. Or at the very least the time to lay out in the sun doing nothing else while getting a tan. Tans also became vastly more popular when the “California girl” image became popular. In no way does a white person with a tan resemble a non-white person.

          • Sick of it

            Nothing says you’re healthy like a higher chance of skin cancer. Also – How did Afrikaners take the extreme sunlight down in South Africa for centuries? It truly burned my skin every day I was there.

          • Who Me?

            What is “popular” isn’t always what is actually healthier. I said that in our American culture, it is implied that a tan looks healthier, not that it really is.

          • Max Krakah

            It is. Vitamin D is essential for good health and is a cancer preventative. When people did not eat PUFAs but ate saturated fats, they would be able to stay out in the sun longer without burning.

          • Max Krakah

            High levels of vitamin D are one of the most powerful cancer preventatives known.

          • High levels of vitamin D are just excreted away, as this is water-soluble. The body simply rids itself of what it can not quickly use.

          • ben no

            This might be of some interest…

            “I’m not completely knocking tan and I’m not saying white women can’t pull it off, since there are those that defiantly can and make it rock, however, they more often look best with their natural white skin, especially has it has that innocent and princess quality to it. You must be crazy to think that fair and feminine skin complexion would not be an attractive featured for women just because tan is “meant” to sexier or hotter or whatever. I think that has got to be one of the most silliest misconceptions of today in America and the West. Skin fairness is envied the world over and it is a real shame that white women are not so aware of this unlike the non-white women are.” Korean-American, age 32

          • Who Me?

            I WISH the fairer skin (without a hint of tan) was more popular in American culture–I’d be a roaring sensation! Five minutes out in the sun without sunscreen and I’m already turning red. Also a couple sunstrokes and terrible blistering sunburns every summer from just playing outside alongside my cousins and neighbor kids tends to teach you very quickly what happens to pale skinned kids. Then you get teased for being pale… called unhealthy, etc.

          • ben no

            I disagree. Fake tan results in reduced femininity and that is exactly how it looks to me. It adds a vulgarized aspect to the sexy and slutty image our girls get lumped with. Many girls can not pull off the orange-y look anyway, though they certainly try to. If you can’t do it right – don’t do it at all. And don’t give me the low down on how fake tan got popularized in the US. I know very well, and its sounds like outdated dribble. Nowadays, terrible aging is associated with beach exposure and intense heat, and that’s the image the rest of the world gets. Nice, isn’t it?

          • I wonder what those gals with their baseball-mitt tans look like once they are in their 40s.

          • Max Krakah

            a very worn baseball mitt

          • Jack Burton

            Skin damage is more perceived later in life. In fact skin cancer can arise from skin damage you received 20-30 years ago. People are stupid.

          • Jack Burton

            How does a tan imply health? That is so stupid, you don’t even know WTF you’re saying.

            Tanning is your skin’s reaction to UV damage. That’s like saying bruising is healthy and attractive.

            That’s not to say that some sun isn’t healthy of course, but you don’t need that much.

            In the context of having a tan, that is not healthy. Here’s a simply question, do you see dermatologists with tans? There you go.

        • David Ashton

          There are different sorts of “pale white”. Some faces look ghostly pale and ill. Others have a healthy and rosy glow.

      • Max Krakah

        Tanning only became popular in the 20’s or 30’s. Before that, white was the preferred skin tone, at least for women. Coco Channel is credited with changing that.

        • Coco Channel was an active collaborator and also ran off from France with her SS officer lover after the end of World War Two, so her judgement leaves something to be desired.

          • Max Krakah

            She liked the uniform.

          • Who wouldn’t? I used to enjoy WW-2 battle reenactment as a hobby and participated both as Russian army and Waffen SS. I still have the uniforms. With a proper haircut and wearing the latter, my mother says I look “frightening”, and my wife says it runs a chill down her spine but that it also looks “sexy” on me.

      • Jack Burton

        That is largely from marketing schemes. Fair skin had always been the ideal in Europe.

        Only since the 20th century have we had this fad of tanning and tan skin being the ideal, which is from marketing propaganda to sell people skin care products and tanning salons.

        It’s analogous to those old ads where they actually had the audacity to claim smoking cigarettes was healthy for you and it’s so cool and hip. It’s all bullshit. Smoking and tanning both cause cancer.

      • Geo1metric

        Simply your opinion.

    • Max Krakah

      Skin cancer incidence rose after people substituted omega 6 vegetable oil fats for the traditional saturated animal fats. One can experience the difference oneself. If one eliminates all of the vegetable fats from ones diet, and uses just saturated animal fats or coconut oil, then they can spend much more time in the sun without burning. Vegetable fats go rancid very quickly. Lard, coconut oil, beef tallow, can sit out on shelves for months without going rancid. The cell walls of your body are made up of the fats that you eat. A diet deficient in saturated fats but abundant in PUFAs will force your body to use unstable fats in it’s cell walls. That means much more susceptibility to oxidation.

    • Jack Burton

      The heat doesn’t bother me, as long as I stay hydrated. Prehydration is key.

      UV radiation is the killer, and the damage it does to your skin can show up later in life. Limit your exposure to the sun during the middle of the day.

      • I’m partly injun, but the way I see it, the injuns here in Colorado were reddish-colored for a pretty good reason. Since I’m a fairly intelligent, light-complexioned guy, I wear a hat.

        • Jack Burton

          You say you’re part Injun, but what part exactly? Have you had your DNA tested?

          There’s a misconception that darker-skinned people don’t get skin cancer, that’s not true, it just doesn’t happen as often.

  • DailyKenn

    Interesting that Europeans have a single common ancestor.

