Be an african in 50,000 BC

>Be an african in 50,000 BC
>Decide that Africa sucks
>Decide that my family is going to pack up all our shit and walk north
>Don't have a boat to cross the Mediterranean because boats don't exist yet so I walk all the way around the Middle East
>Get to Europe and I don't stop even though the climate is nice and temperate
>Keep walking kids, dad isn't satisfied yet
>Keep walking until I get to Scandinavia
>Decide I'm going to live in sub zero temperatures because it's super lovely
>This is the life, glad I fucking left that dumb equator
>But wait
>After awhile, the snow starts to give my black ass amazing super powers
>Magic snow increases my family's IQ by 30 points and makes my coal-black skin super white
>My eyes turn blue because of the magic snow
>The shape of my skull decides to change for no reason and my lips get much smaller and my nose gets more pointy because reasons
>But then, years later, one of my ancestors fucks one african guy and her kids are back to being black in one generation because African genes are dominant

So I'm seriously supposed to believe that my platinum blonde, blue-eyed Norwegian grandmother is descended from Africans?

It's literally more likely that I'm descended from fucking Martian refugees who came to Antarctica in a big nazi flying saucer.

inb4

Attached: Jacob and Lu 0172.jpg (1024x721, 64K)

Other urls found in this thread:

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5753871/
sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/05/170523083548.htm
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_West_Africa
dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5084509/Ancient-skull-China-rewrites-human-history.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dali_Man#Interpretation
sciencemag.org/news/2017/10/new-gene-variants-reveal-evolution-human-skin-color
science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2017/10/11/science.aan8433
newscientist.com/article/2132026-our-common-ancestor-with-chimps-may-be-from-europe-not-africa/
genetiker.wordpress.com/2017/10/16/k-14-admixture-analysis-of-the-complete-tianyuan-genome/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

wh*Teoids are descended from snakes and filth. Later they mixed with people, but sometimes their paleness shows.

>So I'm seriously supposed to believe that my platinum blonde, blue-eyed Norwegian grandmother is descended from Africans?

Yes, and apes. Problem, brainlet?

African genes are not dominant, mulattoes skin tone is around an even mix between their parents. You just see a drop of coffee in a glass of milk easier than a drop of milk in a cup of coffee.

Skin tone genes are comprised of many of your ancestors genes, not just your parents. I'm much darker than my sisters.

And?

>mulattoes skin tone is around an even mix between their parents

That's factually incorrect.

Yes, but if you take the skin tone of all your siblings and take the average, its going to be around the same as the average from your mother and father. Exactly as expected from a trait coded for by many different genes, not a case of simple mendelian inheritance as people who believe in things like "african genes are dominant" believe.

Their skin color is also made up of many of their ancestors genes, same as you. How can someone be this ignorant?

The original people you're talking about looked like this. Whitey comes from black sea and india.

Attached: cheddar-man.jpg (2500x1875, 363K)

>Doubting evolution and natural selection using an argument from incredulity/ignorance
And here i thought only amerilards could be this stupid.

>Walk all the way from India to Scandinavia for no reason
>Penis grows longer and women become more attractive from not being around Indians
>Learn to poo in loo
>Get way taller due to magic snow

I guess I still have to wonder why my dumb ass ancestors would see fit to fuck off to the frozen tundra rather than stick around India

Factually incorrect, the Scandinavian hunter-gatherers were already blonde and light skinned.

>But in the far north—where low light levels would favor pale skin—the team found a different picture in hunter-gatherers: Seven people from the 7700-year-old Motala archaeological site in southern Sweden had both light skin gene variants, SLC24A5 and SLC45A2. They also had a third gene, HERC2/OCA2, which causes blue eyes and may also contribute to light skin and blond hair. Thus ancient hunter-gatherers of the far north were already pale and blue-eyed, but those of central and southern Europe had darker skin.

Indo-Europeans spread from the European Corded Ware Culture into Iran and India, not the other way around. Now back to worldhistoryww with you.

OP says his GRANDMA is Norwegian.

Don't doubt your instincts, user.

No. This is the look of Western European hunter gatherers, Eastern European, Scandinavian and Baltic hunter gatherers were much whiter, Anatolian farmers were also whiter (closer to modern day Mediterraneans).

Before the Indo-Europeans invaded Europe (2900 BC) everyone was already rather light skinned due to mixing, farmer genes and natural selection. Whitest people were probably in the North (and nothing really changed).

