White People Perhaps Only Five Millennia Old...

[Big Orange]

This is pretty interesting although not that surprising, I wonder what the racists think of this:

August 30, 2009
White Europeans evolved only ‘5,500 years ago’

White Europeans could have evolved as recently as 5,500 years ago, according to research which suggests that the early humans who populated Britain and Scandinavia had dark skins for millenniums.

It was only when early humans gave up hunter-gathering and switched to farming about 5,500 years ago that white skin began to be favoured, say the researchers.

This is because farmed food was deficient in vitamin D, a vital nutrient. Humans can make this in their skin when exposed to sunlight, but dark skin is much less efficient at it.

In places such as northern Europe, where sunlight levels are low, the ability to make vitamin D more efficiently could have been crucial to survival.

Johan Moan, of the Institute of Physics at the University of Oslo, said in a research paper: “In England, from 5,500-5,200 years ago the food changed rapidly away from fish as an important food source. This led to a rapid development of ... light skin.”

Moan, who worked with Richard Setlow, a biophysicist at Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York state, said vitamin D deficiency could be lethal. Research links it with heart disease, diabetes, arthritis and reduced immunity.

Their research says: “Cold climates and high latitudes would speed up the need for skin lightening. Agricultural food was an insufficient source of vitamin D, and solar radiation was too low to produce enough vitamin D in dark skin.”

Such findings need to be treated with caution. The history of the colonisation of Europe is highly complex because its climate has been dominated by a series of ice ages, punctuated by warm periods.

This means early humans ventured to Europe not just once but many times over the past 700,000 years, returning each time the ice melted only to be driven back again when it returned.

Furthermore, the ice ages coincided with, and may even have driven, the evolution of modern humans, with several species such as Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons appearing at various times.

The idea that human evolution has often turned on chance mutations is well established. Some researchers have linked the entire evolution of language with mutations in a gene known as FoxP2 occcuring about 50,000 years ago.

Times Online

[Darth Wong]

They've done the genetic research a long time ago to determine that white people are basically mongrels: mixes of genetic material from other races. It stands to reason that they would be one of the more recent strains if they contain genetic material from other races.

This does, however, contain the interesting revelation that white people have always had a bad diet.

[Lonestar]

This is pretty interesting although not that surprising, I wonder what the racists think of this:

"We are the furthest removed from apes, and so the most evolved."

[Oskuro]

5 millenia? I can see a lot of YECs jumping on this as proof of their beliefs.

This does, however, contain the interesting revelation that white people have always had a bad diet.

The existance of KFC and McDonalds a consequence of our genetic makeup? I need go lie down for a while. And make sure my genes never spread.

[Ryushikaze]

That we're the youngest ethnicity really doesn't surprise me, though the specific date is kind of surprising, all things considered.

[Akhlut]

I question that, due to a lot of Mediterranean, Semitic, Aryan (as in, Iranians, Azeris, and the like), Turkic, and Dravidian people being white. While I can imagine light skin being a recent development, I question it being that recent, as we know that the Akkadians, Egyptians, and early Greeks had agriculturally-dependent civilizations at that time and had lighter-skinned peoples living there who could conceivably be described as white if they weren't constantly exposed to the sun. I'd imagine that white skin developed earlier so that it would penetrate central Asia, the Middle East, northern India, the Near East, and Europe. If it developed in northern Europe only 5 millennia ago, I doubt it would have been able to penetrate so completely that far south and that far east in only perhaps 1,000-2,000 years.

[Junghalli]

According to something I found a while back there's genetic evidence indicating that two mutations that led to present day European appearance happened 11,000 years ago and 12-3,000 years ago. It gives links to some papers but some are broken and one requires subscription. I have heard of the Vitamin D theory before.

[Ryushikaze]

I question that, due to a lot of Mediterranean, Semitic, Aryan (as in, Iranians, Azeris, and the like), Turkic, and Dravidian people being white. While I can imagine light skin being a recent development, I question it being that recent, as we know that the Akkadians, Egyptians, and early Greeks had agriculturally-dependent civilizations at that time and had lighter-skinned peoples living there who could conceivably be described as white if they weren't constantly exposed to the sun. I'd imagine that white skin developed earlier so that it would penetrate central Asia, the Middle East, northern India, the Near East, and Europe. If it developed in northern Europe only 5 millennia ago, I doubt it would have been able to penetrate so completely that far south and that far east in only perhaps 1,000-2,000 years.

I don't think it's saying there weren't light skinned people before then, just that no cohesive light skinned group existed prior to that, there being no survival or sufficiently high sexual pressure on the whole of a population to cause them to all be light skinned.
At least that's what I got out of the article. Whether it's true or not, eh.

[Broomstick]

There's no reason light skin couldn't arise multiple times, is there?