    • HJ11

      Interesting but not unusual. All Hass Avocado trees and fruit are descended from one mutant Avocado tree. It just takes one mutant organism to cause the divergence of organisms. This is another reason why we Whites must have as many White children as possible–so the one with mutations that help our evolution into full specieshood (when we can no longer bear children with darker humans) happens. By limiting the number of White children we have, we limit the possibility that the variants we need will be born. Every single White person, male and female, is a possible new Adam and Eve for all future Whites.

      • Jack Burton

        That’s not a valid comparison. Hass avocados are a cultivar, selected and propagated by humans.

        • HJ11

          Nope, I made a valid comparison. Your comment as to the specific mechanism used for this particular selection misses the point that we humans are a part of nature–and in this case, we were the “force of nature” that selected the most fit. Furthermore, my major point is the importance of mutations to our White evolution. And, implicit in my point is that we Whites will be the ones to decide how we shall best evolve.

          • Jack Burton

            So you’re not just stupid, you’re willfully stupid.

          • HJ11

            Non-sequitur.

          • Jack Burton

            You continue to prove my point.

          • Jack Burton

            No, it’s not.

            You couldn’t win a logical debate if your life depended on it.

  • bigone4u

    I don’t view skin color as the prime differentiator between whites and blacks. Blacks:
    * smell different
    * think different
    * behave different
    * are not intelligent on average
    * have different facial features, such as the broad, flat nose and the kinky hair
    Blacks are not white people with darker skin. They are almost a different species, but unfortunately they can mate with white people and produce offspring.

    • So CAL Snowman

      Our lighter skin paved the way for increased Vitamin D production which allowed us to flourish in the extreme cold of Europe and beyond. Our adaptation to an extreme environment allowed for the natural selection of the most fit and intelligent individuals. As our population bottle-necked (became smaller due to genetic isolation in an extreme environment) the White race began to emerge with a unique genetic finger print due to genetic bottle-necking and adaptation by natural selection to our environment. Well that’s my theory anyway, and that’s why WHITE skin makes all the difference.

    • ben no

      Even if Blacks are genetically human, they are more in between apes and humans from an external and social perspective. In fact, one could ague that in certain situations, Apes are smarter and more behaved than Black humans.

      • Lt_Greyman_NVA

        According to the Book, “Erectus Walks Amongst Us”, there is a 0.25% separation between the African and the Nordic types in DNA. Generally a separate subspecies is defined at 0.025%, say between a Great Dane and Blood Hound. Africans are thus 10 times the difference between the average separation between sub-species but because it is Politically Incorrect to say so, no one does. Instead we simply act as if the blood hound isn’t really lazy or can really hunt boar with the Danes because to say else, you lose you job. It is in some cases better to be a child molester than to notice the difference between Homo Sapien Sapien and Homo Africanus.

        • The woman on the left is clearly Australoid, not African. But your point is a good one.

          • IstvanIN

            The fact that you can tell that, as can I, proves the point!

          • Alexandra1973

            Looking at that, I can see how Darwin came up with the *theory* of evolution.

          • Luis

            The woman on the left has a face only an Australoid can love.

          • John R

            That’s what Australoids look like? Geeze! Up until now, I thought blacks were the ugliest race! I hope they have thick paper bags in Australia! Can you imagine, having, no-forget I even tried to think that-okay, people. Please ignore this comment. I really didn’t suggest that!

          • Some of the half-cast Australian lubras look reasonable and are decent people, but I still can’t imagine being aroused by one.

          • John R

            Anyone who SERIOUSLY believes that “all races are equal” and that beauty is only because “white standards” are emphasized, must take some look at Australian aborigines. And did you really HAVE to say “aroused by one” in your reply? It’s going to take me hours, and a lot of stiff drinks to get the thought out of my head, GEEZE, THANKS ALOT! (LMAO).

          • If it helps any, I did admit that I couldn’t imagine it.

          • Jack Burton

            Australoids have the distinction of being the only race with a lower IQ than sub-Saharan Africans.

          • Franklin_Ryckaert

            No, sub-Saharan Africans IQ 67, Australian Aborigines IQ 62, Bushmen and Pygmies IQ 54.

          • Jack Burton

            No, Bushmen and Pygmies are sub-Saharan peoples, troll, and included as Negroid. They’re also a very small percentage of the population.

            Taken as a whole Australian Aboriginals are lower.

          • Jack Burton

            Look reasonable, WTF?

            You have the retarded mentality of the Australians and Latins.

            Apparently the Americans were the only ones that had any god damned sense when dealing with miscegenation. The stupid Australians wanted to absorb Australoids into their gene pool with the Half-Caste Act, that’s their brilliant solution.

            We see how that worked out with the Latins.

          • The light-skinned white-Aborigine crosses look much like some subcontinental Indians, and not so warthog ugly as the unfortunate being in the picture above. Their facial features are much better. There were two twin gals at chow hall in Randwick, NSW who looked like dark-skinned white people. I only decided there were two of them after I had to look back over my shoulder and then back at the woman in front of me.

            When I lived Down Under in 1997-1998, the Aborigines were recognized as not being very bright, but they also weren’t violent the way most African blacks are.

          • Jack Burton

            I see you decided to double down on retardation.

            So you advocate that we should assimilate half-castes by reason that they’re less ugly?

            Australian aboriginals are less violent? Bullshit.

            The major difference is that Australian aboriginals are not as worshiped in the Australian media as blacks are in the US and abroad. They perhaps are not as athletically nor musically talented. They are also a much smaller proportion of the population being only around 2% and are more segregated from society like Amerindian tribals are in the US.

            However, as far as crime and violent crime, Aboriginals are similar to blacks, they commit a disproportionately high amount of crime.

            Aboriginals are 2.3% of the population yet account for around 25% of Australia’s prison population.

            Aboriginals account for 15.7% of homicide offenders and 15.1% of homicide victims.

