Not true. From genomes of ancient hunter gathers, who lived in Scandinavia, we know that they were not as light skin as today's Scandinavians. The new mutations made them lighter, better fitting, healthier, having more kids. These new lighter genes spread through population, because they gave them advantage over others. They both could live there with their skin tones, yet the lighter mutations turned to be more beneficial, therefore wide spread today.
It is only a theory which is wishful thinking, because you don't have nothing better.
People there were living without that mutation, and still are living very well.
We can repeated the same over and over, but it not have sense.
Give us one example of black tribe who migrated to higher latitudes and survived their.
Black tribe don't migrited, but if some persons do this, they don't die, but mixed with the locals.
The most norther black tribe live in Abckazia. They are still feel very well. They dont die.
In Canada are living some black people too. They are probably still alive.
Eskimos, as you showed me yourselves are quite dark, but they didn't die.
You yourselves wrote, that black pepole came to Europe and colonized her.
They can lived here as blacks because otherwise, they either would be dead in short time, or would return to Africa.
They didn't. So they didn't need this mutation to survive, like Lapps didn't need this muteition for thusands of years either.
So, you have your examples.
Give us one example of white tribe who went to sub Saharan Africa and survived their.
Afrikaners lived very well, and are still alive. They are not dying because of sun.
Some tribe R1b V88 came to Africa and thise people are still alive, but they mixed with black locals.
Lemba tribe did the same. Some greeks are still living in Juba in Suoth Sudan.
Many Nordics are living in Rif, Kabylia, even in Sahara. They are still alive.... can you belive in that?!
Please, skip colonial times and modern populations, as due to technology, clothing, supplements people of all colour can live everywhere these days.
So, you have only a theory, which cannot be proofed, because no one ever was eye witness to whole this miracoules thousands of years...
But you still have people, who lived through this thousands of years and didn't have light mutations, and are still good. So, you must invite
fish, winds, diet and so on... but this is not reasonable, because by naked eye it is seeing, that they dont't need light mutation to survive,
and they didn't need this in paleolithic times through thousands of years either. This is totaly usefull theory and problem creating of nothing.
So, this multitude explanations are explanations of non existing problem. It is only problem for evolutionists, which must find some mulitiply
conspiracy theory because thay have this a little paranoic idea fix to explain everything from nothing always because of some need and use.
Just because they can survive, it doesn't mean that new better mutations can't pop up and give them more advantage in surviving. Again, if skin colour doesn't matter for surviving, why all people on earth are not black, like original out of Africa people? Why did they change if there was no need for a change?
Why you are always repeated that maust be some reason and need for changing?
If ther would be always a reason, then Indians would be totqaly diffrent, but they
all are the same - even Eskimos are the same colour as Amazonian Indians. Why???!
Why all north was/is populated by dank eyed i dark hired man, all of them have darker
(even a little) skin than nordics? Why mongoloids are living almost in every latitude, and
why south America isnt natural negroid continent? Where is you theory in that places?
Of course you must find (and you will!) some another explanation only because theory
must be right! Always!
From genomes of ancients, we know that whiter mutations showed up relatively recently. They didn't vanish, as you predicted for recessive genes, but conglomerated around Baltic and North Sea. Can you explain why these mutations like this area the most?
Because a people who lived there had this genes in their genom.
And if I explained it to you couple of times, if such mutations have
a place it had to be in very smoll population, and after that that
small population spread and dominate another populations.
By the way, why you everything must explain. In mutations there is no reason.
In albinism in africa is not reason at all. But it exist. And because it is rare, it
cannot dominate the population. If you take every albiono people together
you will have a pretty large tribe. And you don't need thousends of years.
By the way, through many years scientists were writing a fairy tales that blond
mutated hundrets of thousenads of years, they were creating many nonsensical
theories, and now it is known that blond mutation has... 5000 years...
so as you can see, all this theories are worth nothing.
It is not only about survival, but about advantage over other people.
So tell me, how mutations hg R advantage almost every other mutations in the world?
