posted
Yes stupid, they are symptoms, and correctly listed as such, for there is no other widespread method to detect Albinism except by observing symptoms, with the most important being;
Visual - Eye color: The lighter the eyes, the closer to OCA1. Eye color can range from very yellow to red to light blue to brown and may change with age.
Therefore, where you are ATTEMPTING to make the incredibly desperate claim that all Albinos will have severe visual problems, you are half right, and of course, half wrong. An Albino may have visual acuity of 20/40 when born, yet because the eyes lack sufficient melanin, the eye will degrade rapidly over time due to damage incurred by imparted free radicals.
Example Of Photophobia in Albino
Mis-wiring Of White peoples brains due to insufficient melanin during conception.
"Normal" White burns same as Albino contracting melanoma where ever sunburn occurs. Why? Because "normal" whites share not only same melanin deficiency as Albino, but also share the exact same compromised immunity system that allows skin cancer to manifest.
As can be easily seen, melanoma occurrence in "Normal" whiles (albinos) is increasing year after year at ~2-3%/annually.
Why?
Because "Normal" whites and Albinos lack nature's protection for all earthly top dwelling creatures, melanin. The only creatures on earth who lack this natural protection are below ground level dwelling creatures. Posts: 2403 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, yes, but I have proven that whites lack depigmented retinas while albinos have them. That is what causes the eye problems. Many conditions share symptoms. Nice squinting Saami, I doubt I would have any difficulty finding a squinting Inuit to counter that. Proves nothing.
All of those eye problems are caused by the depigmentation of the retina.
Posts: 195 | Registered: Jul 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by InsertNameHere: Yes, yes, but I have proven that whites lack depigmented retinas while albinos have them. That is what causes the eye problems. Many conditions share symptoms. Nice squinting Saami, I doubt I would have any difficulty finding a squinting Inuit to counter that. Proves nothing.
All of those eye problems are caused by the depigmentation of the retina.
Yes, she/he is displaying obvious signs of Photophobia, AND Freckles, AND blond hair, AND blue eyes, AND white skin. All very VALID SYMPTOMS of ALBINISM. Taken together, almost positive to be diagnosed in some OCA range.
Posts: 2403 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
She/he? Photophobia of something any rational person is photophobic of. Why don't you stare into the sun for awhile? Are you too Photophobic for that? I did it once for quite some time just because I thought it would be interesting. So if your not photophobic you can too. He may display the symptoms you think are important but if there is one thing tv has taught me it is that disease diagnosis is far more complicated than that, with many conditions sharing similar symptoms.
But albinism depigments the retinas and I have proven that this is not the case with whites. The Photophobia in albinos is caused significantly by the depigmented retina as well as the other ocular malfunctions.
So go stare into the sun. Also Saami have eyefolds similar to Asians.
Posts: 195 | Registered: Jul 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by InsertNameHere: Yes, yes, but I have proven that whites lack depigmented retinas while albinos have them. That is what causes the eye problems. Many conditions share symptoms. Nice squinting Saami, I doubt I would have any difficulty finding a squinting Inuit to counter that. Proves nothing.
All of those eye problems are caused by the depigmentation of the retina.
Yes, she/he is displaying obvious signs of Photophobia, AND Freckles, AND blond hair, AND blue eyes, AND white skin. All very VALID SYMPTOMS of ALBINISM.
Forgive my CONfusion here...please...but I have a valid question? Are not freckles made of melanin? I'm not asking about the brown spots that some older people get, that are caused by sun damage...
I really don't bizniz with this whole 'white' people are or are not albinos...Truthfully I don't care...and wondering why so many NON-'white' people do.....when WE got OUR OWN issues and problems and paths to sort out...shouldn't that be some ish THEY need and/or should be worrying about and arguing over rather than WE....why are/should we go round and round page after page thread after thread getting nowhere but heated egos (for the many here who are CLEARLY driven by their egos) over THEIR problem(s)...so nuh bodda try to draw me into the argument...is just a question I am genuinely curious about....
htp
Posts: 3446 | From: U.S. by way of JA by way of Africa | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
The thing is that so many people seem to think they know better than the experts.
Edit: The lack of the depigmented retina makes the condition unlike albinism and unlikely to have derived from any known form of albinism. The ancestors of Europeans were relatively dark compared to their descendants. One does not need black mixture if dark coloration was in the population from the beginning.
Posts: 195 | Registered: Jul 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: I think that at this point, we might pause and reflect on what we are really talking about.
The argument is that Whites "DERIVE" from Albinos; NOT that all Whites ARE Albinos.
Ok thanks for the clarification...so I'll simply re-word my statement, as it's still applicable as far as I am concerned...
