New study claims that Irishmen descended from Turkish farmers

Well maybe you have South French ancestry.
Anyway,what I wanted to show is that Brits are most lactose tolerant people,from whole world. Now,since most of ancestry in Great Britain is Celtic,what is the logic in telling that a large percentage of Irish people are from Anatolian farmers,when such a high percentage are lactose tolerant?
This shows that Celts main food was milk,so this means they were herders,mainly not farmers,as any mentally sane person will understand.
And is well known Celts were great herders of cows,also understood that in Wales there is a strong tradition in herding sheep.
And I doubt that if you drink milk you still need sun to get vitamin D,I know fresh milk is a very good source of vitamin D.
Actually most of my Acadian ancestors came from the Western Fringe of France. And since the Basques were some of the first people to arrive at Nova Scotia or Canada; and communicate and make trades with the indigenous natives; I would not be surprised if I had some Basque ancestry with my French either. The Basque people seem to eat a diet rich and high in seafood and seem to be almost immune to it.

Louisiana is a bit different from Nova Scotia or Canada though; we actually had population migrations from mainland France, as well as a small contribution from Spain. (mostly "Galician" and "Basque" Canary Islanders.) We are not just Nova Scotia or "Acadia". So not all of us are "Acadians" or "Cajuns".
 
The latitude theory looks like a light bulb idea someone had 40 years ago, and that's it. It doesn't look very credible to me. People had been living in Europe for 10,000's of years by the time farmers from the near east arrived, and they'll skin color didn't change. Light skin in southern Europe if anything mostly derives genealogy from near eastern ancestry. Compared to everyone but east Asians and Europeans near easterns have fairly light skin. Light skin in northern Europe developed somewhere around 7,000-5,000 years ago in people who were almost 50/50 European/near eastern. Latitude isn't the only cause, that's for sure.
 
Take a look at East Asia; Southeast Asia in particular. It has about the same frequency as Sub-Saharan Africa or Central America. This theory of skin pigmentation and environment still doesn't hold any merit.
This is the clear sky index. In said places it is a tropical overcast region and people use do live in a shady jungle. Medium brown colour will be enough to survive there without crippling amounts of cancer.

I believe that Mongoloids, or East Asians (Chinese, Japanese, Laos, Thai's etc.) have a lighter white skin color than white Europeans do.
Yes, some of them are very light skinned. Let's point it out that they don't live in equatorial areas, but rather away from it.
 
This is the clear sky index. In said places it is a tropical overcast region and people use do live in a shady jungle. Medium brown colour will be enough to survive there without crippling amounts of cancer.

Yes, some of them are very light skinned. Let's point it out that they don't live in equatorial areas, but rather away from it.
Not true. Why are their Indian/Pakistani (South Asian) neighbors a lot more dark-skinned than the East Asian Mongoloids? China is about as far away to the equator as Central America or Mexico.

They also may not share a common ancestor; where are the slanted eyes in the South Asians?
 
Not true. Why are their Indian/Pakistani (South Asian) neighbors a lot more dark-skinned than the East Asian Mongoloids? China is about as far away to the equator as Central America or Mexico.
Here is a map of precipitation. You see that East Asia is very wet, therefore cloudy, therefore less UV radiation. This will allow lighter skin people to live there. Pakistan on other hand is dry, therefore much more sun and UV radiation. People needs to be darker there to stay healthy.
Z




They also may not share a common ancestor; where are the slanted eyes in the South Asians?
That's right. We also need to take under consideration human mobility too. East Asians, of lighter skin, could have invaded SE Asia and islands only few thousands years ago, not enough time to turn darker, the optimum skin colour for this zone.

Regardless, the main trend is readily visible. Darker people live around equator, lighter live away from equator.
 
One fool says something stupid and countless fools repeat it, but that doesn't make the statement true. I think it's very unlikely that Aristotle, the source of that notion, ever met a Celt.

The Ancient Greeks and Romans were both very familiar and Greek accounts of the ancient Gauls & Celts are plentiful. Do you believe that the prolific documentation of homosexuality and pedophilia among the Ancient Greeks and Romans was false as well?
 
The Ancient Greeks and Romans were both very familiar and Greek accounts of the ancient Gauls & Celts are plentiful. Do you believe that the prolific documentation of homosexuality and pedophilia among the Ancient Greeks and Romans was false as well?
That's impossible motzart....
 
i mean regardless of haplogroup or phentotype only an ignorant could deny these hard scientific facts!..