My pappy weren't no monkey you racist.

Scandinavia isn’t that cold, especially compared to Siberia & Central Asia. Gulf stream is quite a blessing.

Europe is general was way warmer in post-glacial prehistoric times too. Hunter populations didn’t live in the cold. They fled to the warm Mediterranean and went back north after the climate warmed up.

Blue eyes were an adaptation for low sunlight that were sexually selected for by men.

More like
>be black
>family keeps moving north in a few generations
>too little sun
>get depressed and ill because of this
>chad is lighter than me
>everyone wants to fuck him because he's healthy
>another chad shows up from the middle east
>he has blue eyes
>he can see better in the clear snow
>they have more chidren than everyone
>generations later
>most people are white with clear eyes

>>Be an african in 50,000 BC

Humans left Africa probably 100,000-80,000 ago. It's impossible to have been as early as 50,000 because 37,000-45,000 Oase1 was largely australoid-like, not negroid like. If humans left Africa 50,000 years ago he wouldn't have time to diverge from Africans that much. Also Basal Eurasians are estimated to have split from other proto-Eurasians/OOA Africans 80,000 years ago. It's even possible humans left Africa 140,000+ years ago(West Africans and Eurasians diverged.~140,000 years ago at the very least and Khoisan 260,000+ years ago. But West Africans have admixture from some unknown population that was even more archaic than Bushmen but less archaic than Neanderthals and Denisovans(could have been very basal early homo sapiens). Negrod are closer to chimps probably because of that archaic admixture. Chimps are actually more divergent from a common ancestor of humans and chimpas than humans are so archaic neanderthal/denisovan admixture makes Eurasians closer to that common ancestor whereas Africans have some other less archaic admixture that was closer chimps.

Chrck this PCA. Neanderthals and Denisovans were almost as divergent from humans as chimps are but they were closer to the common ancestor, whereas chimps and Africans(despite negroid ancestry itseld being much more basal type of homo sapiens) go in the direction away from our common ancestor .

Attached: 1_2 Blue Neanderthal Green Denisovan Red Chimp Black Humans PCA.png (800x800, 11K)

This. And evidence suggests that blue eyes originated near the black sea, not in the Scandinavian peninsulas.

Black dots are modern human clusters.
Africans are the dot closest to chimps. Mongoloids are closest to neanderthals and oceanian australoids to denisovans.

Attached: 1_2 Neanderthal Denisovan humans PCA.png (1600x1600, 353K)

>European, Scandinavian and Baltic hunter gatherers

Due to signifcant ENA-rich ANE admixture. Pure WHG coal-black.

No it does not, all Mesolithic european hunter-gatheres had blue eyes. Every single one of them. From Iberia to Scandinavia.

>coal black

No, WHG did not have the African mutations for black skin, they just did not have the European mutations for light skin. Dont get it mixed up.

By 3000 BC they were much lighter as pure WHG probably didn't exist anymore.

Oh, is this the legendary american saying "i am 1/n irish/norwegian/german..."?

>>Decide that Africa sucks>Decide that my family is going to pack up all our shit and walk north>Don't have a boat to cross the Mediterranean because boats don't exist yet so I walk all the way around the Middle East>Get to Europe and I don't stop even though the climate is nice and temperate>Keep walking kids, dad isn't satisfied yet>Keep walking until I get to Scandinavia >Decide I'm going to live in sub zero temperatures because it's super lovely>This is the life, glad I fucking left that dumb equator>But wait>After awhile, the snow starts to give my black ass amazing super powers>Magic snow increases my family's IQ by 30 points and makes my coal-black skin super white>My eyes turn blue because of the magic snow>The shape of my skull decides to change for no reason and my lips get much smaller and my nose gets more pointy because reasons>But then, years later, one of my ancestors fucks one african guy and her kids are back to being black in one generation because African genes are dominant


It wasn't that simple. European populations were almost totally mixed and replaced multiple times since upper plaeolithic cro-magnon times. European genetic history is incredibly complex and was characterized by periods of race mixing preceded by long periods of isolation.

All modern Europeans are hybrids of west eurasians(of multiple types), east eurasian ENA (of multiple types) and basal eurasians (not clear if there were multiple branches of them)

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5753871/

>So I'm seriously supposed to believe that my platinum blonde, blue-eyed Norwegian grandmother is descended from Africans?

