Could it be true Veeky Forums ?

There are no Anglo women, and Anglos just pop out of holes in the ground.

This, makes much more sense than aligning it with how people on the continent looked like.

10th thread about this race.

Face*

how shortsighted and daft must they all be to not see what a reactionary backlash all this will generate

the average kid you talk to today is a latent stormfag, even the girls are going rightwing, theres highschool kids dressed all casual but with white shoelaces all over the place, they are making right wing into mainstream, kids are confused, annoyed and angry, like kids allways are, and now being a stormafag is becoming cool and edgy, because thats the current-year contra, and every time some multi-kulti faggot throws up another pile of bullshit like OPpic its another screw for the screwdriver

those generations are growing fast and when they are big enough to both vote and be physicaly dangerous there willbe hell to pay

>young people think it's cool to be stormfags
This is the opposite of the truth in Britain.

I'm confused, did you now know that neolithic europeans often had dark skin?

White skin evolved in the middle east and cam in with migrants later on

as if that is in any way relevant to the price of socks in china

There is a difference between black skin and tan skin, but we did know than the most ancient iberians had dark skin and blue eyes, and where lactose intolerant.

How the fuck could he be black if the pictish people were white?

>complains about a depiction of neolithic european having dark skin
>Fact that neolithic europeans are known to have had dark skin is irrelevant

This guy was a mesolithic hunter gatherer, picts were indo-europeans. Entirely different ethnic groups with only a little bit of admixture. 7000 years makes a lot of difference

Do you think that Europeans used to be black? Like chedder man?

Well of course they did, thats not even a question. The only issue is at what point did white skin replace dark as the most common euro phenotype

>how shortsighted and daft must they all be to not see what a reactionary backlash all this will generate
One you're old enough you stop giving a shit.

Quality bait

>bait
It's a fact.

Did you honestly not know this? Even /pol/ arent in that much denial

>dude once you take a rip of this bong you stop caring about pakistani rape gangs in your town

Not black, but more swarthy for sure, the White skin genes are more recent, mainly from the Anatolian farmers/Cattle herders or the horse herders.

Haha you must be aussie
You too mate, well done

I honestly cant tell if you're trolling or not

Yeah seriously white people should just go back to where they belong, outta space

You are funny man, saying that europeans used to be black ha ha you are so funny man, le epic troll award of 2018 goes to you

Right so you are trolling, thank you for clearing that up

You honestly believe that Whites used to be black?

Seriously this cannot possibly even be a question. You must be aware that everyone on earth is descended from dark skinned africans yes?

You should but could conceivably not be aware that before indo-europeans migrated into europe it was inhabited by an entirely different ethnic group of neo/mesolithic people who often had dark skin

Modern europeans are almost entirely descended from the fairly recent indo-european invaders, with only a small amount of admixture from the previous locals

But yes, obviously, the ancestors of all modern white people were black

Well if you think about it, could be true. The continents were much closer together in the past. This made it easier for living brings to spread and settle on different parts of the earth. So why can't the guy be black? He didn't travel over the sea to get to britain

You know swarthy isn't the same as black right?

That's what the DNA seems to indicate, although, I think that particular reproduction has overestimated the term "Dark Skin." That guy is blacker than most Black people.

I personally would have gone for a more Mediterranean look, myself.

Uhmm try again sweetie

telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/05/22/europe-birthplace-mankind-not-africa-scientists-find/

Pretty sure it happened roughly 6500 years ago, from Euroasia.

>Unless you care about some kid think you support Pakistani rape gangs in your town
top brainlet

No. The neolithic farmers were *relatively* light-skinned. This reconstruction is of a Western Hunter-gatherer who were darker skinned. As stated earlier, however, the many shades of darkness added to this reconstruction were zealotry that hasn't yet passed peer-review.

Do you really think these are the cool kids? Ask yourself seriously.

Those are our apelike ancestors, not humans. Humans evolved in africa

Sounds about right yes

Yeah fair point, I meant mesolitihic. Neolithic anatolians brought light skin to europe

>gets given evidence that your wrong
>make up some bullshit excuse to say you are right
wew lad

[citation needed]

As Neanderthal had developed Light Skin in certain populations, this is likely far to light a date to push back the genetic development of Light Skin in Humans, if it in fact did develop in our strain.
If Cheddar Man had Dark Skin, then he could not have reasonably lived before the advent of Light Skin.

>>gets given evidence that your wrong
What exactly are you referring to here?

Mesolithic euros like cheddar man were replaced by lighter skinned neolithic anatolians who were replaces by white indo-europeans

>If Cheddar Man had Dark Skin, then he could not have reasonably lived before the advent of Light Skin.
Why exactly?