I really don't bizniz with this whole 'white' people derive or do not derive from albinos...Truthfully I don't care...and wondering why so many NON-'white' people do.....when WE got OUR OWN issues and problems and paths to sort out...shouldn't that be some ish THEY need and/or should be worrying about and arguing over rather than WE....why are/should we go round and round page after page thread after thread getting nowhere but heated egos (for the many here who are CLEARLY driven by their egos) over THEIR problem(s)/origins/what have you...so nuh bodda try to draw me into the argument...
htp
Posts: 3446 | From: U.S. by way of JA by way of Africa | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's because people are stupid. And percentage of non-white ancestry has little to do with coloration. At least when it is in low amounts. Dark "white" people are dark simply because they never became as pale as those who did. Not because of pale types mixing with dark.
Posts: 195 | Registered: Jul 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by InsertNameHere: The ancestors of Europeans were relatively dark compared to their descendants. One does not need black mixture if dark coloration was in the population from the beginning.
I'm sorry Sonny, did you miss the memo? The original Europeans were Black people.
White Europeans are NOT the descendants of these Black Europeans - to any appreciative degree.
White people are migrants from CENTRAL ASIA (circa 1,200 B.C.)!
Description of INCOMING Whites, by resident Whites:
Quote: "They have all deep blue eyes, and bright red hair".
(Please look-up the definition of Albinism again).
Give up the Bullsh1t!
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by InsertNameHere: It's because people are stupid. And percentage of non-white ancestry has little to do with coloration. At least when it is in low amounts. Dark "white" people are dark simply because they never became as pale as those who did. Not because of pale types mixing with dark.
Have you ever read-
ANCIENT AND MODERN BRITONS, VOLS 1 & 2, by David MacRitchie....
If not, I recommend it....matter of fact, I posted up some info re; the book a good while ago...I'll see if I can find it using the search mechanism and post the link here to the thread...cah I'm not searching thru aalllll those pages, lol....
htp
Posts: 3446 | From: U.S. by way of JA by way of Africa | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Who cares about Britons? The way you act it's as if Southern Europeans aren't really white people.
There is a gradual change of skin color on most continents where people are darker in the more UV intense regions and paler in the less. European coloration variation is not caused by two extremes mixing.
Posts: 195 | Registered: Jul 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by InsertNameHere: The ancestors of Europeans were relatively dark compared to their descendants. One does not need black mixture if dark coloration was in the population from the beginning.
I'm sorry Sonny, did you miss the memo? The original Europeans were Black people.
White Europeans are NOT the descendants of these Black Europeans - to any appreciative degree.
White people are migrants from CENTRAL ASIA (circa 1,200 B.C.)!
Description of INCOMING Whites, by resident Whites:
Quote: "They have all deep blue eyes, and bright red hair".
(Please look-up the definition of Albinism again).
Give up the Bullsh1t!
That's interesting thanks...I'm talking the term "all" in the same sentence with "bright red hair"...I always read that red hair in 'white' people was actually rare...a 'further' and/or rarer mutation, if you will....for lack of a better way for me to put it at the moment...even more rare for a Natural red-haired 'white' person to have Natural brown eyes, I read somewhere....matter of fact, I've often read historically up to the present it's the tendency of 'white' people to 'persecute' red-haired 'white' people...they call them 'gingers' I think....
htp
Posts: 3446 | From: U.S. by way of JA by way of Africa | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have heard somewhere that the red hair gene might be a weak form of albinism.
Edit:Oculocutaneous albinism is a group of conditions that affect coloring (pigmentation) of the skin, hair, and eyes. Affected individuals typically have very fair skin and white or light-colored hair. Long-term sun exposure greatly increases the risk of skin damage and skin cancers, including an aggressive form of skin cancer called melanoma, in people with this condition. Oculocutaneous albinism also reduces pigmentation of the colored part of the eye (the iris) and the light-sensitive tissue at the back of the eye (the retina). People with this condition usually have vision problems such as reduced sharpness; rapid, involuntary eye movements (nystagmus); and increased sensitivity to light (photophobia).
The four types of oculocutaneous albinism are designated as type 1 (OCA1) through type 4 (OCA4). Oculocutaneous albinism type 1 is characterized by white hair, very pale skin, and light-colored irises. Type 2 is typically less severe than type 1; the skin is usually a creamy white color and hair may be light yellow, blond, or light brown. Type 3 includes a form of albinism called rufous oculocutaneous albinism, which usually affects dark-skinned people. Affected individuals have reddish-brown skin, ginger or red hair, and hazel or brown irises. Type 3 is often associated with milder vision abnormalities than the other forms of oculocutaneous albinism. Type 4 has signs and symptoms similar to those seen with type 2. Because their features overlap, the four types of oculocutaneous albinism are most accurately distinguished by their genetic cause.
Let me remove all the usually and typically.
Oculocutaneous albinism is a group of conditions that affect coloring (pigmentation) of the skin, hair, and eyes. Long-term sun exposure greatly increases the risk of skin damage and skin cancers, including an aggressive form of skin cancer called melanoma, in people with this condition. Oculocutaneous albinism also reduces pigmentation of the colored part of the eye (the iris) and the light-sensitive tissue at the back of the eye (the retina).
Now the important part.
