tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post195043818313401183..comments2024-03-22T15:55:34.030-04:00Comments on Evo and Proud: When Europeans turned whitePeter Frosthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04303172060029254340noreply@blogger.comBlogger33125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-88442908640664781082022-09-25T15:54:55.460-04:002022-09-25T15:54:55.460-04:00This scientific article make better sense to me th...This scientific article make better sense to me than any other theory I have read. I am curious because some years ago I moved to Denver Colorado I grew up in Alabama, where the heat of summer does make darker skin even darker, in Denver I had a neighbor of Greek descent in winter she was considerably lighter than I but during the heat of summer though neither of us actively suntanned here skin could dates to my colors sometimes even darker. Also living at a higher altitude created a larger lung capacityAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-62631567714705278372013-04-13T04:59:18.231-04:002013-04-13T04:59:18.231-04:00This is wrong Europeans have ben white for at leas...This is wrong Europeans have ben white for at least 10,000-15,000ybp my reason is 4,000 year old bones of europeans that had migrated out of easern europe and landed in china all had white skin most had light hair and light eyes the oldest was a redhead and these people arrived in china 5,300 years ago as the afasasveo culture so 5,300 ybp there where nordic looking people they orignally came from eastern europe 6,000-7,000 ybp so those people where deffintly whit probably nordic looking the sammi people who's dna matchs 10,000 year old bones in northern ueorp MTDNA U5b have lived in northern europe for at least 10,000 years experts agreed their common ancestor with the rest of europe live 10,000 ybp sammi are completly white but have been isolated ofr 10,000 years they have the highets amount of blonde hair in the world the common ancestor of the pale eastern europeans and sammi lived about 10,000-15,000 ybp and would havebeen extremly white like nordic europeans have gotten tanner in the last 6,000 years from mid eastern inter marriage greeks have 50% mid eastern ydna and have as much mid eastern as european but are still white same with most southern europeans a part of the reason northern europe is paler is becaue they di dnot inter marry with mid easterns europeans have been white for at least 13,000 years the sardina people are decdants of hunter gathers in france but they have mainly mid easterrn blood today but are still white all of europe would have been white 10,000-15,000 ybp white skin did not travel and sread in europe it came from all europeans common ancestors experts belive the gene is 20,000 years old Krefterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01055804913528477710noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-24846216039056958072012-12-11T08:07:39.746-05:002012-12-11T08:07:39.746-05:00"1)Hunters gatherers in the toundra can not b..."1)Hunters gatherers in the toundra can not be as many as the mutiple waves of farmers immigrants that came later from further south.<br />2) These middle east farmers didn't have the same environmental pressure you describe, somehow they must have been bronwish/bronze, like otzi maybe."<br /><br />1) The middle-east farmers may have been lighter then than they are now.<br /><br />2) The farmers may have been restricted to only some of the available terriotory through their crops not being fully adapted to the climate.<br /><br />3) The farmers may have sparked a population boom among the northern hunter-gatherers through introducing domesticated animals particularly cattle.<br /><br />4) There are numerous historically recorded examples of northern backflow at various times and perhaps more that are unknown particularly if the incoming agricultural zone was more fragile than a theoretical cattle-herding zone.<br /><br />5) If traits had evolved for sexual selection then as long as the mid-east expansion wasn't continuously reinforced those northern traits might be preferred over time i.e. if elites picked northern trait females and elites had larger numbers of surviving offspring.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-23095773154107157832012-10-29T18:15:48.287-04:002012-10-29T18:15:48.287-04:00In Europe and especially the UK and Ireland, tanne...In Europe and especially the UK and Ireland, tanned skin is seen as the most attractive because of its ability to adapt to the changing sun levels throughout the year.<br /><br />Women with the palest complexions aren't seen as the most attractive.Larry Harsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11120481344374726643noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-19213248432291631192012-10-26T21:19:21.500-04:002012-10-26T21:19:21.500-04:00This sounds plausible, but it seems like it's ...This sounds plausible, but it seems like it's missing a few steps. What about lighter skin hues in other parts of the world - the Middle East, southern Asia, the Americas? Female sexual selection among steppe hunters doesn't seem to fit there. I guess there could be a lack of selective pressure for dark skin when humans moved out of Africa, but what is that selective pressure, and why is it different between say, the rainforests of Congo and Brazil?Iainnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-72674235147812017502012-10-26T15:36:05.890-04:002012-10-26T15:36:05.890-04:00Then look at pictures of modern Korean women.