They certainly are but not from modern Africans basal human admixed Bantu-like Africans. Eurasians probabably descend from some extinct East African subrace that was related to neolithic Mota (distant admixed descendant?) sample that we have.

Earth is only 6000 years old

They got lighter due to race mixing as you said yourself.

Do people still believe this IQ/race bullshit? Of course if you put a western IQ test with chimneys and cars and mum and dad to fucking starved Congolese orphans to prove a hypothesis you already believe in (racial superiority of your race), you get ridiculous IQ scores. I've been with people who have IQ if 60, all of them need everyday care and are obviously retarded. GTFO /pol/, nobody loves you, KYS.

Every iq test I’ve seen is a series of shapes in a pattern

How do you know it wasn't made yesterday?

Attached: hmmm.gif (480x270, 1.61M)

Modern West Africans are certainly more basal than OOA Africans and modern East Africans have Natufian/Iberomaurusian/Mushabian/Kebaran and even Iran_Chalcolithic and modern Yemeni Jew/Bedouin-like admixtures so they are bad proxies as well.

>Do people still believe this IQ/race bullshit?

IQ is clearly race related but it's not really caused by race itself. Populations who lived in hot climates in the previous 10,000 years tend to be less inteligent than the ones who lived in colder climated due to recent natural selections. That's why Europeans have higher IQ than Middle Easterners despite both were intermixing with each other since mesolithic (accelerated during neolithic) if not paleolithic. Or East Asians have higher IQ than Southeast Asians (they are also intermixed albeit maybe less than Europeans and West Asians).

But they dont, they test adopted children against their adoptive and biological parents.

Also UP Europeans and even Mesolithic Europeans had tropically adapted negroid-like(australoid-like?) limb proportions so they clearly weren't cold adapter. If they were cold adapter-they wouldn't have dark skin.

>were cold adapted-they wouldn't have dark skin.

ANE was Siberian-adapted so makes sense it could have lighter skin.

>falling for the humans all came from Africa
sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/05/170523083548.htm
It's dated meme science at this point.

Attached: emmamaniac.jpg (757x1050, 191K)

>bronze age tier science
protip :Inuits have low IQ scores despite living in far colder climates, and Ashkenazi Jews have the highest scores despite living in warm climes

>The original people you're talking about looked like this. Whitey comes from black sea and india.

WHG looks like this. They were highly drifted and bottlenecked during during LGM (he has caucasoid phenotype). Original paleolithic cro magnons looked more like this(non-caucasoid or semi):

Attached: sunghir.png (854x570, 279K)

Humans left Africa around 140,000 years ago, but the populations that left went extinct early on, getting absorbed into Neanderthals and possibly Denisovans.

This is Veeky Forums user, everything here is dated
Iq is totally a myth
Race is a myth
All you need to to is take those poor kids out of the congo, give em a harvard education and the cannibals will be producing music and running for office

>Whitey comes from black sea and india
Original Europeans and Oceanians had common ancestors and K Y-DNA so I guess it is possible they split in South Asia but it could have been anywhere.

Attached: 320px-Юноша_из_парного_погребения_на_палеолитической_сто (320x569, 28K)

Having genes for light skin doesn't always mean that you'll be actually light skinned. Look at the San, they share the same light skin genes as modern Europeans.

Attached: sunghir reconstruction.png (320x370, 44K)

Nope. Blue eyed WHG cheddar man types had been in Europe before 7,700, like 3,000 years before the Motala find.
The Siberians had Nordic skulls and unexpressed blondism.
>be literal snownigger
>AryanSupermen from Siberia come
>sheeeit.jpg
>descendants forever have blonde hair and light skin

>K Y-DNA
I meant C Y-DNA

Attached: Kostenki K14 reconstruction.jpg (1200x1800, 239K)

Wouldn't it be more likely that Europeans are descended from a population that looks like the Khoisan, who were the most populous race on the planet at the time?

whether you believe the "out of Africa" theory or not there is obviously a strong correlation between harsh environments and the development of IQ. Are you really this stupid?

Attached: 1521902881071.jpg (978x978, 250K)

Why were the coldest parts of Europe the most primitive?

1. You are fucking stupid.

2. This thread belongs in Veeky Forums. Evolutionary biology and paleontology deals with this, not history.

3. Evolution happens over millions of years of gradual changes and it's a firmly established scientific fact. Your ancestors had dark skin just like this bird's ancestors were dinosaurs.

