Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    This is long, sorry, needed to get the entire argument out.

    Growing up I didn't care about this topic, probably because I never noticed or paid much attention to the fact people came in different skin tones. I was probably in my 20s when before I gave it any serious thought and looked into it. After researching it for a long time and asking around in various places for information, I’m leaning towards no it doesn’t. Why?

    Well, for starters our genetic code is something like 99% the same across the globe, with 0.1 to 1% (it may be as high as 10% actually) accounting for our differences. That means two random people from opposite sides of the globe have more genetically in common with each other than two people of the same colour in the same city. This means what you see on the outside doesn’t necessarily tell us what’s going on genetically and differences in our genome aren’t big enough to be significant (still 1% accounts for a lot of bases though)Then there’s the fact that everything obeys natural selection so our environment has a huge say in what we look like. Features such as skin tone are responses to the environment. Darker skin = inbuilt sun block, curly hair = heat insulation, wider noise = moisture retention during ventilation. Now where the environment isn't so demanding it allows for more things to persist like different hair colours like we see in Caucasian populations. And when the selection pressure changes, the features that pop up change, like lighter eyes for better light sensitivity in areas of the world where there's not much sun.

    It's even the same for diseases too. Cystic Fibrosis will help you out if there's cholera in your area because of increased resistance and sickle cell will help out in malaria ridden areas. It's not a case of because you're black you'll have sickle cell or if you're white you'll have cystic fibrosis.

    Even lactose tolerance. That was affected by the foods available to different populations during their development. Those who had a lot of different foods available didn’t need to keep their ability to digest lactose so they did what should normally happen and their levels of lactase enzyme dropped after babyhood. Vice versa for those cultures that started drinking cow’s milk.

    Another thing is any of the features we like to think are race exclusive can pop up in anyone. For example, pale skin tone is recessive/caused by mutation so get the right black couple together they could produce a white child. Another couple could produce a child with pale eyes or straighter hair, narrower noise, you get the picture. It's just not seen often because of where on earth black people's ancestry goes back to and as for whites you have recessive gene anyway so that's why I'm yet to hear of the opposite happening

    Then there's the fact that skin tone isn't a discrete variation, but a continuous one. A couple could give birth to a child whose skin tone is similar to theirs or outside of theirs (so quite a bit darker or quite a bit lighter) and then there’s the whole thing of twins looking completely different to each other (to the extreme) in terms of skin tone (see links below). Then there’s also the whole Cheddar Man thing which was just announced which means they paled out at some point thanks to the environment.

    On top of that, everyone has their mother’s mitochondrial DNA and if you work backwards through time, it stands to reason we started from a handful of humans and therefore that bit of our genome came from the same person and barring any mutations/changes, should be the same.

    Where do you draw the line as to who is classified as what? Do you believe race exists?

    http://wifewine.com/how-ridiculously...m_term=msn-msn

    https://www.yahoo.com/beauty/twins-o...ampaign=buffer
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I mean it quite obviously exists going against it would just be anti scientific
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AperfectBalance)
    I mean it quite obviously exists going against it would just be anti scientific
    What’s your evidence for it obviously existing? I gave you mine for it not existing so where’s yours?
    I’m not 100% one way or the other
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mine turtle)
    What’s your evidence for it obviously existing? I gave you mine for it not existing so where’s yours?
    I’m not 100% one way or the other
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_genetic_variation

    This along with all the haplogroup stuff is pretty clear that there are different races and groups
    • TSR Support Team
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by mine turtle)
    This is long, sorry, needed to get the entire argument out.

    Growing up I didn't care about this topic, probably because I never noticed or paid much attention to the fact people came in different skin tones. I was probably in my 20s when before I gave it any serious thought and looked into it. After researching it for a long time and asking around in various places for information, I’m leaning towards no it doesn’t. Why?

    Well, for starters our genetic code is something like 99% the same across the globe, with 0.1 to 1% (it may be as high as 10% actually) accounting for our differences. That means two random people from opposite sides of the globe have more genetically in common with each other than two people of the same colour in the same city. This means what you see on the outside doesn’t necessarily tell us what’s going on genetically and differences in our genome aren’t big enough to be significant (still 1% accounts for a lot of bases though)Then there’s the fact that everything obeys natural selection so our environment has a huge say in what we look like. Features such as skin tone are responses to the environment. Darker skin = inbuilt sun block, curly hair = heat insulation, wider noise = moisture retention during ventilation. Now where the environment isn't so demanding it allows for more things to persist like different hair colours like we see in Caucasian populations. And when the selection pressure changes, the features that pop up change, like lighter eyes for better light sensitivity in areas of the world where there's not much sun.

    It's even the same for diseases too. Cystic Fibrosis will help you out if there's cholera in your area because of increased resistance and sickle cell will help out in malaria ridden areas. It's not a case of because you're black you'll have sickle cell or if you're white you'll have cystic fibrosis.

    Even lactose tolerance. That was affected by the foods available to different populations during their development. Those who had a lot of different foods available didn’t need to keep their ability to digest lactose so they did what should normally happen and their levels of lactase enzyme dropped after babyhood. Vice versa for those cultures that started drinking cow’s milk.

    Another thing is any of the features we like to think are race exclusive can pop up in anyone. For example, pale skin tone is recessive/caused by mutation so get the right black couple together they could produce a white child. Another couple could produce a child with pale eyes or straighter hair, narrower noise, you get the picture. It's just not seen often because of where on earth black people's ancestry goes back to and as for whites you have recessive gene anyway so that's why I'm yet to hear of the opposite happening

    Then there's the fact that skin tone isn't a discrete variation, but a continuous one. A couple could give birth to a child whose skin tone is similar to theirs or outside of theirs (so quite a bit darker or quite a bit lighter) and then there’s the whole thing of twins looking completely different to each other (to the extreme) in terms of skin tone (see links below). Then there’s also the whole Cheddar Man thing which was just announced which means they paled out at some point thanks to the environment.

    On top of that, everyone has their mother’s mitochondrial DNA and if you work backwards through time, it stands to reason we started from a handful of humans and therefore that bit of our genome came from the same person and barring any mutations/changes, should be the same.

    Where do you draw the line as to who is classified as what? Do you believe race exists?

    http://wifewine.com/how-ridiculously...m_term=msn-msn

    https://www.yahoo.com/beauty/twins-o...ampaign=buffer
    Nope, we're all one race.

    There are definitely different ethnicities within the human race - largely due to a common variation of features based largely on locale of modern ancestors but in the end we are all largely "made up", structurally, of the same stuff.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AperfectBalance)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_genetic_variation

    This along with all the haplogroup stuff is pretty clear that there are different races and groups
    I’m still reading, but, unless I’m misunderstanding something, it doesn’t really contradict anything I’ve said. There’s a higher frequency of alleles in certain groups because of the environment. Some mutations pop up and have a neutral effect (e.g. hair colour) so they stick around. It did bring up clines though, and I think I’ve seen that argument somewhere before.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
 
 
 
Poll
Is the Big Bang theory correct?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.