Because, unless he had a Time Machine and came from 30,000 years before, he could not have lived before Neandertal

Could be true, could not. What I don't understand is if our commen ancestor is supposedly also the ancestor of chimps and bonbons. How come those species also have the white skin mutation?

There is too many holes in the out of Africa theory for it to be conclusive. This shot is way to ancient to male any conclusions but at the present I would suggest we stop teaching out of Africa theory as fact and simply say that it is one likely theory.

The footprints on Crete for example and the Jaw bone in Romania. Are unaccounted for by out of Africa. We don't know a lot about modern humans origins and previous hominid variations that may or may not have existed.

Proof?

"Of course we did" proof?

That's a bold claim your making.

Our closest relative chimps also have white skin, logically if we accept Darwin ism as fact, it would stand to reason That a human ancestor had light skin.

I'm not claiming it as such, but I'm just pointing out that the burden of proof is on you when you make such a bold claim about people 10000 years ago.

You're so smart with all those big words

The out of Africa theory is just a theory and has many holes. Please provide proof that humanities commen ancestor with chimpanzees (who are also white) had black skin.

>Neolithic farmers brought light skin to Europe
They brought lighter skin to Europe, but all pre-existing evidence of WHG indicates they were not black people. This body is only 10k years old and it’s not the first WHG we know of. Yet somehow this one hasn’t passed peer-review yet but already comes with a political statement from the scientist, lots of unquestioning news coverage, and a deal with the BBC. I think we can all see what’s happening.

This is not as conclusive as the headline claims. Yes the oldest evidence of human life has been found in euroup, no that does not confirm or deny any out if Africa or out of euro up theories.

>Please provide proof that humanities commen ancestor with chimpanzees (who are also white) had black skin.
It didnt, it had white skin because it was covered in hair. Dark skin evolved later when our ancestors lost their body hair

Bonobos have Black skin, though. Also, there's no indication that Chimps had ancestral light skin, and circumstantial evidence points away from that, since Gorillas have black skin as well, which indicates a dark skinned ancestor.

Also, you don't even know if Chimps have light skin as a result of the same mechanism as humans do. Even light skinned humans are different. East Asians arrived at light skin separately from Europeans

Seems logical, many other hairy mammals have light skin. Not provable tho

Makes more sense though, because thats were the most advanced civilisations started, in the same area that those bones were found.

Ya idk sit about bonobos haha, I thought it's just another kinda chimp.

We are even farther from gorillas then bonobos and chimps tho (allegadly)

I would say the evidence is inconclusive, it does not point to any conclusion.

I don't know if "east Asians arrived at light skin separately from indo-aryans" but it seems possible. However this example of genetic variety and possibility makes it even more doubtful to try and discern a comment ancestors traits or any lineage of homo sapiens.

Cheddar man had dark skin but nobody knows how dark.
These people who studied his DNA did it because they were expecting this result based on previous ones from western Europe and wanted to make it a political thing relating to immigration to the UK.
It could be made into an anti-immigration piece if someone else was constructing the narrative since it shows that co-existence of groups usually leads to the rapid extinction of the older one.
That's all there is to it.

>and wanted to make it a political thing relating to immigration to the UK.
Nice source

This makes more sense

>the area with the most primitive humans is where the most advanced civilizations started
>makes perfect sense

>Kids! Don’t put much too much stake in ancestry and descendance, they are fragile things. t. Tom Booth

Nice source

It's a tweet of his
twitter.com/boothicus

Jesus fuck, being from an ex-commie shithole I can tell you that these degenerate trans-whatever ''people'' would've been beaten to death by the secret police back in the day.

But that tweet doesn't show that the people who studied the Cheddar man's DNA did it because they wanted to make it a political thing relating to immigration to the UK. Again, nice source.

>I don't know if "east Asians arrived at light skin separately from indo-aryans" but it seems possible
They definitely did. And Indo-Aryans is a meme. Europe was light skinned long before Indo-Europeans arrived to Europe.

Why is this causing such an uproar?

I thought we all knew Mesolithic Europeans were darkies since the La Brana man?

>Tom Booth, an archaeologist at the Natural History Museum who worked on the project, said: “It really shows up that these imaginary racial categories that we have are really very modern constructions, or very recent constructions, that really are not applicable to the past at all.”