Attached: 440px-Dino_bird_h.jpg (440x277, 46K)

No Khoisans are way too basal to be ancestors of Eurasians and they split from Eurasians over 260,000 or more years ago. So way before OOA. Interesting fact: Iberomaurusians were similar to modern Ethiopians.

Attached: Eh90ZxT Taforalt Iberomaurusian PCA .jpg (1057x856, 132K)

>If they were cold adapter-they wouldn't have dark skin.
the only way they could retain their dark skin is if they fished, for instance for regular fish, seal, and whale, which is exactly what they did.

This is a pre-human, a hominid that might not even be a hominin. Did you even read the damn article you brainlet? The genus Homo is from Africa, and Homo sapiens, unless some 400,000 year old Asian skull pops up, evolved in Africa.

You saying that the Saharan desert isn't harh? Then we're is this great inuit. Civilization why aren't inuits scoring the highest?

this is because arctic people's don't farm.
To farm for the winter makes for high IQ, inuits can hunt all year long without having to prepare for winter in any meaningful sense.

>You saying that the Saharan desert isn't harh? Then we're is this great inuit. Civilization why aren't inuits scoring the highest?
already refuted

The Out of Africa theory is full of holes and contradictions, the evidence for it is weak as shit and there are plenty of examples that suggest otherwise. But people will keep regurgitating it because of how persistent and perverse the ecumenical ideology of modern leftism is. Can you imagine, trying to use genetics to prove we're all really the same? People share half their DNA with fucking bananas, but no-one is going to suggest that invites some kind of comparison in equality.

>originate in europe
>go to africa
>leave
>humans originate from africa
seems legit

To be fair, the Sahara was once wet. There's evidence of the ancestors of West Africans and Berbers domesticating crops around 7,000 years ago there.

No they dont you fucking idiot.

>The genus Homo is from Africa
we don't actually know that though, the whole point is that the direct ancestor of Humans was found in Europe.
>inb4 evolution isn't uniform
Evolution is a guided process, the whole random selection shit is bogus as fuck, it's bio 101 to figure that out.
This shit isn't random, there's something in the genome that codes for better sexual genes (what you pass on) dependent on lifestyle and environment.

This doesn't explain why they still had tropical limbs.

>direct ancestor of Humans was found in Europe.

Then they went to Africa and eventually evolved into homo sapiens

t. Armchair Biologist

I'd rather trust what people in Academia are saying rather than some random/pol/ retard. If you don't like it, go study 6 to 10 years, get a degree and prove them wrong.

The Saharan desert has both wet and dry phases so when west Africans demoesticated milit and sourgum they would migrate between each of the tichitt settlements developing the further and further
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_West_Africa

Attached: afd75a0fd1b820e1ddb038f4b7b987b9--african-history-african-art.jpg (736x552, 65K)

no need for a change in limb and bone structure, also consider that those are much more difficult to change than say eye or hair color.
The Modern European is not of these places, but is from the Steppe and North Eurasia. tropical limbs aren't exactly helpful for riding horses.
Also tropical limbs are more useful in a mountainous region, which is where the ancient proto-proto-Europeans lived.

>unless some 400,000 year old Asian skull pops up, evolved in Africa.
dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5084509/Ancient-skull-China-rewrites-human-history.html
Supposedly already has, but you can't trust those commie chinks.

>Then they went to Africa and eventually evolved into homo sapiens
wrong

Yes, this is how things work. Why are you surprised that animals move? Even besides that, between 7 million years and 3 million years ago, the genus Homo did not exist. Homo is widely accepted to be everything that is actually human. Guess where the earliest evidence of the genus Homo is found?

>Why were the coldest parts of Europe the most primitive?

Random occurence. They also have mongoloid Siberian admixture although Siberians aren't stupid.(they have ~100 IQ)

but it had no winter, so their farming didn't require greater intelligence.

Then why did Arabs have more advanced civilizations dispite living in grassland and desert

>where we find the earliest piece means there are no other pieces anywhere else
guess where the earliest human-like creature is found?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dali_Man#Interpretation
yawn

There's the wet and dry phases making farming harder especially when the land starts to become desert

They never did.
Mesopotamians and Arabs had no relation before the Islamic conquests.
The Arab empires of the middle ages were riding on the coattails of the classical world.