View attachment 6947
You are so gullible it is not even funny. Meet the real parents of Maria, Sasha Ruseva:
article-2474887-18F5ACD100000578-701_306x423.jpg


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...an-IS-natural-mother-blonde-haired-Maria.html


Can your albino hypothesis answer these questions? Because if it can't, your hypothesis really sucks.
1. How come in India, or any other country of similar latitude, albino don't make kids with albino, like in Europe?
2. Why does this process only happen in higher latitudes?
3. Also you need to explain what happened to this dark brown/black people who lived in Europe. Where are they now? Did albino people eat all black people in Europe?
4. Shouldn't we have mixed populations of white and brown over the whole globe by now? According to your hypothesis white and black people could live everywhere on Earth.



And what about blond arctic fox with blue eyes?
1371787-bigthumbnail.jpg
 
Last edited:
LeBrok is right, Dark skin vs lighter skin (which works simultaneously with eye and hair colour both melanin effected too) is due to the wonderful environmental factors for us to survive as humans. Areas that have been inhabited for thousands of years in regions with LOW UV more and more with MUCH cloud cover have to adapt their bodies and eyesight to those conditions and less Melanine for protection is needed. New high grain diets vs meats in more cooler and overcast areas would accelerate the process (as the sun does help the the process of Vitam D in the body in southern areas). Also there could be an additional input from Neanderthal admixture who were already adapted to low UV for thousands during the glaciation periods (not sure the overcast situation during that period).

Environmental adaptation is very logical for other body requirements, examples fur on mammoths found in colder climates in the northern hemisphere compared to those in lower latitudes.

Just would like to add that (as discussed previously) that clothes can also contribute to the whitening of the skin especially in the Middle east and North Africa were heavy clothes cover (compared say to subsaharan Africa). On a personal note I notice example that well covered Muslim North African women wearing hijabs who I see roaming around on vacation have a trend to have much paler faces compared to their darker skinned male counter parts.
 
LeBrok is not right,white skin is caused by a gene that is transmited from parents to children.
For example,Pashtun people from Pakistan,Iran,Afghanistan,100% of them carry the IE light skin alele,while Nordish non-IE people,for example sami,a significant percentage,do not have this mutation.
I am talking about light skin alele SLC24A5.
On average,a Pashtun from Pakistan/Afghanistan is much more light skinned than the average Eskimo,please explain that LeBrok.
So light skin was brought in Europe by Aryans,that is not a myth,is the reality. And light hair and light eyes were brought by Aryans.
These Pashtun people got darker by mixing with dark natives from there,but I guess originally most of them were light haired,light eyed people,as Germanics are.
Celtic people are from a different group,but their origin is still in India/Pakistan/Afghanistan ,in the original Aryan people and not from the savage Anatolian people.
The "Out of Africa " theory is just a pure nonsense,a recent study,a serious study,noticed that Nordish Europeans and Indian herders are sharing a gene that give them lactose tolerance.
Let us not forget that Microsoft,Nokia and other large IT companies got Indian CEOs and are working really well,sorry but they did not got African presidents,why is that?
I am not a racist,but genes are a scientific reality which can not be wiped because this is what some people think is cool.
EDIT:
White fox and polar bear have white fur for camouflage purposes.
So I do not see where is the link between the idea that people left from Africa and became white skinned as they moved towards North and white fox and polar bear color.
As someone said here,native Alaskans and Eskimo are not that white skinned people.
Fino-Ugric people came from near Urals,which is not so North. They are I think most light skinned people,from all world.However,there are Ugric people with only light skin,but not light eyes,Finns,on the other hand are very light eyed.So just pretending that people got light skinned,light eyed and light haired because they moved North can not explain blondism and light eyes at for example Pashtun people.
Who gave examples here of Sami people with darker skin,that is from mixing with Eskimo people and native Siberian people,they took genes for that skin color,is not from their Ugric ancestry.
Most Sami people are having extremly white skin.
 
Last edited:
What do you want to say by this? Black people had sex with yellow and then red folks, and this created white people?

Not necessarily like that. But white skin is not albinism but a result of having all of this possibility? (black, yellow and red?). Maybe other skin color evolved from white?
And for me white people are from places like this:
with fog, small amounts of sun, and not high or cold weather/temperature.
 
Not necessarily like that. But white skin is not albinism but a result of having all of this possibility? (black, yellow and red?). Maybe other skin color evolved from white?
And for me white people are from places like this:
with fog, small amounts of sun, and not high or cold weather/temperature.

You would be amazed to find out how much sunshine is during summer in Norhern Norway,is an extremly dry area,with huge amounts of sunshine during summer and very low amounts of sun during winter.
And how you can explain that Germanic genetics people living in Iceland have much whiter skin even if they moved there less than 1000 years ago,but Eskimo people who moved there who knows from how many thousands years,have much darker skin?
Russians are also extremly white skinned ,however,native Siberians,are not and native Siberians are more North and stay at less sunlight than from where Russians came.
Also,British people are getting much less sunlight than Scandinavians,however,Scandinavians are more white skinned than Brits.
And,in Norway,the differences in the amount of sunlight are quite considerable as you move from area to area,but white skin is quite constant,as nuance,between Norwegians,why is that?
So,this theory with skin whitening because people moved towards North is having lots of flaws.
 