            Child abuse is also much higher among Aboriginals.

            As a comparison in 2008 the imprisonment rate of Australian Aboriginals was five times higher than that of black men in South Africa at the end of apartheid.

          • Franklin_Ryckaert

            Everything other than the “one drop rule” is racial suicide for Whites.

          • Jack Burton

            That’s laughable on its face considering that 1-2% admixture is the norm for Europe.

            However, we certainly need a standard.

          • Max Krakah

            she’s the tasmanian devil

          • Jack Burton

            Case in point, it’s not all about skin color. Despite sharing some phenotypic characteristics and a low average IQ, Australoids and Congoids are very distinct races which diverged over 60,000+ years ago.

        • Bossman

          Homo Africanus is not a species or a sub species as far as science is concerned. There is no term “Homo Africanus” in the literature of evolutionary biology. The woman on the left belongs to the Australoid group and some have speculated that they could be Proto-Caucasians.

          • Brian

            Thank you, Captain Obvious.

          • Jack Burton

            Australoids diverged from other races 50,000+ years ago, get out of here with that BS.

          • Bossman

            It is not exactly BS. Most anthropologists still are unsure how to classify the Australoid group, given that there are only three main racial divisions of mankind.

          • Franklin_Ryckaert

            Well these geniuses might consider that if the Aborigines don’t fit in the “only three” main racial divisions of mankind, they simply are a fourth.

        • Jack Burton

          True, however that’s obviously a very biased example.

          A better contrast would be with the typical or average phenotype of the two races.

          • ben no

            There is no “single” average phenotype of any people or nation. You cannot pick out one woman and one man and say that’s the average, as it just doesn’t work like that. There are at least 3 or 4 different phenotypes in the averages, and that’s exactly how it looks in group of random, average people. If you round up a group of 30 White-Americans and quickly, randomly select them, saying “him” or “her” from the street, they will all look different from each other with different phenotypes, and thus making a “single” average impossible.

            Now you cannot say the people weren’t “average”, if you randomly selected them, you see. Its not about the average man or woman, rather its about the average men and women, which represent the general looks. The single concept is much too narrow.

            The point is: the general concept of average is flawed.

          • Franklin_Ryckaert

            The “average phenotype” is indeed a theoretical construct, but as such useful. You can find nowadays on the internet pictorial representations of such “average phenotypes” of given populations, without it being suggested that you will meet such types frequently in real life.

          • Jack Burton

            Nice straw man, you stupid troll.

            It’s called a composite, moron.

            feministphilosophers. files. wordpress. com/2011/02/averageface.jpg

          • ben no

            I’m not a troll. You are the idiot. Trolls are high-conflict peoples and their intention is to increase conflict wherever they go on the internet. I do NOT do this.

            “It’s called a composite, moron.”

            Yes. And it’s largely inaccurate, you fool. Such a narrow estimation is impossible.

          • Jack Burton

            Trolls are people who make stupid statements just to be contrary and provoke others, like you.

            Nothing you’ve said has made any damned sense.

            Do us all a favor and never comment again, you failed abortion.

          • ben no

            You don’t have to admit you can’t keep up with me. I can see it for myself. You’re probably one of those retarded type whites that degrade our race.

          • Jack Burton

            Everything you say is meaningless, just like your life.

        • David Ashton

          I have seen the odd “white” woman that looks a bit like the lady on the left if you ignore the pigmentation. The tasty chick on the right is hardly typical of “white women” in general, and should have done her roots.
          Still, I know which of them I would prefer to “date” if given the choice.
          (The one on the right, in case you have any doubts.)

          • ben no

            The white woman is an Alpine type or Cro-Magnon type, and for some parts of Europe, she is extremely common. There is no white woman that would have a primitively flat and wide face like the aborigine, as it’s simply not Caucasian. Period.

          • Franklin_Ryckaert

            I think the white woman is a gracile Nordic-Alpine mix, a type one frequently sees among models.

          • ben no

            Nordic-Alpine mix? Really? Her face seems more Slavic or Baltic to me. I would say Alpine with minor Cro-Magnon influence.

          • Franklin_Ryckaert

            Both Alpines and East Baltics have broad faces. East Baltics have even tilted noses. This woman has a narrow face and nose, but I admit she could be Slavic. Cro-Magnons are not gracile.

          • ben no

            You’re wrong. The woman in that picture has Cro-Magnon influence. Her brow and forehead is prominent, and don’t you get that from either the Alpine or the Nordid. Pure Alpine female example: Christina Ricci.

          • Geo1metric

            Come on, guys, she’s gorgeous!!!!

          • David Ashton

            Disqus omits comments at random and it is often difficult to know who is replying to what.

          • David Ashton

            PS. Someone replied to my comment but it disappeared (as my posts also do sometimes). I did say “a bit like” the Australid on the left, the nasal form being fairly race specific, but no less “ugly”.

            Disadvantageous mutations can arise within racial conglomerations.

            The girl on the right resembles Miss England 2013, though I have seen equally pretty girls in my small home town who would not dream of entering beauty competitions. There are variations within the white female population of England; e.g. Derbyshire women are very big-boned and “jowly”, whereas Norfolk women are more gracile. Some Indian women are also very pretty and slim, but I say: each to his own.

          • ben no

            I find your estimations to be incorrect from what Iv’e read. Derbyshire (East-Midlands) has one of the largest settlement of Danish Vikings following the Northern Alpine Borrebys, while Norfolk (South-East) has Anglo-Saxon/Robust Nordics everywhere. If anything, Norfolk will be more broad and big-boned, and probably look like Kate Winslet type or Joss Stone type. Of course, being broad and having rounded features only makes them cute and childish-looking. You should think about that before slamming phenotypes with Cro-Magnon influence, as you haven’t got a damn clue!