Excuse me?

sciencemag.org/news/2017/10/new-gene-variants-reveal-evolution-human-skin-color

science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2017/10/11/science.aan8433

Don't come wide at me again, you moron.

>People share half their DNA with fucking bananas
Are we monkeys or are we bananas? Which fucking is it.

The persian didn't have an advanced civilization?

so not winter?
if the West Africans had trouble farming they could pack up and move or start fishing.
European farmers couldn't do any of that.
Winter means no movement, generally much reduced fishing, and also you could freeze to death or waste away because you expend energy trying to stay warm.

Apes so more monkey than banana

Persians and Arabs aren't related, they are literally separated by a desert. Or at least they were.
It would be like suggesting that SSA are Berbers or Spaniards.

The desert was vast that's why the built separate settlements along the Saharan in order to plan for the dry and wet season

Did you not read about the part where they say Africans also carry a darkening mutation at MFSD12 that makes even the ones with light mutations darker? Must have.

how is this comparable to winter?

Graecopithicus, if it is a hominin (includes bipedal apes and chimpanzees to simplify things), would have been the common ancestor to us and chimps. Not just humans, both. And besides, there are arguments that state that it was just another European ape, which Europe was filled with for quite some time. Even if it really is exactly what it seems to be, it is not within the genus Homo, so it is not human. Hominin doesn't mean human, it means all apes closely related to humans, which includes archaic humans (Homo), proto-humans (Australopithecines and other bipedal apes), and both species of chimpanzee.

newscientist.com/article/2132026-our-common-ancestor-with-chimps-may-be-from-europe-not-africa/

If you look at global PCA out of africa makes sense. OOA East Africans evolved first into australoids(who reteined archaic proto-african facial phenotypes probably better than africans themselves), then some australoids evolved into mongoloids and then into caucasoids (furthest away from negroids).
Only position of BE is missing. Unfortunately all modern basal and west eurasian derived populations are heavily mixed so it confounds relationships between populations.

Attached: main-qimg-966b9864d82683e19aa8c2e7fb4f847e Global PCA important.png (500x509, 65K)

It's a constantly shifting desert environment

>Travels to Scandinavia from Africa
>During an ice age
....for what reason?

What a horrible title for an article. Well, if that skull is Homo sapiens, there is a skull in Southern Africa that's just as old, a skull found in Northern Africa that's even older, and some old San child's DNA that suggest Homo sapiens might even be 350,000 years old in Africa. It wouldn't surprise me to find that humans left Africa extremely early on, archaic humans did the same thing multiple times, starting with Homo habilis, the likely ancestor of the Hobbits, and Homo erectus. However, early modern humans who migrated to Eurasia back then got absorbed into the Neanderthal population, and aren't as related to us. In fact, they might have even been like H. sapiens idaltu, a different subspecies.

West Africans also independently developed iron working agriculture and such

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_West_Africa

Okay lets be real here. Anywhere where also apes can survive, is not really that hard. Why do you think monkeys havent made it further than Gibraltar? See the parallels?

Human-like doesn't mean "is human". Why are you pushing the goal posts even further back? It's as simple as this, even if Graecopithicus really was the common ancestor between us and chimpanzees, and we share a direct lineage between it and us today, that does not make Graecopithicus a human. It's in the fucking genus name man. Call me again when paleontologists discover proof of the genus Homo outside of Africa that's at least 3 million years old and older.

Funny how they all post-date the back-to-Africa migration by the neolithic farmers

Check these admixture results. EU Europeans and Tianyuan who weren't fully genetically differentiated yet have green ASI and purple Oceanian components. Europeans also had middle eastern components which suggests Proto-BEs and Proto-Europeans may have had a common ancestor or admixture not shared with proto-ENAs.

genetiker.wordpress.com/2017/10/16/k-14-admixture-analysis-of-the-complete-tianyuan-genome/

On PCA Cro Magnons are South Asian shifted.

Attached: Ice_Age_Europe_global_PCA.png (1200x630, 67K)

Homo sapiens is over 300,000 years old, and all of the oldest finds are in Africa. Dali Man isn't the ancestor of Eurasians, a population that left Africa somewhere around 60,000-80,000 years ago is.

Oase and Ust'-Ishim look like African shifted Oceanians on PCA as they are more archaic and had excess of archaic ancestryvcompared to modern oceanians.