I&#...<i>Then look at pictures of modern Korean women.</i><br /><br />I'd tend to look at pictures of Europeans and Koreans together as a reference.<br /><br />East Asian people are very particular with how they light their pictures - it changes the reflectance and brightness a lot.<br /><br />Check out European girls who are into Asian fashion lighting their photos the same way and you'll see what I mean. Their skin looks a lot brighter than in "reality".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-51413850986800630482012-10-26T14:16:22.082-04:002012-10-26T14:16:22.082-04:00On the other hand, maybe I am wrong. I just came ...On the other hand, maybe I am wrong. I just came across this:<br />http://kdvr.com/2012/10/26/chinese-man-sues-wife-for-being-ugly-wins-120000/<br /><br />Maybe it's just that plastic surgery is so common to get rounded eyes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-69224063844151401542012-10-26T11:35:25.773-04:002012-10-26T11:35:25.773-04:00Anonymous at 5:29:00, Don't believe me? Do a ...Anonymous at 5:29:00, Don't believe me? Do a google images search such as "Korea 1900". Here is a good example:<br />http://www.paulnoll.com/Korea/History/Korea-1900-33.html<br /><br />Then look at pictures of modern Korean women.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-32626120298777066782012-10-26T10:21:57.887-04:002012-10-26T10:21:57.887-04:00Peter, your theory will be blocked for its politic...Peter, your theory will be blocked for its political consequences. <br /><br />Here is what it means to accept your theory in political terms:<br />1)Whites today are the result of sexual selection taking place for thousands of years.<br />2)This reproduction behavioral pattern has been genetically hardwired in the brain of white males and is expressed very strongly during the male reproductive age. <br />Technically, it should even be possible to look for genetic markers of this behavior.<br /><br />3)This inherited ancestral behavior is called 'racism' in modern language and for the last 60years or so has been ruled from unwelcome in some rare white countries to unlawfull in most. This was not a problem as long as 'racism' was considered a moral deviance of (mostly) white males, as would be any criminal activity, but this becomes a problem if 'racism' is a genetic inheritence as much as the color of our hairs or eyes. Under these new terms, the french law that considers 'racism' unlawfull and punishable by prison, would become as stupid and arbitrary as labeling brown eyed people unlawfull and send them all in jail.<br />Then the case could be made that social behavior has amplified our imprited basal racist tendancies, but even the Law considers that the legal reponsability is diminished in genetically affected individuals. <br />The bottom line is that IF your theory was accepted, that would give some legal ground for people to challenge the anti-racist racist laws. <br />So, forget it. <br />Ben10noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-59813895565723623232012-10-26T06:29:56.601-04:002012-10-26T06:29:56.601-04:00"On a related note, I think that east Asian w..."On a related note, I think that east Asian women are turning white."<br />That's absurd but funny.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-58851568538957968962012-10-25T10:59:36.006-04:002012-10-25T10:59:36.006-04:00In Neanderthals, there was the whole range of hair...In Neanderthals, there was the whole range of hair colour we see today in modern European populations, from dark to blond right through to red. Out of Africa, the selective pressure from UV radiation disappears. So any mutation that falls into the MC1R gene is allowed to survive and spread through a population. This suggests that similar adaptations were evolved independently by Neanderthals and modern Europeans in response to similar environmental circumstances.<br /><br />Whiteness is more likely to have evolved within the Neanderthals who inhabited areas where white skin would be an evolutionary advantage for hundreds of thousands of years before the two species met, or perhaps even predecessor non-African species. Neanderthals would then have interbred with Sapiens, producing offspring with ever-lighter skin. The idea isn't impossible. Anaway it seems humans and Neanderthals only overlapped in a few places that we now of, notably in the Middle East and in Southern Russia. Neither of these are places known for inhabitants with especially pale skin. So if pale skin did come from Neanderthals, it migrated North with Sapiens and died out from the areas that Neanderthals existed. But, this isn't impossible.<br /><br />The next issue is that Australian Aborigines lived in environments on the same latitude as New York or Spain at the height of the last ice age and for at least 10, 000 years before. They never evolved light skin any more than tropical Americans evolved dark skin. All this doesn't prove very much at all except that skin colour really isn't as plastic as people often assume it, nor is it as large a survival trait as people often assume it is. There's no doubt that it is somewhat plastic, and that it offers some survival advantage, but either plasticity or advantage is so low that it doesn't alter in over 20.000 years at latitude lower than those at which humans an Neanderthals predominantly overlappedAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-63401960902706835672012-10-25T10:20:37.193-04:002012-10-25T10:20:37.193-04:00On a related note, I think that east Asian women a...On a related note, I think that east Asian women are turning white. Someone should do a comparison of photographs from a hundred years ago and today. It appears to me that round eyes and light skin are being selected for at a rapid rate among asians.