          • David Ashton

            Well, I live in Norfolk and often visit Derbshire.

          • ben no

            You are trying to neglect the fact that Derbyshire England is a hot spot of Danish Viking influence, while Norfolk England a hot spot for Anglo-Saxon influence.

            You said Derbyshire is more big-boned and robust, and yet the Nordics are meant to be the most gracile. HYPOCRISY!!!

          • David Ashton

            I have no interest in replying to ridiculous personal accusations of “hypocrisy” or “low standards”, another reason why I stopped making major contibutions here.

          • ben no

            You shall not be missed.

          • David Ashton

            I don’t slam phenotypes with Cro-Magnon influence. I just find some white girls prettier than others. I have only lived in Norfolk for 26 years and visited Derbyshire about 20 times.

          • grunt2301

            Most Indian women look like half breed Australoid women, especially the Dravidian southern ones, plus Indian women tend to gain weight fast after 22, and they get extremely round, plus they’re hairy and have an odor problem too.

          • David Ashton

            I have not been around that many older Indian women, so unlike you I cannot comment on their odor. There is an Australid element in people of southern India.

          • David Ashton

            My reply to this has not appeared. If these “silent” deletions continue, I shall not waste time contribution to AR discussions.

          • Franklin_Ryckaert

            I’m glad to hear that, because I had my doubts.

    • willbest

      Isn’t smell largely a function of diet?

      • bigone4u

        Partly, such as consuming large amounts of raw garlic. But sweat glands and other such biological features distinguish the black smell. Dogs have sensitive noses and the “jungle smell” often scares them or makes them hostile.

        • Jack Burton

          They have more sweat glands and their sweat glands are also more active. Combine that with a bad, greasy diet and lack of hygiene, and you have one nasty race.

          Blacks are an eye-sore, ear-sore and nose-sore. These are all warnings by God, stay the hell away from these people.

      • Bossman

        Blacks have larger and more numerous skin pores and more sweat glands. They also have higher basal metabolism; that is the ability to burn sugars and fats while at rest.

        • Jack Burton

          F off with your Negrophilic lies.

          The opposite is true, studies have shown that blacks have a lower resting metabolic rate, which contributes to their higher rate of obesity.

          • Bossman

            Not true at all. They are the world’s best sprinters. One given reason for that is because they can quickly metabolize sugars and fats to produce a quick burst of energy. Black males also store less body fat per given body weight than white males.

          • Geo1metric

            Their muscle fibers are shorter and more numerous which gives them a faster reflex response. However, White men still win the world weight lifting competitions, and overall are better at sports than blacks. See castefootballdotnet.

          • grunt2301

            Chinese win the weightlifting competitions, and its mostly just Eastern Europeans that are weightlifters, the British whites are weak

          • Jack Burton

            Google studies on resting metabolic rate in blacks and Whites, you lazy retard.

            Sprinting ability has to do with fast-twitch muscles, not resting metabolic rate, you mouth-breathing moron.

            What you mean is that they have more muscle mass than your wimpy ass.

            Black males are on average shorter, fatter, and have less upper body strength than White males, specifically Northern European males. Yet douchebags like you want to invent this Negrophilic fantasy to pretend all White males are as inferior as you are to make yourself feel better. Misery loves company.

    • Who Me?

      Blacks are the only race of people on the planet with kinky, nappy hair. Anyone else who is born with it, usually have some sort of genetic mutation–think clowns with kinky orange hair…

      • Jack Burton

        It’s a very dominant characteristic that is noticeable even with low admixture levels. That’s why quadroons like Vin Diesel can pass as “white” among average simpletons as long as they shave their heads.

    • Jack Burton

      Anthropologically speaking, skin tone is one of the least significant racial differences. Skull size and shape being two of the more important phenotypic differences.

  • Alexandra1973

    I’m a brown-eyed brunette (touch of Cherokee, more than 49% Anglo, 50% Eastern European), I tan easily, and I can take the cold rather easily. I was born in Michigan and I live in Ohio.

    I for one am uncomfortable in 80-degree (Fahrenheit) weather. I prefer no more than 75 degrees. I just don’t get cold that easily. My hands feel warm even in cold weather.

    My son must have inherited something there. When he was a baby, he could lie there in front of a fan in just his diaper and not want a blanket or anything. I think he too is a cold-weather person.

    • ncpride

      I’m the exact same way. I much prefer colder weather to the blistering heat of summer. I can’t even tolerate hot showers…. I prefer lukewarm ones. Very hot water actually makes me dizzy and sick to my stomach. I’ve been like that since childhood. Weird, huh?

      • Alexandra1973

        When I was pregnant with my son hot showers made me nauseous, had to be tepid. Other than that I enjoy hot showers in the winter.

        I’m always interested in these genetic studies. It’s like I’m finding out things about myself. I’m always wondering if my Scottish ancestry made me like this, or is it my German ancestry….

    • My wife and I set the heat in the house for 55 degrees F. I’m wearing a long-sleeved t-shirt, a sweatshirt, a heavy “Field & Stream” hunting shirt and an old army jacket, so only my hands feel cold. Sayaka seems quite happy this way, and would set the heat lower if I let her and if the pipes wouldn’t freeze and break. I now suspect Japanese are more closely related to Chuchkis, Nivkhs and Inuits than I had earlier supposed.

      • Alexandra1973

        They are. Orientals and Amerinds are both Shemites.

        I guess some crossed the Bering Strait, the rest stayed in Asia.

        • Shemites are tan Afritards from the northeast Saharan Somalian “hook”. I suspect they are different all on their own. I’m not John Eglelman, but I’m glad my wife and I can have fun together.