It also depends on how you define "light" and "dark" skin, doesn't it? For example, Arabs are lighter skinned than Ethiopians, but significantly darker than the Irish. So are Arabs light or dark skinned? Depends on who they're standing next to.

Still, the lack of dietary nutrients makes some sense, and might also account for the European ability to digest milk in adulthood as well as moving into an area with a significantly different diet would exert some evolutionary pressure.

[Sarevok]

It also depends on how you define "light" and "dark" skin, doesn't it? For example, Arabs are lighter skinned than Ethiopians, but significantly darker than the Irish. So are Arabs light or dark skinned? Depends on who they're standing next to.

There are plenty of blonde haired and blue eyed arabs too. Which makes me wonder about how did pale skin evolve elsewhere. For instance consider the skin tone of the Japaneese, Koreans or many Chineese people. They are pretty much as pale as many Europeans. Was it a general reaction that occured in all populations living in northern latitude or specific characteristic that slowly spread worldwide ?

[Themightytom]

They've done the genetic research a long time ago to determine that white people are basically mongrels: mixes of genetic material from other races. It stands to reason that they would be one of the more recent strains if they contain genetic material from other races.

This does, however, contain the interesting revelation that white people have always had a bad diet.

What the hell? Does this mean Adam and eve were black?

[Elfdart]

It also depends on how you define "light" and "dark" skin, doesn't it? For example, Arabs are lighter skinned than Ethiopians, but significantly darker than the Irish. So are Arabs light or dark skinned? Depends on who they're standing next to.

There are plenty of blonde haired and blue eyed arabs too. Which makes me wonder about how did pale skin evolve elsewhere.

It's probably just a quirk in the genes that has no real benefit on most of the planet, but under the right conditions (climate, genetic isolation) becomes more common -like solid black leopards and jaguars, only in this case it's less melanin rather than more. The melanistic phase can be found in any population of these big cats, but it's very rare in open terrain and more common in thick forests.

[General Zod]

They've done the genetic research a long time ago to determine that white people are basically mongrels: mixes of genetic material from other races. It stands to reason that they would be one of the more recent strains if they contain genetic material from other races.

This does, however, contain the interesting revelation that white people have always had a bad diet.

What the hell? Does this mean Adam and eve were black?

Clearly, it means that Adam and Eve were the first white people, and set above all those other races by God. When the Bible talks about making Adam out of mud? It was talking about mud people.

[Themightytom]

They've done the genetic research a long time ago to determine that white people are basically mongrels: mixes of genetic material from other races. It stands to reason that they would be one of the more recent strains if they contain genetic material from other races.

This does, however, contain the interesting revelation that white people have always had a bad diet.

What the hell? Does this mean Adam and eve were black?

Clearly, it means that Adam and Eve were the first white people, and set above all those other races by God. When the Bible talks about making Adam out of mud? It was talking about mud people.

Nah a creationist wouldn't fall ffor that. it lets evolution, and genetics in the backdoor, they have to stick to "Science that cannot be directly observed is a sham/the work of the divvel" and there can only have been seven days between the creation of man and that fantastic view of... utter blackness.

[General Zod]

Nah a creationist wouldn't fall ffor that. it lets evolution, and genetics in the backdoor, they have to stick to "Science that cannot be directly observed is a sham/the work of the divvel" and there can only have been seven days between the creation of man and that fantastic view of... utter blackness.

Then explain why "intelligent design" is so popular.

[Mr Bean]

Then explain why "intelligent design" is so popular.

Back door to let creationism into the class room of American schools. The history of creationism is kinda interesting to note that when the Creationists lost their Supreme Court case when they tried to place Creationism alongside Darwinian evolution as two equal theories in the science classroom... Less than a year later the two most common purposed Creationist textbooks had a line by line replacement done on them with all references to God and Creationism removed and replaced by Intelligent Designer and Intelligent Design. And less than a year after that they were trying to get Intelligent Design in equal footing with Evolution in the classrooms again.

[General Zod]

Then explain why "intelligent design" is so popular.

Back door to let creationism into the class room of American schools. The history of creationism is kinda interesting to note that when the Creationists lost their Supreme Court case when they tried to place Creationism alongside Darwinian evolution as two equal theories in the science classroom... Less than a year later the two most common purposed Creationist textbooks had a line by line replacement done on them with all references to God and Creationism removed and replaced by Intelligent Designer and Intelligent Design. And less than a year after that they were trying to get Intelligent Design in equal footing with Evolution in the classrooms again.

It was more of a rhetorical question than anything. The idea that creationists won't incorporate evolution when it's convenient for their agenda is just kind of silly, was the point.

[Admiral Drason]

I remember my Biological Anthropology Prof had said that light skin was only around 6k years old, but he didn't back this up with any source material. Looks like he was right.