Oculocutaneous albinism also reduces pigmentation of the colored part of the eye (the iris) and the light-sensitive tissue at the back of the eye (the retina).
There is no uncertainty here.
Posts: 195 | Registered: Jul 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by InsertNameHere: Who cares about Britons? The way you act it's as if Southern Europeans aren't really white people.
There is a gradual change of skin color on most continents where people are darker in the more UV intense regions and paler in the less. European coloration variation is not caused by two extremes mixing.
Respectfully...have you taken a good look at how close Europe and northern Africa really are.....do you real-eyes that Africans did travel up into Europe- I hope you don't think that none of the Africans- that would have been a big part of Caesar's army- didn't sow their seeds during those travels...for just one example...
Something else many don't real-eyes...in those times...people were not so 'color conscious' as nowadays...people tend to try to put modern day racist views/attitudes on the ancient peoples..."white supremacy ideology" and "nationalistic schauvinism" [sp?] are two different things....that being said...."Roman" or "Greek" doesn't necessarily equal 'White' person back then because....no matter the skin color...if one was a Roman citizen or a Greek citizen..one was just that...and referred to as such..skin color was not ALWAYS noted....
btw....African blood runs rampant in the veins of not just a few royal families of Europe.... the de Medici family comes to mind...as does Queen Victoria's family...and Portugal?? oh my!
AFRICAN PRESENCE IN EARLY EUROPE by Dr. Ivan van Sertima, you would gain nuff information from that read...
htp
Posts: 3446 | From: U.S. by way of JA by way of Africa | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Actually so many people take what we "see" for granted. The answers of why white people appear as "pink" and why red hair is red is easily given in explanation by simple physics and energy absorption.
The fact that whites are "seen" as pink is a strong indicator in itself of whites being or being derived from Albinos.
Visible light is merely a small part of the full electromagnetic spectrum, which extends from cosmic rays at the highest energies down through the middle range (gamma rays, X- rays, the ultraviolet, the visible, the infrared, and radio waves) all the way to induction-heating and electric-power-transmission frequencies at the lowest energies. Note that this is the energy per quantum (photon if in the visible range) but not the total energy; the latter is a function of the intensity in a beam.
The visible light that humans perceive is a tiny fraction of the full electromagnetic spectrum (All of which blacks absorb).
We can detect the range of light spectrum from about 400 nanometers (violet) to about 700 nanometers (red). We perceive this range of light wavelengths as a smoothly varying rainbow of colors, otherwise known as the visual spectrum.
therefore, while black people appear brown or black is due to their skin ABSORBING all known wavelengths of radiation. White people and Albinos appear white or pink becasue their skin lacks melanin and therefore reflects rather than absorbs all known wavelengths except for the small intermediate wavelength of ~405-540nm.
Whites have "FAKE" Color
Consider the color pink. Look at the rays of color cast from a prism illuminated by the sun, and you won't find pink. Look at the spectrum and you won't find pink there, either. Pink is not a "pure spectral color". There is no wavelength of light that corresponds to pink. But we can see it anyway. Where does it come from?
It turns out that pink is a pale shade of purple - which doesn't really exist either. Purple is what your brain perceives when light enters your eye that stimulates about equal amounts of beta and rho, and no gamma at all. Beta and rho overlap from roughly 405 nm - 540 nm, and for most of that range, gamma will also produce a signal. The only place that we can get beta and rho without gamma is 405 nm - 425 nm. And in that range, beta is much more sensitive than rho.
But what if you mixed two beams of light - one around 405 nm (which would stimulate only beta), and one from 675 nm (which would stimulate only rho)? With this setup, you can jam into the brain combinations of signals that do not occur with pure spectral colors. And in this case, the brain perceives the combination as pink (if it's a light shade) or purple (if dark).
Posts: 2403 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't doubt the presence of African ancestry in Southern Europeans, what I doubt is that it is greater than the Asian ancestry in Northern, which would give them all the same dark eyes and hair as the Southern Europeans. I don't believe the mixture is enough to that significantly influence pigment.
Also there are so many European genes that influence coloration that their paleness could not have arrived fully developed out of nowhere, it had to gradually develop. Southern Europeans may be a bit more African than Northern, but their color is simply due to not carrying all the genes that reduce pigment in Europe. If it was solely to do with admixture they would not commonly have one pigment reducing gene and a rarity in another.
Nice demonstration on light. But whites depigmentation genes have no relation to albinism genes and cannot have been derived from them.
There are similarities. But they are not the same thing. Asians can be argued to be Albinos or derived from albinos just as well as Europeans can be, as some albinos have dark hair and eyes.
Or we can say the conditions are similar but distinct.
And Southern Europeans would have cause for remarking on the red hair and blue eyes of invaders, as those traits are still uncommon in many parts of Southern Europe, especially the red hair.
Actually an entire group with red hair would be remarked upon even in those places where it is relatively common.
Posts: 195 | Registered: Jul 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by InsertNameHere: I have heard somewhere that the red hair gene might be a weak form of albinism.