  • Spartacus

    Race is a social construct. Claim that some people have lighter skin than other is a nazi concept, as doctor Shlomo clearly points out in his books “We’re all the same, but Whites say otherwise because they’re evil” .

    • Alexandra1973

      When it comes to the “gibs,” though, suddenly we’re not all the same!

  • John R

    “…..and another study found that persons of the lighter skin tone were afflicted with a pathological altruism toward people who are completely different from them, even especially, when these people hated and resented those with the lighter skin tone…” Ahhha, now we have found the roots of the Bleeding Heart Liberal Gene!

  • Lt_Greyman_NVA

    So what about all the other differences? Completely different hair, bone structure, genetic diseases like Sickle Cell anemia, thick lips, behavioral differences, high blood pressure, yellow eyes, low I.Q., bone ridge on skull, etc? And this was only a gene accounting for a third of the difference between Whites and Africans skin. What genes are accounting for the other two thirds? Also, African melanin comes from a completely different chemical cascade than Whites, so in what way is that difference influenced by this gene? Very superficial article.

    • Sick of it

      Nice to see that I’m not the only one to notice the bone ridges.

    • Max Krakah

      don’t forget the absence of nasal dams.

  • wildfirexx

    Why does science always assume that since we all came out of Africa theoretically, we must all have been black at one time or another ? How do we know that the black Africans and or Asians didn’t evolve from the Caucasian race! After all, if we originally all evolved for other primates …are they not light skinned underneath all that hair ? We also know we have DNA traces of Neanderthal and other possible species in our genes, adding to our differences.

    • Franklin_Ryckaert

      The original Africans probably looked more like Bushmen who have a yellowish skin rather than like black Africans. The black African is a more recent development than the Bushman.

      • Bossman

        The Bushman is supposed to be the closest link to Cro-Magnon man who immigrated to Europe and then interbred and somhow replaced Neanderthal man. Poster Engelman can help explain all that stuff.

        • Maybe. Please remember that whites and Orientals each have some pre-human traits, but these are different features.

    • Brian

      Why does science always assume…
      ===
      This is not based on an assumption. There is a good deal of evidence on this subject, esp. molecular biology.

      are they not light skinned underneath all that hair ?
      ===
      We don’t have all that hair. That matters. It would make sense for people in the tropics to be dark because of the vitamin D/melanoma tradeoff, given their sun-rich, clothing-optional circumstances. And as people pushed toward colder, seasonal climes, the tendency would be to get lighter.

      • wildfirexx

        First off… how do we know that today’s savannah was not a jungle hundreds, if not millions of years ago. Many blacks lived in treed areas sheltered from the sun, as do most primates. And if humans lived so freely in open savannah throughout the past , would not they be easy prey for wild animals.

        • The men killed every dangerous animal they saw, until there weren’t any more in Europe, Asia and the Americas.

    • WR_the_realist

      One of the biggest evolutionary mysteries about humans is why we lost our fur. But given that we did, those humans living on the African savanna needed to have dark skin to protect them from the sun. So our African ancestors probably did have dark skin.

      • Perhaps, but when proto-Eurasians and Africans diverged along different evolutionary paths to better suit their respective environments, Eurasians would have become lighter, while Africans became darker. They developed to suit their areas’ changing demands just as we did in ours.

    • Geo1metric

      All other primates are not “light-skinned underneath all that hair”. Take a close look at a gorilla some time. Characteristics that stand out to me are: very dark skin, small ears, flat noses, large lips, and a kind of “shelf” on their rear-ends.

  • MikeofAges

    There are two kinds of people, you know . Those who think there are two kinds of people. And those who don’t.

  • rightrightright

    The DM article is at odds with this report. Europeans’ Neanderthal inheritance includes white skins. Neanderthal man lived about 30,000 years ago and there was some interbreeding with modern humans resulting in a 1.5 neanderthal genetic transfer into homo sapiens. The development of white skin surely pre-dates the 10,000 years quoted in the above report. The gene described may have come from one individual, but white skin must have come from other sources too.

    • Grantland

      The evidence indicates that the Neanderthal admixture occurred prior to the speciation event that gave rise to h sapiens sapiens from h sapiens some 50-70k years ago. H sapiens is thought to have been timid, gracile, and easy meat for the formidable carnivore (and rapist?) Neanderthal. The subsequent Cro-Magnon probably killed Neanderthal on sight.

    • Sick of it

      There was an article on Amren within the past few weeks which showed that Neanderthal ancestry was more readily found among certain nonwhite groups than whites. Stop peddling the theories of Marxists, please. Archaic DNA is more common in every other group than our own.

    • Max Krakah

      The differences between the races go way beyond the skin color. For instance, one can tell the race of an individual by teeth alone. Physical morphology is equally or more important.

      • Whites and East Asians both have Neanderthal and other archaic physical traits, but some of these are different traits. That has me thinking a bit.

        • Max Krakah

          If one has only the teeth from a skeleton, one can tell if it is asian or European. I am not aware of traits that Asians have that are from Neanderthals. The only one that whites have, that I am aware of , is the heavier brow ridge.

  • Talltrees

    To be fair, (Chinese) Dr. Keith Cheng’s colleagues on this project are Dr. Janet Robishaw (English), Dr. Robert Levenson (Jewish), and Dr. Glen Gerhard (German).

  • William Krapek

    “…one person who most likely lived at least 10,000 years ago, according to Penn State College of Medicine researchers.”

    And..

    “This specific mutation in SLC24A5, called A111T, is found in virtually everyone of European ancestry.

    A111T is also found in populations in the Middle East and Indian subcontinent, but not in high numbers in Africans. Researchers found that all individuals from the Middle East, North Africa, East Africa and South India who carry the A111T mutation share a common “fingerprint”—traces of the ancestral genetic code—in the corresponding chromosomal region, indicating that all existing instances of this mutation originate from the same person.”