You would be amazed to find out how much sunshine is during summer in Norhern Norway,is an extremly dry area,with huge amounts of sunshine during summer and very low amounts of sun during winter.
And how you can explain that Germanic genetics people living in Iceland have much whiter skin even if they moved there less than 1000 years ago,but Eskimo people who moved there who knows from how many thousands years,have much darker skin?
Russians are also extremly white skinned ,however,native Siberians,are not and native Siberians are more North and stay at less sunlight than from where Russians came.
Also,British people are getting much less sunlight than Scandinavians,however,Scandinavians are more white skinned than Brits.
And,in Norway,the differences in the amount of sunlight are quite considerable as you move from area to area,but white skin is quite constant,as nuance,between Norwegians,why is that?
So,this theory with skin whitening because people moved towards North is having lots of flaws.

Russians or Ugro-finnic people in Russia? I bet the second one.
We have: Scandinavians - tan light brown at one time (skin is neither pale, nor milky-white, nor rosy or ruddy. It is rather "golden"), White-brown in Poland, France etc. -tan "indian" or "iranic" every summer (brown or red-brown) and white-red people - in british isles. They can't tan, they’re unable to produce melanin. Their ancestors almost never received sunlight exposition due to their necessity of protecting themselves from the cold or because of lack of sunshine (fog etc.)
I personally tan red-white, have some reddish hair, my father, brother, grandmother have pure red hair.
 
And what about blond arctic fox with blue eyes?
1371787-bigthumbnail.jpg
good photoshop, actually arctic foxes have brown eyes!!! and by the way their fur gets only white in winter for camouflage their skin is dark as well as the skin of seals and polar bears to collect heat and warm up in the cold environment!!!

another desperate try from you to ignore the undeniable facts white skin is not an adaptation..

real arctic fox
https://www.flickr.com/photos/wcdumonts/11347121504/
shaved polar bear
http://www.tickypages.com/2007_Nov/Zoo_31.jpg
seal
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images...al_337-395/02seal_337-395-articleLarge-v2.jpg
eskimo in cold climate
http://www.der.org/films/at-the-winter-sea-ice-camp.html

how can you discuss with me when you even deny or lack understanding of simple physics facts?!
http://www.instructables.com/id/Solar-Thermosiphoning-Hot-Tub-Heater/
enough sunshine to be collected by brown skin to warm up the body
http://biogeochemistry.blogg.lu.se/files/2013/03/midnigth-sun-Version-2.jpg

so number one, a black object collects heat from sunshine so it stays warm
white objects reflect sunlight and stay cold
this explains why eskimos are darkskinned because dark skin is beneficial both in hot climate(uv protection) and cold climate(heating up body) so again this proves whites are not adapted to any climate we are albinos oca1b who can only survive in low uv climate because we lack the protection from uv which causes folic acid breakdown (degenerative diseases and birth defects) and skin cancer! this is sadly the truth backed up by scientific facts and common sense..
 
so here is your "perfectly adapted to cold" fallacy

View attachment 6954

http://www.irishhealth.com/article.html?id=21926

The Mutated link between Caucasians and Albinism.
In humans, only four genes are isolated and have a high affinity for albinism.

The 4 genes are: TYR, OCA2, TYRP1, SLC45A2. OCA is the acronym for Oculocutaneous albinism (hair, skin, and eyes are affected resulting in loss of pigment to the hair and skin and decreased visual acuity due to photo phobia which comes with green or blue eyes). SOURCE:HTTP://www.allaboutvision.com/conditions/lightsensitive.htm It must be conveyed to the reader that nothing is ever proven 100%, only the outcome/ results are interpreted within our scope of realism. I can now get into the biochemistry and the bond between Caucasians and albinism. All people (black, white, or asian) have SLC24A5 genes. The difference between us is found at the alleles of the SLC24A5 gene. The original father (Negros even today) exhibits an alanine allele (Ala111 allele) on the gene SLC24A5 to produce natural pigmented skin. Recently, however, at an estimate of 6,000 - 12,000 years ago, the alanine allele underwent the mutations for a Therine affinity. SOURCE:HTTP://img46.imageshack.us/img46/4784/eurospaleonlyrecentlypu0.jpg.
The A1a111 alleles mutated to Thr111 alleles for whites. Approximately 9% of all humans on earth have an affinity for this mutation (the entire white race to be exact). The alanine allele, it must be stated, is, however, the common bond between the asian and negro populations (this is termed by scientists as Evolutionary Conservation). Whites, as ive stated, do not have alanine alleles-- Europeans, typically have Therine alleles.
Thr111, an amino acid has mRNA codons of ACU, ACA, ACC, and ACG; instead of GCU, GCC, GCA, or GCG as is the case for alanine. The function of the Thr111 is to produce white skin, blue or green eyes (photo phobia exhibited in both groups), and light hair. Only 2 people on the earth exhibit the Therine characteristics/phenotypes: albinos and Caucasians. It must also be stated that the main deficiency in both groups is the inability to produce tyrosinase (TYR), TYRP1, and SLC45A2... Those are the key enzyme and genes, respectively, in melanin metabolism. All life forms with the exception of white people have melanin. Even plants have melanin. Catechol oxidase (a plant's equivalent to tyronsinase) is one of the chief enzymes which makes melanin for plant life. Melanin (TYR) that is "exhibited" in whites and albinos will have a function that is negligible in both groups when exposed to direct sunlight.
(conclusion) The OCA2 form of albinism is very similar to Caucasian phenotypes. and is the most common for negroes. Negroes will typically have blond hair and blue, gray or hazel eyes.
1 in every 15,000 black persons have OCA2 genes.
SOURCE:HTTP://www.mayoclinic.com/health/albinism/DS00941/DSECTION=causes