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-43121786376626189002012-10-24T15:05:54.872-04:002012-10-24T15:05:54.872-04:00Peter, MtDNA analysis of global populations suppor...Peter, <a href="http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/121018/srep00745/full/srep00745.html" rel="nofollow">MtDNA analysis of global populations support that major population expansions began before Neolithic Time</a>.<br /><br />The vitamin D hypothesis advocates are about go very quiet. After the inevitable Y-chromosome study showing selection, your former critics will say the theory that Europeans originated in sexual selection of women was obvious all along.Seannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-40702686311025843252012-10-24T09:41:07.426-04:002012-10-24T09:41:07.426-04:00Peter,
"Yes, I believe it can be applied to ...Peter,<br /><br />"<i>Yes, I believe it can be applied to other aspects of female attractiveness. <b> Women of European descent have wider hips, narrower waists, and thicker subcutaneous fat than do women of other geographic origins </b>. I touch on these points in my 2006 and 2008 articles (go to My Publications) </i>."<br /> <br />You have discussed to a trend toward lower waist-to-hip ratios among women in northern Europe, overall corresponding to some secondary sexual characteristics that tend to be more exaggerated in European women. <br />Although there is considerable heterogeneity in breast sizes within each population, Northern European women's average breast size tend to be larger than another populations- mongolides, Negroid ..-? And there are different features between Northern and Southern European women?Macnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-83182572042150529672012-10-24T07:23:05.579-04:002012-10-24T07:23:05.579-04:00Peter Frost,
You have said " There's ver...Peter Frost,<br /><br />You have said <i>" There's very little sexual selection of women anywhere. In fact, an argument can be made that the pressure of sexual selection has now shifted to men. The 'European singularity' has been pretty much abolished. </i><br /><br />What are your thoughts on social and Darwinian nature of this debate?,and about how human evolution has sped up in the last 10,000 years anticipated the future shape of human evolution would take given the sexual marketplace changes?. I wanted to know if the Four Sirens (contraceptives, easy peasy no-fault divorce, women’s economic independence, rigged feminist-inspired laws) would speed up human evolution even faster than the dawn of agriculture.<br />Contraception is a selective pressure? Catholicism and fewer years of education are both positively correlated with fertility? In possibly what will turn out to be the juiciest irony in all of human history, feminism and its co-ideologies of deceit may usher in a Western that looks more like a patriarchal Middle Eastern caliphate of their worst nightmares. The realization of the matricentric utopia that feminism has been clamoring for these last few generations will undo the very foundation upon which the rancid ideology was able to prop itself.<br /><br />Economically independent women, freed from shame and the restrictions of their biology by the pill and abortion, following their vaginas straight into soft polygamy, state-supported single motherhood, and grossly unjust payday divorce settlements.<br />a great narcissism has flourished, leading women to overvalue themselves so much that they price themselves out of the dating market. Modern women are being more choosy and they are increasing their mate standards.<br /><br />At this time religions and monogamous marriage can not enforced made sure all beta men have get a mate, thus unlocking productive output out of these men who a this times have no incentive to be productive. Surplus of bachelor men. Such surpluses of men increase the potential for internal and external violence, while diminishing the prospects for democracy? This phenomenon destabilize. <br /><br />It would be interesting if you could discuss about this in a thematic post.Michaelnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-58339469858405682712012-10-23T21:22:40.879-04:002012-10-23T21:22:40.879-04:00So what's with the British being so white in p...So what's with the British being so white in particular and other people not finding them attractive?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-67589247236677487382012-10-23T17:11:59.304-04:002012-10-23T17:11:59.304-04:00The women surplus in Europe could have spilled in ...The women surplus in Europe could have spilled in the near populations?<br /><br />If a male could only support a female, it make sense to sell the surplus to other men. It would be better than let the die.<br /><br />If the women sold were "prettier" than the women of the confining populations (but less of the women kept), they would reproduce with their new owner / husband faster than the local women.