    _________________________________________

    It’s around 10,000 years ago that White people invented the bow and arrow. And we can indeed confirm: they were WHITE people. Not just people who happened to be living in Europe. This also suggests that the mutation might have had something to do with our increased intelligence and creativity.

    This also confirms that the Aryans of the Hittite Empire and the Aryans who created Hinduism were – once again – WHITE people. The regions they describe here were all within the areas conquered and civilized by the Aryans.

    So Uriah the Hittite, who was betrayed by King David, was almost certainly a white man. I wouldn’t be surprised if he were blond hair and blue eyed.

    • Bossman

      American Indians were using bow and arrows also; does that mean they are part of the white race also?

      • William Krapek

        That doesn’t follow it all.

    • Franklin_Ryckaert

      The Hittites may have been of Aryan descent (their language is clearly Indo-European) but racially they were probably more of the Armenoid kind. At least that is the way they depicted their gods. At the time of king David the Hittite Empire had already collapsed but small Hittite “successor statelets” did exist in the Middle East including in Palestine. Uriah the Hittite probably looked more Armenoid than “Aryan”.

      • David Ashton

        Possibly a Nordid-Mediterranid class ruling a largely Armenid population? David himself is described as if Nordid, and the Philistines are thought to have been Nordid.

        • Franklin_Ryckaert

          Yes, probably a form of elite dominance.

          As for king David, he is called admoni in the Bible (1 Sam 16:12, 17:42) which is translated as “reddish” or “ruddy”. We cannot conclude a Nordid phenotype from that.

          The Philistines belonged to the “Peoples of the Sea” who invaded the coasts of the Levant and Egypt in the 13th century BC. In Egypt they were called Peleset and in reliefs they were consistently depicted with straight noses, in contrast to Semitic types who were depicted with hooked noses. They came from the Aegean and were probably Greeks.

          • David Ashton

            I would not press the point about David. German Nordicists contrasted the tall Goliath’s custom of a single combat with swords with little shepherd-boy David’s sneakily “semitic” trickery. But there is reason to think that Nordid genes were widespread in the ancient world from north Africa through the Near East to Persia.

          • There were certainly Celts in what is now Turkey even in Roman empire times. Even modern Celts don’t look very different from modern Germans. Stories about the Islamic prophet Mohammad say that he had red hair.

          • David Ashton

            Galatia.

      • William Krapek

        I don’t know who these people are you refer to. Indo-Europeans are White. I don’t know why everybody has trouble wrapping their heads around that. I’m afraid you’ll have to show me how a nonwhite people started speaking a white language in the very region the Aryans may have first appeared. And on the very path of white Aryan expansion clear through to India.

        (And once again they certainly WERE white. The Hindu god Indra is Thor – and Dionysius. When Alexander the Great with conquering towards India he was consciously following the path formerly trod by him.)

        Also: the Syrian kingdom Uriah probably came from was Hittite and Philistine. Both these are Aryan. And white.

        • Franklin_Ryckaert

          The Armenoids are also white, but they belong to a different sub-race than the Aryans.They are distributed mainly in Eastern Turkey. I consider Turkey, especially Anatolia, as the birthplace of the Mediterranean race from which the Aryans later developed in their homeland North of the Black Sea. There are traces of North Caucasian languages in Indo-European which indicates their route of migration.The Hittites are the earliest group of Indo-European speaking peoples, but they developed locally in Turkey. They must have been a small group of people who conquered an empire of which the majority of the population was different from themselves.

          • William Krapek

            Awesome. Thank you.

            Still white. 🙂

            But in the past, probably even whiter. Turks and Arabs loved raping White women. Still do if I’m getting the right stats. Whatever is special about whiteness seems to be recessive and gets overwhelmed by other racial characteristics. Per what I’m reading online, blond and red hair still pops up – but that often disappears when the children grow up.

            I know the Greeks were MUCH whiter in the past. They were neighbors of the Armenians for centuries.

      • Zimriel

        With the nitpick that the Armenians themselves were probably aligned with the Sea Peoples in invading Great Hatti from the west and extirpating its language and culture from the face of the earth . . . I get what you mean (“Armenoid” as a modern classification for the people historically living there, whether or not there was a political “Armenia” surrounding them).

        In the Hittites were blond, the Egyptians would have found some way to work that into their artwork. They certainly had no trouble portraying Nubians as black.

        • William Krapek

          I actually don’t commit to the Hittites being blonde. I just wouldn’t be surprised if some were.

  • SirMe

    I don’t think we need science to explain a genetic difference in skin colour between Western Africans and Europeans, I think its fairly obvious.

    • Franklin_Ryckaert

      Genetics is the scientific explanation of the obvious phenotypical differences.

  • Brian

    This specific mutation in SLC24A5, called A111T, is found in virtually everyone of European ancestry.
    ===
    I love my A111T privilege.

    • Franklin_Ryckaert

      We have found your “guilty” gene!

  • Sick of it

    There are plenty of people in India who could not be distinguished from white people short of a DNA test. Obviously not the majority, but still.

    • Max Krakah

      tests on light skinned Brahmins show that they have European genetic markers.

