Why are Black People so dark?

I was just wondering this (Since I'm Black). Why do Black people have darker skin while White Europeans have lighter skin? Does anyone have a good answer?

Other urls found in this thread:

sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/08/170831134221.htm
scykness.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/iqjdlrbtay5rj.jpg
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Blacks were too stupid to wear clothes to protect them from the sun, so they essentially forced their bodies to evolve a defense mechanism.

HOLY
SHIT

MUST WE DO THIS

JUST FUCK OFF BACK TO YOUR SAFE SPACE YOU FUCKING NAZI PIECE OF SHIT

IM SICK OIF YOU POLTARDS SHITTING UP MY BOARD

JUST FUCKING LEAVE YOU GARBAGE PIECE OF SHIT NAZI

He just asked a simple question, my /leftypol/ friend.

Its actually interesting question since south Americans and southeast Asians live on relatively the same climate as them, yet never became quite as dark, while others like some south Indians and Abo / pacific islands tribes do reach the same dark skin level

Reported for ad hominem

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

This board is honestly drowning with retarded shitposters like you

Clothes for most of history we're skins and furs. The need for either is not necessary in equatorial climates.
Sub-Saharan Africa has the greatest gradients of colouration of any region on earth.

From Nilotic and Wolof pitch blackness to the occasional Igbo person who is blonde hair and blue eyed.

How are you splitting the regions? Sub-saharan africa is pretty fucking big, is the variation greater than combined Eurasia?

>dark black with a few dozen albinos
Such variety.

>what are Khoisan

People with darker skin have been there longer the light skin people in the same climate are more recent arrivals

As far as I know people were dark skinned but one of those lolsorandom mutations changed that

Khoisan and the purer mbuti are both a very light skin. I'm not talking about the being caramel in the sun part. The former are pale when wearing clothes daily and the later we accounted as being as like a "Yellow ivory" in the 1800's.

Also that child is not albino in the classical sense, he's just light skin.

>The former are pale when wearing clothes daily

Lol no.

Our ideas of pale differ. I mean their unexposed skin is "peachy" like the boy here
But anyways they utilized ochre as a protectant

High melanin contents evolved in primates some time in around five million years ago when our ancestors lived for about five years, and a single digit percentage of them died of skin disorders from the African sun.

Many people in Europe around 20,000 BC had black skin, blonde/red hair, and blue/green eyes. This continued until the development of agriculture around ~15,000 years ago. At this point, humans stopped eating nearly as much meat, and dietary variety collapsed.

If you have black skin, you live off of a neolithic subsistence farmer diet, and you live in the higher latitudes, you will die of vitamin deficiency because your body needs sunlight to make Vitamin D, so farmers living in northern climates began to develop paler skin to absorb more vitamin D from the sun.

>develop paler skin
That's not how evolution works

It literally is.

>some people are naturally paler than others
>paler people reproduce at a higher rate due to environmental conditions
>genes that encode for pale skin become more common among the general population with each new generation

Calm yourself Chomsky

Discussions related to genetics do not belong on Veeky Forums
Go piss of Veeky Forums instead faggots

>This board is dedicated to the discussion of history and the other humanities such as philosophy, religion, law, classical artwork, archeology, ANTHROPOLOGY

Why do White people have light skin is the real question

It's called evolving traits based on your . You do know that Africa is right on the equator right? So the closer they are the darker the people will be

your environment*

Back to /leftypol/ with you. All he did was ask a question

but asians and amerindians aren't that dark

Indonesians and shit are.

Also, you don't die if you're a white skinned person in a tropical area, just if it's the other way around.

So the genes for light skin that presumably emerged in China and Peru during the agricultural revolutions there might have been able to spread elsewhere.

I'm speculating here.

>Also, you don't die if you're a white skinned person in a tropical area, just if it's the other way around.

Inuit are pretty dark.

It's such a dumb question that can be Google or maybe just thinking a few seconds might answer

people get vitamin Do from food sources. The sun is terribly inefficient for vitamin D in the long run.

They aren't farmers.

The big problem was that early agricultural societies didn't have as nutritious a diet as the hunter-gatherer societies they replaced.

It was the invention of agriculture, and the sudden need for Vitamin D to come from sunlight instead of meat, that caused a decline in melanin.

Mutations/alleles must be present in a population before their selected upon. By sheer luck they never developed the white skin gene

It's because their location has more sun my child (alongside most places at that latitude(

Dark skin and Afro-textured hair was humanity's default initially. The first Europeans contemporary with Neanderthals would have more closely resembled modern-day Africans. Lighter skin evolved much later; as recently as maybe 10k years ago.

They ain't gonna leave if you keep reacting how they want

Meant this pic, its better.

Because blacks are inherently evil and whites are good. It's why light is seen as a good thing and darkness as bad. The whites were too pure and innocent to kill the blacks, which is a lot to do with all the evil in the world. You cannot blame blacks for being evil and committing crimes it is a part of their creation.

>not realizing finns should also be brown by your reasoning

>Dark skin and Afro-textured hair was humanity's default initially.
sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/08/170831134221.htm
>made from the modern human skull of a black person
lol kill me now God

That's actually really interesting and I don't know what to make of it. It's going to take a lot to turn over the mountain of evidence for OOA though; I can imagine a major revision though.