What is special in that mustation, that is most spreading mutation in the world? Expain
it by only natural elements without human action. I beg you, explain me this...
they also got Lactose Persistent genes,
I still don't have it, and I am alive after thousands of years... and I drink milk sometimes... this is miracle!
and farmer genes from the south. They are all improvements over old hunter gatherer population. Now they can produce more or faster vitamin D3, they can drink raw milk to survive in case crops fail, and being farmers they can feed 10 times bigger population than hunter gatherers. Hunter gatherers could just survive, the new improved Scandinavians are thriving there.
No, no, no!
They simple had better knowledge and more food because of that knowledge, and as a result, they were more numeriuos.
Not really, there are also blond Sami people in European far North.
They are blond, not because they eveolved, but because they mixed with Nordics
from the south.
Don't try to pretend that you dont know that!
Regardless, hair colour doesn't really mater.
Now it doesn't matter...?
You was the one, who said that it matters, because the people could survive because of that color...
It just might be a side effect of very white mutations. We just don't know why yet.
Again, they can survive now. The new mutations can give them extra advantage.
So it matter or not?
Decide about survival or not?
Have a reason or not?
There is a reason why arctic fox or polar bear don't live in Africa, or crocodiles and elephants in Siberia. All the animal species are adapted well to their environments. Otherwise why not?
Black animals in arctica couldn't survive because they were good seeing... and people or predators can easly see and kill them.
Another reason is that, that they could be create on purpose to live in that envirornment. But people don't have need for a special
mascarade to survive, because they can survive everywhere where it is possible for man - it doesn't matter how he is coloured.
Many animals would survive when transplant to foreign environment, granted the new environment is not drastically different. However giving them tens of thousands or a million years they would evolve to fit the environment much better. This is observable in every species, humans included, and also from archaeological sources.
Not better, they either can survive or not. If they cant, they dont. Million of years it is to long to survive in bad enviroments. Look at Dinosaurs! They coudnt survive...
Humans... they are diffrent. They can create their own enviroment to survive. Otherwise Eskimos would be dead by now - they dont have sun, and they dont have blond hair...
This is just crazy. I hope you realize that. But for the heck of it, can you give us an example that inbreeding creates variety of looks. All the examples I know points otherwise.
You wanted this example, so I explained it to you.
You want next example... hmmm.. tell me, how were created all races of dogs?
Why greyhound looks totaly diffrent that yorkshire terrier?
How many milions of years was past to create such a diffrent types of dogs if every one comes from one kind of dogs?
And how many positive mutations necessary to survival have Chihuahua or YorkshireTerrier?
Look at secluded tribes in Amazon jungle or New Genie. All the tribe looks like brothers and sisters.
Yes! because they have the same gene pool.
One small tribe without any other variety which give the beginning of that people.
If at the beginning fisrt population would be mixed withe many varieties, then next tribes could be differet from each other.
And this happend in whole earth long time ago, so, next subtribes cannot change their limited genom pool.
And this is olso proof, that change doesnt come from nothing and dont create itselves.
I'm having a difficulty following your thoughts. Can you write in more coherent style?
Im trying
What pool of genes? They all come from one man and women, Noah and his wife.
And their sons had a children with whom?
And who said that:
- Noah had children only with one wife,
- that wife of Noah looks exactly the same as Noah,
- that they all have only AA type of gens?
Dauther in laws of Noah came from another people.
They could looks totaly different.
Anyway, why genes would go missing or recombine, if by your assumption, they were already surviving fine in environment? If they are surviving, there is no need for any changes, right?
Not right. This is your theory, not mine.
There is no need to a reason.
Blond or red hair does not decide about survival.
Only blind or deaf man cannot see or hear this.
To hunt a mammoth you dont need bolnd hair.
To invade another tribe - you don't need blond hair.
And as I show you, people without blond hair lived very well in the same environment.
The need for changes, aspecially for bond or blue eyes
does not exist.
It is only a fantasy for theory which must explain why and for what.
But ther was no "why", and any "for what".
Hemophilia has no use and reason, but still exist.
Or maybe you can explain, why evolution evolved such a thing, for what reason?