>Yoan Diekmann, a computational biologist at University College London and another member of the project’s team, agreed, saying the connection often drawn between Britishness and whiteness was “not an immutable truth. It has always changed and will change”.

theguardian.com/science/2018/feb/07/first-modern-britons-dark-black-skin-cheddar-man-dna-analysis-reveals

There was no need for these not so insightful political comments, intended to lead the public into the correct opinion regarding immigration. Instead they could started talking about something relevant to their research like Cheddar man being genetically closer to Scandinavians/Finns/Balts than Brits but that fact is nowhere to be seen.

go back to pol. Why do all you nazi fucks word your sentences in the same way. This isn't a board for you

Tom Booth is talking about the combination of features and how you dont see it in any modern populations, he explicitly states that

Yoan is talking about SJW wankery though

They forgot to mention this.

>this suggests that Britain’s Neolithic farmers (who left behind massive rock relics, including Stonehenge) were elbowed out by Beaker invaders. “To me, that’s definitely surprising,” says Pontus Skoglund, a population geneticist at Harvard Medical School in Boston, Massachusetts, who was not involved in the research. “The people who built Stonehenge probably didn’t contribute any ancestry to later people, or if they did, it was very little.”
The wonders of mass migration.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Hyacinth

>Polish law ceased to penalize homosexuality in 1932,[2] and in the Second Polish Republic homosexuals were not persecuted. The situation changed after World War II, as the communist government of the People's Republic of Poland followed the Stalinist approach to homosexuality, which had been developed in the 1930s. Thus, homosexuality was regarded as an abnormality, homosexual groups were watched either by the Milicja Obywatelska or by the Służba Bezpieczeństwa since the 1960s, and the first files on homosexuals were created in the 1970s. However, this process was interrupted in the early 1980s, because of martial law.

>However, most probably, the Służba Bezpieczeństwa (SB) functionaries wanted to gather compromising evidence, which would later be used to blackmail involved individuals. Furthermore, those persons would be more willing to cooperate with the security services, also there are speculations that the operation was part of the wider action aimed at fighting the anticommunist opposition.

das rite we built stonehenge n shieet

This post is all wrong.

Take your political garbage out of this board.

That is fucking rich when it comes to anthropology, the most shilly and politicised of all the “””””””””””””””””””””””””””science””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””s

sure sure, lefty """""""""""""""facts""""""""""""" are science the rest (that actually are scientific based) MAKE ME FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE SO THEY ARE WRONG

You don't know that user, you have no idea what makes them uncomfortable or not.

Aaaand the post is still wrong. Cry me a river, brainlets.

Take your political discussion back to pol

>discussing history on a Cilician timber framing forum
>use commonly known terms for period of history
>some /pol/tard thinks you're being an intellectual elitist

absolute state

Woah, we got a regular Mario frickin Einstein ovah here

of cource.the blue eye mutation was way earlier than the evolution to pale skin.pale skin has only developed because of the transite from hanter gatherer culture to a life as farmer.
weed (unlike meat) contains not enough vitamin d to sustain the body so paler skin develop to increase the production of vitamin d.

But that's literally the names.
Cheddar was part of Group X. Group X got replaced by Group Y. Group Y got replaced by Group Z.

White Europeans were the result of them getting burger'd by Euroasians. White skin didn't emerge in Europe if that's what you're implying.

How do you extract DNA from a skeleton?

Britain didn't even exist when Cheddar Man was alive, he's was a Doggerlander.

funny thing is this syncs up with the white-supremacist/Aryan propaganda of the late 19th/early 20th century which said the white race evolved in Asia and replaced an earlier "inferior" race when they came into Europe.

Even if this guy was brown, dark, or swarthy (probably not black because it looks like black face with his facial features, hair and eye color), that doesn't mean people from Somalia, Afghanistan, or Syria have any historical or ethnic affiliation whatsoever with the U.K.

Do they just want to ignore the 'white' period of U.K's history? Isn't that what makes the U.K. the U.K.? Do we think of the Cheddar man, or black neolithic farmers when we think 'British'? Where did 'British' gestures, mannerisms, and accents originate from? It's just silly, stupid, and naive, this whole thing. The people pushing it know it's bullshit deep down.

Except this is not what happened at all.

Modern white skin probably emerged in Europe. Light farmers were probably a bit darker than modern Europeans.

In the case of GB, this is exactly what happened. Angles and Saxons, German people, invaded the Celtic land of Brittany.

Yes. Light skin is a fairly late adaptation.

>Even if this guy was brown, dark, or swarthy (probably not black because it looks like black face with his facial features, hair and eye color), that doesn't mean people from Somalia, Afghanistan, or Syria have any historical or ethnic affiliation whatsoever with the U.K.
It really blows your mind, doesn't it?