Edit:Oculocutaneous albinism is a group of conditions that affect coloring (pigmentation) of the skin, hair, and eyes. Affected individuals typically have very fair skin and white or light-colored hair. Long-term sun exposure greatly increases the risk of skin damage and skin cancers, including an aggressive form of skin cancer called melanoma, in people with this condition. Oculocutaneous albinism also reduces pigmentation of the colored part of the eye (the iris) and the light-sensitive tissue at the back of the eye (the retina). People with this condition usually have vision problems such as reduced sharpness; rapid, involuntary eye movements (nystagmus); and increased sensitivity to light (photophobia).
The four types of oculocutaneous albinism are designated as type 1 (OCA1) through type 4 (OCA4). Oculocutaneous albinism type 1 is characterized by white hair, very pale skin, and light-colored irises. Type 2 is typically less severe than type 1; the skin is usually a creamy white color and hair may be light yellow, blond, or light brown. Type 3 includes a form of albinism called rufous oculocutaneous albinism, which usually affects dark-skinned people. Affected individuals have reddish-brown skin, ginger or red hair, and hazel or brown irises. Type 3 is often associated with milder vision abnormalities than the other forms of oculocutaneous albinism. Type 4 has signs and symptoms similar to those seen with type 2. Because their features overlap, the four types of oculocutaneous albinism are most accurately distinguished by their genetic cause.
Let me remove all the usually and typically.
Oculocutaneous albinism is a group of conditions that affect coloring (pigmentation) of the skin, hair, and eyes. Long-term sun exposure greatly increases the risk of skin damage and skin cancers, including an aggressive form of skin cancer called melanoma, in people with this condition. Oculocutaneous albinism also reduces pigmentation of the colored part of the eye (the iris) and the light-sensitive tissue at the back of the eye (the retina).
Now the important part.
Oculocutaneous albinism also reduces pigmentation of the colored part of the eye (the iris) and the light-sensitive tissue at the back of the eye (the retina).
There is no uncertainty here.
My cousin has been dealing with a particular 'white' woman for about ten years or more now anyway, she has bright red hair..pale skin..deep brown eyes...black eyelashes...dark brown maybe black eyebrows- and no, she doesn't use mascara on her lashes and/or eyeliner on her brows, lol...hair on her legs and arms is so light red or whatever can't really seet.....oh, and he confirmed she IS a Natural redhead (TMI dammit!)...
and as I stated, I read somewhere that combination of red hair/brown eyes is genetically unusual in that most red heads are blue or green eyed with light lashes and eyebrows....even the couple ones I've seen with dark eyes had light eyelashes and eyebrows....
htp
Posts: 3446 | From: U.S. by way of JA by way of Africa | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I also dislike people saying that whites only appeared recently in Europe. Going back enough thousands of years they did indeed lack the extremes of their coloration, this did not make them non-white. Evend if Germanics came from central Asia, that does not mean whites were not already living in Europe. It means the Germanic whites were not living in Europe.
I have no problem if you would like to insult Germanics, but they are still not albinos.
Posts: 195 | Registered: Jul 2010
| IP: Logged |
here are a few EXCERPTS, tho this article should be read in its two page entirety:
quote: Scientists said yesterday that they have discovered a tiny genetic mutation that largely explains the first appearance of white skin in humans tens of thousands of years ago, a finding that helps solve one of biology's most enduring mysteries and illuminates one of humanity's greatest sources of strife.
The work suggests that the skin-whitening mutation occurred by chance in a single individual after the first human exodus from Africa, when all people were brown-skinned. That person's offspring apparently thrived as humans moved northward into what is now Europe, helping to give rise to the lightest of the world's races.
Leaders of the study, at Penn State University, warned against interpreting the finding as a discovery of "the race gene." Race is a vaguely defined biological, social and political concept, they noted, and skin color is only part of what race is -- and is not.
In fact, several scientists said, the new work shows just how small a biological difference is reflected by skin color. The newly found mutation involves a change of just one letter of DNA code out of the 3.1 billion letters in the human genome -- the complete instructions for making a human being.
quote: The work also reveals for the first time that Asians owe their relatively light skin to different mutations. That means that light skin arose independently at least twice in human evolution, in each case affecting populations with the facial and other traits that today are commonly regarded as the hallmarks of Caucasian and Asian races.
quote: The discovery, described in today's issue of the journal Science, was an unexpected outgrowth of studies Cheng and his colleagues were conducting on inch-long zebra fish, which are popular research tools for geneticists and developmental biologists. Having identified a gene that, when mutated, interferes with its ability to make its characteristic black stripes, the team scanned human DNA databases to see if a similar gene resides in people.
To their surprise, they found virtually identical pigment-building genes in humans, chickens, dogs, cows and many others species, an indication of its biological value.
quote: They got a bigger surprise when they looked in a new database comparing the genomes of four of the world's major racial groups. That showed that whites with northern and western European ancestry have a mutated version of the gene.