<br /><br />Another point: if food was abundant but difficult to get, the old Europeans would have a surplus population spilling continuously to South and East. <br />They would have a difficult to invade homeland and the ability to push continuously outside.painlord2k@gmail.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04566115851088917514noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-38941671601578650482012-10-23T16:12:27.485-04:002012-10-23T16:12:27.485-04:00The vitamin-D hypothesis is fateful; it mandates g...The vitamin-D hypothesis is fateful; it mandates giving supplements of vitamin D to those (INCLUDING CHILDREN) with dark skin who live at northern latitude. If it was true Black Africans in the northernmost latitudes would all have severe rickets and much else wrong with them.Seannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-5086725545251400062012-10-23T15:11:23.550-04:002012-10-23T15:11:23.550-04:00Beyond Anon,
If only the horse were dead! The vit...Beyond Anon,<br /><br />If only the horse were dead! The vitamin-D explanation for white European skin is like the Terminator. You think you've killed it, and it comes back to life in a new form.<br /><br />Anon,<br /><br />Point taken. The text has been changed.<br /><br />Anon,<br /><br />I wasn't aware of that article by James Bowery. This may be a case of convergent thinking. Or he may have picked up from me indirectly. I first published this hypothesis back in 1994: <br /><br />Geographic distribution of human skin colour: A selective compromise between natural selection and sexual selection? Human Evolution, 9, 141-153.<br /><br />Tyrion Lannister,<br /><br />Yes, I believe that the same intensifcation of sexual selection influenced European face shape.<br /><br />See:<br />http://evoandproud.blogspot.ca/2009/09/female-face-shape-and-sexual-selection.html<br /><br />Sean,<br /><br />The vitamin-D hypothesis is one of the three big obstacles I encounter. It has a strong hold on people's thinking, and I'm not sure whether Beleza et al's study will be enough to knock it out of the running.<br /><br />Chris Crawford,<br /><br />Yes, I believe it can be applied to other aspects of female attractiveness. Women of European descent have wider hips, narrower waists, and thicker subcutaneous fat than do women of other geographic origins. I touch on these points in my 2006 and 2008 articles (go to My Publications).<br /><br />I suspect that blushing is more developed in European women, but the data are sparse. I prefer to focus my energies where I have the best chances of winning this argument.<br /><br />Ben,<br /><br />Yes, this is the other obstacle I encounter. "Since Middle-Eastern farmers replaced European hunter-gatherers, everything that happened in Upper Paleolithic Europe is irrelevant." <br /><br />Most paleoanthropologists believe that less than 25% of the current European gene pool comes from these Middle-Eastern farmers. Others, like Greg Cochran, disagree, and I've dealt with their arguments at some length in previous posts, such as:<br /><br />http://evoandproud.blogspot.ca/2012/05/who-were-ancestors-of-modern-europeans.html<br /><br />Farming came to northern Europe between 7,000 and 3,000 years ago. Egyptian tombs from 4,000 years ago have paintings of white-skinned, fair-haired Europeans. So, if Europeans had been demographically replaced by Middle Easterners, we're left with a time frame of only 3,000 years (maximum) during which these hair, eye, and skin color traits could have evolved. In any case, the time frame was much earlier, 19,000 to 11,000 years ago. That's long before farming came to Europe.<br /><br />Anon,<br /><br />Yes, boys are maturing earlier, but I wouldn't rule out a genetic explanation. In a word, the 'cads' are outbreeding the 'dads.'Peter Fros_noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-64415797510461480462012-10-23T14:32:28.835-04:002012-10-23T14:32:28.835-04:00Peter has a book about light skin colour being fav...Peter has a book about light skin colour being favoured in a wide range of traditional cultures. I gave <a href="http://evoandproud.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/eye-of-beholder.html" rel="nofollow">a link</a> which shows that white women are regarded as relatively attractive, and were even in the days before Westernization of global culture.<br /><br />And at that link it says: "female raters, (14 were White, 3 were Black, and 3 were Asian) gave the highest ratings to Black men. It's difficult to explain that unless Peter is right.Seannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-18412003677790396112012-10-23T14:00:57.866-04:002012-10-23T14:00:57.866-04:00Thanks for straightening me out on breasts and hip...Thanks for straightening me out on breasts and hips, Mac and Sean. There are still lots of traits that I mentioned that might be useful for confirming or rejecting Peter's hypothesis.Chris Crawfordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14926445098765433310noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-35308839731528119322012-10-23T03:19:55.669-04:002012-10-23T03:19:55.669-04:00Peter, this is OT but you've blogged or mentio...Peter, this is OT but you've blogged or mentioned before on your blog that girls are maturing faster and reaching puberty earlier. Well it appears to be happening to boys as well:<br /><br />http://edition.cnn.com/2012/10/20/health/boys-early-puberty/index.html<br /><br />"Boys in the United States are starting puberty earlier than ever, according to a new study publishing in the November issue of the journal Pediatrics.