[Simon_Jester]

But we still see light skin in places that didn't have all that much genetic mixing with the part of the world "white" people live in; I've seen some very pale Koreans, for example. So while the white population of Europe may trace back to a relatively recent mutation that produced an all-white group of Neolithic farmer-hunter-gatherers, that doesn't mean that light skin is itself a recent mutation.

[Darth Wong]

There's no reason light skin couldn't arise multiple times, is there?

It also depends on how you define "light" and "dark" skin, doesn't it? For example, Arabs are lighter skinned than Ethiopians, but significantly darker than the Irish. So are Arabs light or dark skinned? Depends on who they're standing next to.

Still, the lack of dietary nutrients makes some sense, and might also account for the European ability to digest milk in adulthood as well as moving into an area with a significantly different diet would exert some evolutionary pressure.

I would also hasten to point out that there's light, and then there's white. I consider my wife to be a beautiful woman, but she is really white, as anyone knows if they saw the beach pictures from my cottage country vacation pic thread in A&P. I'm actually pretty pale myself by Asian standards and there are plenty of "white" people who have tanned to a darker skin shade than me, but nobody gets quite as white as white people.

[Junghalli]

There are plenty of blonde haired and blue eyed arabs too. Which makes me wonder about how did pale skin evolve elsewhere. For instance consider the skin tone of the Japaneese, Koreans or many Chineese people. They are pretty much as pale as many Europeans. Was it a general reaction that occured in all populations living in northern latitude or specific characteristic that slowly spread worldwide ?

This refers to SLC24A5 only in the context of Europeans and in the comments the author says she believes that Asians have a different mutation for light skin but there's no source for it. I've never heard of SLC45A2 and SLC24A5 being found in Asians and they're always referred to in the context of European populations. So from the looks of things my bet would be that very light skin in Europeans and Asians is the result of convergent evolution. I might see if I can't find some actual papers on the subject later. Given that Europe and the Middle East are right next to each other those blue eyed blond Middle Easterners could easily be just the result of gene exchange with European populations.

[Big Orange]

Some Semitic Arabs being blonde hair and blue eyed is not really a huge stretch due to the colonization of the Middle East by Kurds, Persians, Greeks, Macedonians, Romans, and Crusaders etc.

[Vehrec]

I always knew that the one professor I had a major falling out with was probably wrong about this-she attributed white people to inbreeding and genetic drift caused by living in caves during the ice age. It wasn't so much that this was impossible as much as I had to wonder why this wouldn't be the case in other small isolated populations. This news also means there are other things that are wrong-like the common depictions of white Cro-Magnons and Neanderthals. Not that those are very likely to change anytime soon.

As for the blue-eyed blond semitic population, I have to agree with Big O. Jerusalem was the center of the world for Muslim, Jews and Christians, and the region was a center of trade for a millennium or more before that. Genes get muddled up, and occasionally float to the surface.

[Broomstick]

This news also means there are other things that are wrong-like the common depictions of white Cro-Magnons and Neanderthals. Not that those are very likely to change anytime soon.

Especially not since there is some scientific evidence that Neanderthals, at least some of them, had red hair (I'll try to find a cite for that - my original source was not on-line so it's a little hard to link to it from here). Of course, they could be dark skinned even with red hair (see babboons) but if pale skin is adaptive in Europe it is entirely possible that Neanderthals were also pale.

[Junghalli]

This news also means there are other things that are wrong-like the common depictions of white Cro-Magnons and Neanderthals. Not that those are very likely to change anytime soon.

Especially not since there is some scientific evidence that Neanderthals, at least some of them, had red hair (I'll try to find a cite for that - my original source was not on-line so it's a little hard to link to it from here). Of course, they could be dark skinned even with red hair (see babboons) but if pale skin is adaptive in Europe it is entirely possible that Neanderthals were also pale.

Here's one site. Interesting according to this the genetic evidence indicates they also likely had light skin (impaired MC1R activity leads to both red hair and lighter skin). So Neanderthals could very well have looked white. It's worth noting that Neanderthals and their ancestors were in Europe for much longer than the ancestors of modern Europeans (hundreds of thousands to over a million years vs around 40.5K-34K years for the Pestera Cu Oase remains which are the earliest modern human remains in Europe), so even if the theory in the OP is correct it's hardly conclusive on what Neanderthals would have looked like.

I must say the article itself is damnably vague on exactly what sort of evidence they've got for their conclusion, and I'm wondering if it's actually anything new or just a paper on the still highly unproven agricultural caused skin lightening theory.

In any case Vehrec is probably right about Cro-Magnons, if genetic evidence is anything to go by the early inhabitants of Europe were probably not white. My guess is Cro-Magnons would probably have looked like Middle Easterners to us, you can find a discussion on what Europeans might have looked like before the SLC24A5 mutation here.