Skin color is a reflection of the amount and distribution of the pigment melanin, which in humans protects against damaging ultraviolet rays but in other species is also used for camouflage or other purposes. The mutation that deprives zebra fish of their stripes blocks the creation of a protein whose job is to move charged atoms across cell membranes, an obscure process that is crucial to the accumulation of melanin inside cells.
Humans of European descent, Cheng's team found, bear a slightly different mutation that hobbles the same protein with similar effect. The defect does not affect melanin deposition in other parts of the body, including the hair and eyes, whose tints are under the control of other genes.
A few genes have previously been associated with human pigment disorders -- most notably those that, when mutated, lead to albinism, an extreme form of pigment loss. But the newly found glitch is the first found to play a role in the formation of "normal" white skin. The Penn State team calculates that the gene, known as slc24a5, is responsible for about one-third of the pigment loss that made black skin white. A few other as-yet-unidentified mutated genes apparently account for the rest.
Although precise dating is impossible, several scientists speculated on the basis of its spread and variation that the mutation arose between 20,000 and 50,000 years ago. That would be consistent with research showing that a wave of ancestral humans migrated northward and eastward out of Africa about 50,000 years ago.
Unlike most mutations, this one quickly overwhelmed its ancestral version, at least in Europe, suggesting it had a real benefit. Many scientists suspect that benefit has to do with vitamin D, made in the body with the help of sunlight and critical to proper bone development.
Sun intensity is great enough in equatorial regions that the vitamin can still be made in dark-skinned people despite the ultraviolet shielding effects of melanin. In the north, where sunlight is less intense and cold weather demands that more clothing be worn, melanin's ultraviolet shielding became a liability, the thinking goes.
Today that solar requirement is largely irrelevant because many foods are supplemented with vitamin D.
Some scientists said they suspect that white skin's rapid rise to genetic dominance may also be the product of "sexual selection," a phenomenon of evolutionary biology in which almost any new and showy trait in a healthy individual can become highly prized by those seeking mates, perhaps because it provides evidence of genetic innovativeness.
OKKAAAAAYYYY.....THIS PART HERE:
quote: white skin's rapid rise to genetic dominance
IS WHERE I GOT LOST...EVERYONE KNOWS THAT 'WHITE' SKIN IS GENETICALLY RECESSIVE ....FOR EXAMPLE...LOL...THAT 'WHITE' GAL I MENTIONED ABOVE THAT MY COUSIN DEALS WITH...THEY HAVE THREE SONS...NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THOSE YOUTHS COULD PASS FOR 'WHITE' IF THEY TRIED...
htp.
Posts: 3446 | From: U.S. by way of JA by way of Africa | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
A major functional role of eumelanin is to protect melanocytes from harmful UV-induced DNA damage by virtue of absorption of UV light. On the other hand, pheomelanin may become a pro-oxidant upon UV exposure. In this regard, assaying eu- and pheo-melanin has become an indispensable tool in pigment cell biology.
Therefore, RED hair is a trait associated with those able to manufacture some level of Pheomelanin, and little to no Eumelanin. The trait is very common in the Irish and Scottish.
As this study indicates, those with pheomelanin production and low Eumelanin production are susceptible to melanoma as albinos, quite possibly, because they and albinos are the same physically.
Eumelanin and pheomelanin concentrations in human epidermis before and after UVB irradiation Alison Hennessy 1 , Carol Oh 1 , Brian Diffey 2 , Kazumasa Wakamatsu 3 , Shosuke Ito 3 and Jonathan Rees 1,* 1 Department of Dermatology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK 2 Regional Medical Physics Department, Newcastle General Hospital, Newcastle NE46BE, UK 3 Department of Chemistry, Fujita Health University School of Health Sciences, Toyoake, Aichi 470–1192, Japan
Pheomelanin is widely thought to be causally related to susceptibility to the harmful effects of ultraviolet radiation: epidemiological studies show that those with a higher ratio of pheomelanin to eumelanin in hair (RED HAIR) have higher rates of melanoma, and work in mouse and cell culture shows that pheomelanin generates excess free radicals after UVR exposure. By contrast, based on measurements of eumelanin and pheomelanin in human skin, before and following irradiation, we now report that both pheomelanin and eumelanin are positively related to skin colour, and by inference, inversely with cancer susceptibility. The ratio of melanin classes is similar in people with widely different cancer rates and UVR sensitivity. Although our numbers are small, our results extend previous work in man, and lead us to speculate that factors other than the amount of pheomelanin may be important in determining UVR susceptibility in persons with red hair.
Posts: 2403 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Red hair is not actually as common among the Scottish and Irish as people believe. Norway has a higher percentage of red-hair than either of them.
TruthAndRights: As "for white skin's rapid rise to genetic dominance" I believe by that they mean that the trait became more common then the ancestral form. In other words they are saying that white skin "won". Words usually have multiple definitions.