<br /><br />In the study, lead author Marcia Herman-Giddens from the University of North Carolina's School of Public Health and her colleagues show that boys are starting to sexually develop six months to two years earlier than medical textbooks say is standard."<br /><br />"Researchers assigned each boy's data to one of five stages -- Stage 1 being pre-puberty, Stage 2 being the onset of puberty and Stage 5 being adult maturity. They then compared the ages and puberty stages of all the boys. The rigorous study was designed to report on only physical changes, not hormonal.<br /><br />The results were broken down by race: African-American boys start hitting Stage 2 first, at about 9 years old, while non-Hispanic white and Hispanic boys begin developing around 10 years old. "This should have an impact on the public health community," Herman-Giddens said.<br /><br />But the researcher is concerned about using the numbers as a new standard for pediatricians. "That might be normal now," she said, "but that doesn't mean it's normal in the sense of what's healthy or what should be."<br /><br />One of the reasons she's worried is that our environment may be playing a role in accelerating puberty.<br /><br />"The changes are too fast," Herman-Giddes said. "Genetics take maybe hundreds, thousands of years. You have to look at something in the environment. That would include everything from (a lack of) exercise to junk food to TV to chemicals.""Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-82363260579204334732012-10-22T15:04:18.966-04:002012-10-22T15:04:18.966-04:00Chris, Re. looks: The eye of the beholder? . As fo...Chris, Re. looks: <a href="http://evoandproud.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/eye-of-beholder.html" rel="nofollow">The eye of the beholder? </a>. As for behaviour,it seems to me that in a population where there was sexual selection of women we would see intensification of women's feminine traits in looks and behaviour. I think promiscuity is masculine behaviour, and it would be reduced in women by sexual selection (of women).<br /><br />What we would see more of is typical feminine behaviour. such as hesitant acquiescence to the advances of a favoured male. It has to be remembered that white women's sexual behaviour is a function of the liberalism of white societies which allow women a degree of sexual freedom that is inconceivable elsewhere in the world.Seannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-10948878030632611992012-10-22T13:31:59.218-04:002012-10-22T13:31:59.218-04:00... your theory works perfect IF the white genes w...... your theory works perfect IF the white genes were dominant (or at least less recessive in that time) OR, if the white genes carriers became the majority during a short period of time, like an 'extinction event'.<br /><br />One might think about an epidemy similar to the great pests, who supposedly are responsible for the predominance of the blood type A in Europe.<br />But i am also thinking about two cataclysmic events, unless they are the same:<br />The end of Atlantis as mentioned by Plato, around 9000 bc, and the biblical Deluge.Ben10noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3734925856292601239.post-78693330527453302392012-10-22T12:23:52.447-04:002012-10-22T12:23:52.447-04:00Chris Crawford.
...Most of these components of wh...Chris Crawford.<br /><br /><i>...Most of these components of which I'm aware already have an explanation in health and fecundity (large breasts suggests good milk production, large hips suggest better birth survivability, symmetric features imply early health). </i><br /><br />1- Human breast size does not influence how much breast milk produce. Because breast size depends more on the amount of supporting fibrous and fatty tissue than the amount of milk glands. Therefore women with larger breasts do not necessarily produce more breast milk. Breast milk production is stimulated hormonally and increases with demand.<br /><br />2- It is not hips size that determines the space a baby has to travel through the birth canal, but the width and shape of the pelvis - the part of the body which contracts and pushes the baby out into the world. If a woman has hips that looks childbearing, this doesn't necessarily mean she has a wide pelvis. There is no test to prove how wide or narrow a pelvis is - the only way to find out is to give birth!<br /><br />The key piece in all of this is that question is hourglass shape because that is a sign of fertility, of whether women with 0.65-0.70 WHRs are really more fertile. As it turns out, women with smaller WHRs get pregnant more readily. Women with a relatively low waist-to-hip ratio and large breasts have about 30 per cent higher levels of the female reproductive hormone estradiol than women with other combinations of body shapes. Waist-to-hip ratio also had a strong effect on levels of another female hormone, progesterone.<br /><br /><br />Men find more attractive those women who are likely to be fertile and nubile, i.e. able to get pregnant. Women with smaller waists and wider hips mean aren't obviously pregnant, tend to be younger, have more circulating estrogen and all of which are associated with higher fertility.Macnoreply@blogger.com