>People with darker skin have been there longer the light skin people in the same climate are more recent arrivals

Eskimos have been living up north since forever and yet they're not white and SE Asian have been living in condition just as hot and sunny as Africa, yet they're not black.

Multi-regional evolution is the only logical answer.

Original multi regional has been disproved but a weak one in combo with a modified out of africa makes sense

>Original multi regional has been disproved

Not it hasn't, don't confuse politics for science.

Explain how we have groups that have been isolated for tens of thousand of years that are still homo sapien. Khoisan haven't had any gene flow; why are they not erectus?

I think you're the one motivated by politics.

>tens of thousands
Scratch that, 100k years ago is when Khoisan plot off from rest of humanity

>I think you're the one motivated by politics.

No, Multi-Regional was the accepted and logical evolutionary hypothesis for generations, until the 1960s when Out of Africa was promoted for purely political reasons despite the evidence to the contrary.

Full size image here;
scykness.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/iqjdlrbtay5rj.jpg

To protect the skin from sun light. That's the purpose of melanin.

>>No, Multi-Regional was the accepted and logical evolutionary hypothesis for generations, until the 1960s when Out of Africa was promoted for purely political reasons despite the evidence to the contrary.
Or, you know, instead of your retarded conspiracy theory, new evidence surfaced and new scientific tools such as genetics had become ready to use.

Nice map even though it has indians as nordics lol

>It has been observed that by the "late 1990s most paleoanthropologists were interpreting the fossil and genetic evidence as incompatible with a 'strong' version of the multiregional hypothesis"[8] subsequently Multiregionalists revised their model to allow for a dominant role for Africa during Pleistocene human evolution (Wolpoff et al. 2000).
Sounds reasonable to me

> new evidence surfaced

What new evidence, that completely turned hundreds of years of science on its head?

Because we’re told that it is now a fact that the human on the left, wandered into Europe from Africa and in only several thousand years, evolved into the person on the right….

1. "South Americans" are not a race.
2. South American NATIVES are pretty dark.
3. South America is not nearly as sun-exposed as Africa, the Andes and the Amazon rainforest provice cover in the hot equatorial regions, whereas Africa has deserts, savannahs and less forest cover.

Yet these people have been living above the Arctic Circle for 10,000 years but somehow haven’t evolved pale skin and blond hair.

They are much paler than their equatorial counterparts, brainlet.

I already explained that shit.

Low melanin content is primarily an adaptation to neolithic agriculture in northern climates.

Eskimos have not practice agriculture for an evolutionarily significant amount of time.

>completely turned hundreds of years of science on its head?
I bet that even a century after Darwin, you'd still cling on to cladistics.

>Because we’re told that it is now a fact that the human on the left, wandered into Europe from Africa and in only several thousand years, evolved into the person on the right….
Oh, wait, that's exactly what you're doing.

peruvians are dark and they're not an equatorial population

> Africa doesn't have trees!

Come on. This is high school knowledge. Either way this doesn't belong here.

>Eskimos have not practice agriculture for an evolutionarily significant amount of time.

These people practiced agriculture for thousands of years in a sweltering jungle, yet they're neither white nor black?

>hyperbole
I didn't say that, brainlet.

No, you said the Andes Mountains "provide cover" thus S.American natives aren't black...

It's basically down to a balancing act between letting enough ultraviolet radiation in to produce Vitamin D versus blocking too much ultraviolet because it also causes cancer.

So places where there's shitloads of UV, we became darker, because we needed to block most of it.

Places where there's sweet fuck all, we became lighter, because we needed to absorb most of it.

>Vitamin D

I can't tell if you're trolling me or your parents already had the same last name before they got married.

Let's try this again

>humans need vitamin D
>the primary sources of vitamin D are sunlight and meat
>when humans began farming, they stopped getting as much vitamin D from meat and got lighter
>the less sunlight in a given environment, the paler that people became, because pale skin absorbs more sunlight and produces more Vitamin D
>this is why people in tropical climates tend to have darker skin than people in northern climates
>this effect is intensified for cultures that adopted agriculture earlier on

>he wouldn't give those fine ladies the Vitamin D

These people have been living in Canada since the Ice Age - why don't they look like Swedes?

A: Because their ancestors had more access to Vitamin D from meat than neolithic European farmers did

B: Because people who live in arctic climate are exposed to intense radiation from the snow, which is why they had to invent special glasses to keep their corneas from getting burnt out

C: Because of that time you sucked a dick for bus fair and then walked home

Fatty fish, yo.

...

Don't forget that cultures sexually select for certain traits

how do you know this?

When some homo sapiens from Africa moved into the Caucasus Mountains, they bred with neanderthals that lived in Europe/Eurasia. This is why Europeans have lighter skin and coloured eyes.
It wasn't from lack of sunlight or anything, it was because of the characteristics of the neanderthal.

This is also why some asian eskimos are very dark skinned, because they're probably a mix of homo sapien and some other asian primate, and have very little neanderthal DNA.

read you retards. Is this seriously the power of Veeky Forums? You guys really think black skinned homo sapiens just walked into the snow and within a thousand years turned white? Fucking brainlets I swear.