Posts: 195 | Registered: Jul 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by InsertNameHere: I also dislike people saying that whites only appeared recently in Europe. Going back enough thousands of years they did indeed lack the extremes of their coloration, this did not make them non-white. Evend if Germanics came from central Asia, that does not mean whites were not already living in Europe. It means the Germanic whites were not living in Europe.
I have no problem if you would like to insult Germanics, but they are still not albinos.
If you would care to submit evidence (you do remember what that is), indicating White existence in Europe prior to 1,200 B.C. Please DO submit it.
BTW - It is not lost on me that you have so far presented only your ill informed opinion on these matters, and when you tried to present evidence, it turn out to be wrong.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
What is your definition of "white"? I know that genetically Cro-Magnon man had some genetic traits most common to some middle-eastern people but also found in Europe. But really I do not know what type of evidence would satisfy you. African skeletal traits overlap with European so evidence is useless in that regard. But the presence of an afro in old European art can't help your case either because some whites can grow those.
Posts: 195 | Registered: Jul 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by InsertNameHere: Red hair is not actually as common among the Scottish and Irish as people believe. Norway has a higher percentage of red-hair than either of them.
TruthAndRights: As "for white skin's rapid rise to genetic dominance" I believe by that they mean that the trait became more common then the ancestral form. In other words they are saying that white skin "won". Words usually have multiple definitions.
LOL, what they are "attempting" to throw out there is called, PROPAGANDA, based on misleading, FACTOIDS.
Posts: 2403 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
however, had it 'won'....the majority of Mama Earth's people would be 'white'...no?...rather than the current REALity that she is peopled by a majority of NON-'White' people...
htp
Posts: 3446 | From: U.S. by way of JA by way of Africa | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by InsertNameHere: What is your definition of "white"? I know that genetically Cro-Magnon man had some genetic traits most common to some middle-eastern people but also found in Europe. But really I do not know what type of evidence would satisfy you. African skeletal traits overlap with European so evidence is useless in that regard. But the presence of an afro in old European art can't help your case either because some whites can grow those.
Boy, what the hell kind of nonsense are you talking about?
Quote: "African skeletal traits overlap with European" - which ones and since when?
Quote: an afro in old European art!
Damn boy, you are getting fuching stupid.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
They were talking about within Europe. Light skin is the most common color of skin in Europe. In a certain usage of the word dominant it is dominant.
All of the skeletal traits overlap. I recently saw something where the skeleton of a black man was mistaken for a white women.
There is a reason that craniometry and physical anthropology are no longer taken seriously.
Posts: 195 | Registered: Jul 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
So you believe Craniometry is correct? How exactly do I prove to you white people were there when I do not know what you consider to be white?
Posts: 195 | Registered: Jul 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I really have to ask...with no disrespect nor offense intended....but genuine curiosity nothing more nor less: is there some reason why you and so many others have to resort to insults like school-yard children when you disagree with someone and/or they disagree with you....is it that serious to your EGO that ones cannot seem to be able to respectfully agree to disagree like most other adults seem to be capable of doing...or is just because you're (remember, I am using "you/your/you're" in a general sense, it's not directed directly AT you individually) behind a computer and it's easy to say alot of things that wouldn't be said outta street to someone- one can say anything on the net, to include what they will and won't do off the net, lol.....or do you and others just like to go round and round and round with neither side budging to the point that it's actually counterproductive and pointLESS....or are you jus mad...or you did drink mad puss piss...ah which..cah JAH know...you all are some of the rudest people I have ever encountered on the net...and it's sad to see grown folks agwan so...
SMFH
btw...while you are busy criticizing the nonsense of others (which nonsense SHOULD be pointed out, yes!)...you have yet to acknowledge your own nonsense which I previously addressed....
whoiii.....what a way the dead point pon the dead and cry dead!
htp
Posts: 3446 | From: U.S. by way of JA by way of Africa | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: Stature, body mass, and body proportions are evaluated for the Cheddar Man (Gough's Cave 1) skeleton. Like many of his Mesolithic contemporaries, Gough's Cave 1 evinces relatively short estimated stature (ca. 166.2 cm [5′ 5′]) and low body mass (ca. 66 kg [146 lbs]). In body shape, he is similar to recent Europeans for most proportional indices. He differs, however, from most recent Europeans in his high crural index and tibial length/trunk height indices. Thus, while Gough's Cave 1 is characterized by a total morphological pattern considered ‘cold-adapted’, these latter two traits may be interpreted as evidence of a large African role in the origins of anatomically modern Europeans.
While not as diverged from his African ancestors as modern Europeans, which is to be expected as change occurs over time, and in the past less time had gone by. He is still cold-adapted and similar in body shape to Modern Europeans in most ways.