and to explain to you your question how such large groups of albinos came to be, simple, when we caucasian albinos isolated ourselves on empty islands in the north and we made children exclusively betweeen ourselves there was only more albino offspring so we multiplied in numbers while in other countries albinos mated with majority of melanated people and so their albinism was neutralised by normal melanin genes..

do not think it is a coincidence nowadays intermariage between brown skinned and whites is so promoted in the media!..
 
@ Vigilantexplorer:
African people do not have SLC24A5.South Indians,do not have it in high percentage.
I think you miss the difference between different populations in India,first there is a strong divide between North Indians who are speaking IE languages and South Indians,who are not speaking an IE language.
And between North Indians are different populations,they are not same group,neither they present same percentage of blue and green eyes.
I already presented the case with Pashtun people.
Pashtun people are found in Pakistan,Afghanistan and are what we call "white people".Lots of them have blue or green eyes.
So your theory with albinism is just non-sense,albinism means your hair is white,not blonde.But most Pashtun people with light eyes have dark hair,so where is the albinism you are talking about?
Since albinism with dark hair is not possible.
Eskimo are darker because this is how their race is,not because they adapted to the lack of sunshine.
Already wrote,during summer,there is a lot of sunshine where Eskimo are living.
When outside is pitch black it does not really matters what color your skin has,neither when the sun shines 2-3 hours per day :D .
Eskimo are taking vitamin D from the food they are eating,go read and be informed and stop telling absurdities.
Is same with vitamin D at Norse Germanics,they are eating lots of fish,from where they take their vitamin D.
The falsity of "out of Africa" theory is proved very easy by the lack of similiraty between people from Northern Hemisphere and those from Southern Hemisphere,located at same latitude.
Natives from South America are not same with natives from North America,while South Africans people,which are living in South Africa,are still very dark and those from South America,living are same latitude,have a moderate brown skin.
Why is that again?
What about the fact that in North America skin color was gave by the tribe from which the natives were and not by the latitude neither by statistics,as it should be if albinism would be the reason for having people white skinned.
In fact there is known that natives from North America were having a reddish nuance at their skin this is why they were called "red skins".
How come these people did not had any albinism,neither their skin got white,cause they were at such north latitudes?

EDIT:
Just for the lol mode,half of Japan is under 35 degrees North Latitude.
So is at about same latitude as South Part of South Africa.
And how come Japanesse are very white skinned while those people from the South of South Africa are so dark skinned?
If I would take the absurdities of vigilantexplorer,all Japanesse people sufer from Albinism.
:D
Or ,we just accept that the race of Jappanese people is having the skin that white and the race of South African people is having the skin so black and this does not have anything to do with how closed to Ecuator they are,neither that is something caused by the lack or presence of albinism.
 
so here is your "perfectly adapted to cold" fallacy.

There is a direct correlation between the geographic distribution of UV radiation (UVR) and the distribution of indigenous skin pigmentation around the world. Areas that receive higher amounts of UVR, generally located closer to the equator, tend to have darker-skinned populations. Areas that are far from the tropics and closer to the poles have lower concentration of UVR, which is reflected in lighter-skinned populations.[3] Researchers suggest that human populations over the past 50,000 years have changed from dark-skinned to light-skinned and vice versa as they migrated to different UV zones,[4] and that such major changes in pigmentation may have happened in as little as 100 generations (~2,500 years) through selective sweeps.[4][5][6] Natural skin color can also darken as a result of tanning due to exposure to sunlight.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_skin_color
 

This thread has been viewed 112514 times.

Back
Top