      • Amanda A. Watson

        my&nbspco-W­­­­­­ο­­­­­­r­­­­­­Ker’s&nbsphalf-sister&nbspΜ­­­­­­а­­­­­­K­­­­­­е­­­­­­ѕ&nbsp$­­­­­­­88&nbspan&nbspհ­­­­­­ο­­­­­­ս­­­­­­r&nbspon&nbspthe&nbspі­­­­­­ո­­­­­­τ­­­­­­е­­­­­­r­­­­­­ո­­­­­­е­­­­­­τ.&nbspShe&nbsphas&nbspbeen&nbspunemployed&nbspfor&nbsp10&nbspΜ­­­­­­ο­­­­­­ո­­­­­­τ­­­­­­հ­­­­­­ѕ&nbspbut&nbsplast&nbspΜ­­­­­­ο­­­­­­ո­­­­­­τ­­­­­­հ&nbspher&nbspρ­­­­­­а­­­­Уcheck&nbspwas&nbsp$­­­­­­­21409&nbspjust&nbspW­­­­­­ο­­­­­­r­­­­­­King&nbspon&nbspthe&nbspі­­­­­­ո­­­­­­τ­­­­­­е­­­­­­r­­­­­­ո­­­­­­е­­­­­­τ&nbspfor&nbspa&nbspϜ­­­­­­е­­­­­­W&nbspհ­­­­­­ο­­­­­­ս­­­­­­rs.&nbspRead&nbspmore&nbspհ­­­­­­е­­­­­­r­­­­­­е,…J&#x75&#109&#112&#x38&#53&#46&#67&#x6F&#77

        ☭☭☭☭☭ ☭☭☭☭ �☭☭☭ ☭☭☭☭ ☭☭You sure you’re not an albino? I heard melanin deficiency causes poor impulse control. Just ask Pr. Bossman.

        • Max Krakah

          why do you say I have poor impulse control? Do you assume I’m black?

        • My uncle’s cousin’s best friend’s sister’s dog makes more than that urinating on fire hydrants. Ask me how!

          • Max Krakah

            of,how?

          • Whitetrashgang

            Does the dog work for the federal reserve?

    • Oldcorporal

      My conclusion, based on my study of the subject, is that the lighter-skinned Indians (you see them all the time in Indian-made movies) have the least amount of native Indian DNA from the miscegenation of Indo-Eurpean invaders (the “Aryan Invasion” that some liberals claim never happened) with the native people of India.

      • Sick of it

        The “native people of India” thing is still being debated. Vedic texts do not describe blacks as the original inhabitants of every location, but rather more as people they came into contact with at a later time. Folks often make the same mistaken assumption re: The Zulus and the Afrikaners.

        Also, archaeological studies posted on this very website have suggested that miscegenation did not occur until a later time than the original Aryan invasion/migration into what we now call India. One could be tempted to assume that ancient Egyptians had a lot of black blood because of the people who live there today, but the people there today are not the same as the people there in the ancient past.

        • Given Egypt’s importation of black slaves from the more southern reaches of the Nile, it is easy to understand that modern Egyptians are darker than their ancient forebears.

          • Franklin_Ryckaert

            According to Mathilda’s Anthropology Blog the ancient Egyptians were for 5% negroid, while the modern Egyptians are for 20% negroid. If you look at pictures of Egyptian crowds you hardly see any individual without kinky hair. Fully Caucasian Egyptians still exist today, especially among the Copts. The statues of the ancient pharaos all show pure Caucasian features.

  • Funruffian

    I’ve heard that skin color alone is a direct result from a race or people being exposed to hot climates. I’m not certain if this is entirely true, but it sure holds merit.

    • wildfirexx

      Eskimos who apparently have lived in the far north untouched for thousands of years…are as dark, if not darker than their central american cousins.
      Unlike the europeans,.. their skin color didn’t change to white due to change in climate!

      • Franklin_Ryckaert

        Yes, but only a few thousand of years. Too few to cause such a genetic change.

      • Bossman

        In the summer months when the sun doesn’t set they become even darker.

      • HJ11

        Actually, our White skin didn’t change–direclty–due to climate change. The way evolution works is that a mutation arises in a population that gives those with the mutation a survival advantage. Then, and only then, does natural selection work to spread that mutation through the population. So,, what happened, was that an individual who was one of our ancestors in Europe had a mutation to make his or her skin White. This person, with this survival advantage (More Vit. D, for example) then didn’t get rickets, lived longer, had more children and passed on the mutation.

        The Eskimos didn’t have one of their get the mutation.

        • Eskimos, Inuits, Siberian Chukchis and Nivkhs also ate a very different diet from Europeans and East Asians, so perhaps there was no evolutionary pressure on them so far as vitamin D production was concerned.

  • Ella

    “Europeans came from the same chromosome of one person who most likely lived at least 10,000 years ago, according to Penn State. ” It seems that Europeans phenotypic traits date back further to me than 10,000 years ago. Neanderthals portrayed in Central anthropological museums had strawberry blond hair and lighter skin features if it’s accurate, so we share up to 2-4% of their DNA. My guess was more like 20,000 BC?

    • Jack Burton

      So far they have found no direct link to us inheriting Neanderthal pigmentation. Red hair in Europeans is not from Neanderthals. It’s convergent evolution.

  • White Light

    If confirmed, this will show that the mutation likely occurred as an adaption to a life of farming, as the new diet did not provide sufficient amounts of vitamin D.

    • Max Krakah

      People get enough vitamin D from the sun if they are outside. In the northern areas where they have to cover up, they will become vitamin D deficient in the winter. Light skin tome would be a great advantage in those regions.

    • Jack Burton

      It was an adaptation to climate and sun exposure, not diet. Sexual selection also played a role.

  • LHathaway

    This is good news. This A11T gene may still be around even when there are no more caucasians in North America.

    • IstvanIN

      How is it good news?

    • Jack Burton

      Oh yeah, because we all identify with single genes in our daily lives.

  • Max Krakah

    blacks have much fewer hairs per inch than whites do as well. So when their straighten their hair, it looks too thin.

    • Jack Burton

      Mongoloids have less hair as well.

      Caucasoids have the most hair follicles, another cold adaptation.

      • Max Krakah

        or a beauty adaptation. Whites , on average, have finer hairs than asians. Asians tend to have a thicker cuticle layer, making the hair shinier and giving it a soft feel, even though it is coarser. There is also a much greater range of textures in whites. Some blonde whites, such as some scandinavian men, may have hair that never grows a cortex in puberty or adulthood, or the cortex is very minimal, making it seem very thin, even though there are abundant hairs. Such hair can not be curled or permed, the cortex is what holds shape.

  • Max Krakah

    American Indians are believed to be a mixture of different migrations. Some may have been white originally.

  • Franklin_Ryckaert

    The Veddoids are simply (pure) Australoids of the Indian subcontinent. The Australoids left East Africa by crossing the Bab el Mandeb and then followed the coast of South Asia untill they reached Australia (ca. 40,000 BP). There is an Australoid racial substratum in most populations of South and South East Asia, but especially in India where the bulk of the population consists of a Mediterranean-Australoid mix. Australoid-Mongoloid mixes exist in Camboja and in Java. The reason why Australian Aboriginals look more primitive than Indian Veddoids is that they mixed with the pre-human Homo Erectus whose remains have been found in Java.

    Bushmen and Hottentots (Khoi-San or “Capoids” of Carleton Coon) are more difficult to classify. I’m inclined to see them as an early form of Negroids, but their status is still disputed.

    I do not consider the Neanderthals as a separate species but simply as the earliest fully human race. In the order of their evolution in time we then get the following series of major human races :

    Neanderthaloid
    Negroid
    Australoid
    Mongoloid
    Caucasoid

    Of these races only the Mongoloids and the Caucasoids have developed civilizations, with the Caucasoids having developed the majority of them.

    • grunt2301

      Indus Valley was a Dravidian civilization

  • Randall Ward

    There is one tiny problem with this view. The genes do not determine anything except the construction of proteins. Scientists or anyone else for that matter, do not know the processes that cause the different body parts to be built, they don’t know where in the cell the information is stored or what it is that causes a hippo leg to be built different from a human leg. Scientists always want to pretend they are gods and have all the answers; it has been that way all my life. Scientists could do all of a favor and become a bit more humble.
    This means that a single gene does not operate by itself and can mean different things for different people and animals.
    An example; a chimps brain and a humans brain share most of the dna, but a humans brain is far different from a chimp. What causes the difference? No one knows.

  • Fossilized seeds provide evidence of past vegetation, and current dry lake beds show prior wetter climates in some areas, such as Nevada, Arizona and Southern California.

    • Brian

      Yes, and we also see clues in biology– the giraffe evolving a long neck probably to gain an exclusive food source up high, as the habitat went from forest to savannah and ground-level vegetation became sparse.

  • ben no

    I did not know that. Thank you.

  • David Ashton

    In racial classification by phenotype one must look at the skull shape and structure as well as skin complexion.

  • Caucasoid, but not white.

    • David Ashton

      Agreed.
      I usually distinguish between “western” and “eastern” Caucasids.

  • ben no

    India was most advanced when white people still lived there in significant numbers to which they don’t anymore and haven’t for a long time now. It is sad and tragic in the same way the western world is going now.

    • grunt2301

      There was NEVER any white in India, the Indian R1a1 is older than the European R1a1 and Indians have Ancestral North Indian blood which is mostly Central Asian populations, plus Sanskrit is the mother of Indo European languages.

  • ben no

    Actually, Native Americans are more like Mongoloid/Australoid mixes, or Mongoloid/Caucasoid mixes. The Mongoloid is the predominant genetic factor in either mixes I should imagine. Lets not forget, it is often the white anthropologists who study these things and in this liberal world, therefore one should always expect intellectually dishonesty or half-truths.

  • ixObserver

    Dravidian is a linguistic term primarily so its application is a bit misleading. Southern Brahmins could be of the Indo-Aryan type speaking Dravidian languages.

  • ixObserver

    Not just Brahmins but some other upper castes too such as Rajputs (Huns), Khatris, Jats (Scythians). There is some data already. Most of these people have the R1b haplogroup, same as some Central Asians and Eastern Euros.

    Data for IQ doesn’t exist. There isn’t enough research in this area, I have plans to work on it.

  • David Ashton

    No. I said “as well as”. I refer to the works of Deniker, Coon, Gates, Garn, Baker and Cavalli-Sforza.

  • William Krapek

    Well this says we have some entering 10,000 years ago.

  • ben no

    (Bruenn) Cro-Magnon Females and Males

    As you can see, they have fairly broad, round faces and heads, and their equally rounded features are pretty soft and cute, including the men. They look this way despite them being of Cro-Magnon origin, and that type is officially classified as “robust”. Of course they all look very British Isles. Ethnic Brits and Irish are perhaps among the softest-looking of the Europeans, and us White-Americans tend to get our softness from them. I’m grateful for it.

    • Bossman

      Cro-Magnon man came from Africa. He couldn’t have looked like any of these people. Perhaps after many centuries of living in cold and temperate climates and mixing with various Euro-Asiatic peoples, his descendants got to look like these people.

      • ben no

        Studies reveal that ALL humans originally came from Africa before they split and evolved into their individual groups across different continents. So what’s your point? The out of Africa thing means nothing, whether it is true or not. Why would you stress about about how we used to look about a zillion of years ago. It has about as much relevance to an argument as how I looked as a baby.

  • David Ashton

    Coon’s section on “The Living Peoples of Greater India” in “The Living Races of Man” (London 1966) pp.194-208 still seems reasonable enough to me and not substantially controverted by recent direct genetic research or “out of India” arguments. There is a decisive objection to inward settlement from northern India and modern Iran on religious and political grounds quite apart from pigmentation, intellectual and temperament issues.

  • grunt2301

    Vedic scriptures have no outside basis and the Indus Valley was a Dravidian civilization