Posts: 195 | Registered: Jul 2010
| IP: Logged |
I really don't bizniz with this whole 'white' people derive or do not derive from albinos...Truthfully I don't care...and wondering why so many NON-'white' people do.....when WE got OUR OWN issues and problems and paths to sort out...shouldn't that be some ish THEY need and/or should be worrying about and arguing over rather than WE....why are/should we/you all go round and round page after page thread after thread getting nowhere but heated egos (for the many here who are CLEARLY driven by their egos) over 'WHITE' PEOPLE'S problem(s)/origins/what have you...LIKE WE DON'T HAVE OUR OWN ISSUES TO BE WORRYING ABOUT AND REASONING OVER...
htp
Posts: 3446 | From: U.S. by way of JA by way of Africa | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: TruthAndRights - You keep saying that Quote: You don't care either way".
So what the fuch are you still doing here - Playing Miss. Manners?
Try CONTRIBUTING something of VALUE!
alla that is FAAR from necessary...settle yuhSelf and cool yuh ego...it's a public forum...I can sit round here and play tiddlywinks on the board all day if I so choose...jus like yuh can sit here and unnecessarily insult those who ain't said **** outta order to you (i.e., me)...YUH BRITE LIKE STADIUM LIGHT YES...if you don't care for what I have to say there is a simple solution enuh: SEE ME AND NUH BLOODCLAATE SEE ME....if yuh pull yuh balls from round yuh neck yuh might feel better...
btw...my point was not the "I don't care" part...it was the more important paragraph that followed it (which was emphasized in bold type)....
Have a pleasant day...as I am....
htp
Posts: 3446 | From: U.S. by way of JA by way of Africa | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I did provide studies. I provided one that shows that whites lack retinal depigmentation. You just didn't read it. Or any other of the studies I posted, you're saying I didn't post any.
I would rather be ill-informed than to jump to conclusions and assume I am right.
Posts: 195 | Registered: Jul 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote: Stature, body mass, and body proportions are evaluated for the Cheddar Man (Gough's Cave 1) skeleton. Like many of his Mesolithic contemporaries, Gough's Cave 1 evinces relatively short estimated stature (ca. 166.2 cm [5′ 5′]) and low body mass (ca. 66 kg [146 lbs]). In body shape, he is similar to recent Europeans for most proportional indices. He differs, however, from most recent Europeans in his high crural index and tibial length/trunk height indices. Thus, while Gough's Cave 1 is characterized by a total morphological pattern considered ‘cold-adapted’, these latter two traits may be interpreted as evidence of a large African role in the origins of anatomically modern Europeans.
While not as diverged from his African ancestors as modern Europeans, which is to be expected as change occurs over time, and in the past less time had gone by. He is still cold-adapted and similar in body shape to Modern Europeans in most ways.
it is one thing to insult after getting tired of being insulted...it is another to insult for no reason atall other than simple disagreement and/or dislike....
"If a donkey kicks you and you kick back, you are both donkeys."
"Having a good discussion is like having riches."
BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY:
"Until lions have their own historians, tales of the hunt shall always glorify the hunter."
htp
Posts: 3446 | From: U.S. by way of JA by way of Africa | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by InsertNameHere: Yes, yes, but I have proven that whites lack depigmented retinas while albinos have them. That is what causes the eye problems. Many conditions share symptoms. Nice squinting Saami, I doubt I would have any difficulty finding a squinting Inuit to counter that. Proves nothing.
All of those eye problems are caused by the depigmentation of the retina.
Yes, she/he is displaying obvious signs of Photophobia, AND Freckles, AND blond hair, AND blue eyes, AND white skin. All very VALID SYMPTOMS of ALBINISM.
Forgive my CONfusion here...please...but I have a valid question? Are not freckles made of melanin? I'm not asking about the brown spots that some older people get, that are caused by sun damage...
I really don't bizniz with this whole 'white' people are or are not albinos...Truthfully I don't care...and wondering why so many NON-'white' people do.....when WE got OUR OWN issues and problems and paths to sort out...shouldn't that be some ish THEY need and/or should be worrying about and arguing over rather than WE....why are/should we go round and round page after page thread after thread getting nowhere but heated egos (for the many here who are CLEARLY driven by their egos) over THEIR problem(s)...so nuh bodda try to draw me into the argument...is just a question I am genuinely curious about....
htp
So. if you are not concerned with the true nature of whites, and you feel this information offers no real value, WHAT EXACTLY ARE YOU PROPOSING TO RESEARCH THAT IN YOUR OPINION, DOES OFFER REAL VALUE, IF ZEUS WAS BLACK OR NOT?
Lastly, what the HELL is this nonsense supposed to mean? I really don't bizniz with this whole 'white' people are or are not albinosPosts: 2403 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
InsertNameHere only a handful of people in old Africa remained unaffected by Civilized states
what many don't realized is that many of the independent villages or cities formally belonged to Empires proper that situation came about after the destruction of the of the major civilizations there. This map is not even complete for it leaves out the Empire of the Moors in Africa,Dahomey much of the Swahili states,Mupungabwe,the Somali Sultanate and a hellava lot more. To give you and idea of how huge Africa is and how huge those old empires were,very few people escaped their influence.
Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
Albinism depigments retinas. It was in the definition Mike111 gave me. I found sources that show that whites have equal melanin density in their retinas. I even found a source that whites are more prone to Hyper-pigmentation in a part of their eyes. It is not albinism then, similar that it may be to it in many ways.
And race is so ill-defined that you can't really prove jack **** about it. Race as most understand it is pure social construct. All racial features overlap. That is why scientists say there is no such thing as race.
It would be impossible to prove what race ancient people were.
So the proof that I would have to give is that the people called themselves white. As that is really the only definition that is really used.
Saying I did no research and posted no links to research is complete and utter bullshit. I just didn't picture spam you.
And to the new post: I never said people unaffected by civilizations, but people not a part of them. There are certainly more tribes then civilizations. Or at least a history of not being a part of them.
Never knew that Africa was that big. Interesting.
Posts: 195 | Registered: Jul 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by InsertNameHere: Yes, yes, but I have proven that whites lack depigmented retinas while albinos have them. That is what causes the eye problems. Many conditions share symptoms. Nice squinting Saami, I doubt I would have any difficulty finding a squinting Inuit to counter that. Proves nothing.
All of those eye problems are caused by the depigmentation of the retina.
Yes, she/he is displaying obvious signs of Photophobia, AND Freckles, AND blond hair, AND blue eyes, AND white skin. All very VALID SYMPTOMS of ALBINISM.
Forgive my CONfusion here...please...but I have a valid question? Are not freckles made of melanin? I'm not asking about the brown spots that some older people get, that are caused by sun damage...
I really don't bizniz with this whole 'white' people are or are not albinos...Truthfully I don't care...and wondering why so many NON-'white' people do.....when WE got OUR OWN issues and problems and paths to sort out...shouldn't that be some ish THEY need and/or should be worrying about and arguing over rather than WE....why are/should we go round and round page after page thread after thread getting nowhere but heated egos (for the many here who are CLEARLY driven by their egos) over THEIR problem(s)...so nuh bodda try to draw me into the argument...is just a question I am genuinely curious about....
htp
So. if you are not concerned with the true nature of whites, and you feel this information offers no real value, WHAT EXACTLY ARE YOU PROPOSING TO RESEARCH THAT IN YOUR OPINION, DOES OFFER REAL VALUE, IF ZEUS WAS BLACK OR NOT?
See you now....ah next one who puts words onto my fingers where they don't belong....wherever did I say the information doesn't have value.... KMRT...because you seem to be KNOWledgable on the topic, I asked you a question because I wanted to learn about something that puzzled me "Are not freckles made of melanin?"...yet here you come now with fuckery rather than to educate me....KMRT....again...nuh bodda try to draw me into unnu argument....nah guh happen star...
btw....their 'nature'- do we need to do GENETIC research for that....their nature is revealed just by reviewing the history of their actions.... We KNOW their nature as history bears it out...do we really CARE so much about THEIR ORIGINS to the point that we put US AND OUR OWN issues and problems to the side to discuss THEM AND THEIRS CONSTANTLY ROUND AND ROUND....AGAIN, I was jus saying that WE got OUR OWN issues and problems and paths to sort out...shouldn't that be some ish THEY need and/or should be worrying about and arguing over rather than WE....why are/should we go round and round page after page thread after thread getting nowhere but heated egos (for the many here who are CLEARLY driven by their egos) over THEIR problem(s)
Is all I am saying...as a Black Woman who loves Black People....so all that animosity yuh coming with is uncalled for and unnecessary....save it please for someone to whom it should actually be directed towards....and if not...you can always guh ina corner and fold up...
htp
Posts: 3446 | From: U.S. by way of JA by way of Africa | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Brada-Anansi: InsertNameHere only a handful of people in old Africa remained unaffected by Civilized states
what many don't realized is that many of the independent villages or cities formally belonged to Empires proper that situation came about after the destruction of the of the major civilizations there. This map is not even complete for it leaves out the Empire of the Moors in Africa,Dahomey much of the Swahili states,Mupungabwe,the Somali Sultanate and a hellava lot more. To give you and idea of how huge Africa is and how huge those old empires were,very few people escaped their influence.
Brada...yuh fren dem well brite like blousenskirt stadium lights enuh star....
htp
Posts: 3446 | From: U.S. by way of JA by way of Africa | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ No one is putting words in your mouth OR in your fingers. Common sense dictates if someone states something simple in a thread that they don't care about the subject matter, than obviously they find little value in it. You stated this several times, probably in frustration since you lack any credible sources that refute the presented data and offered only, opinion.
Even at this stage with the data presented clearly showing (Proving) that black and white people are NOT alike, you find it necessary to act as if people are just people and there are no real distinct differences. Fact is, blacks and whites are physically different, as well as psychologically and even electrically and magnetically distinct. The data presented reveals this in it's totality!
My question is rather simplistic regarding your statement that blacks have much better useage of their time rather than uncovering white Albinistic origins. In your opinion, What are examples of these greater topics you are referring to?
Posts: 2403 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MelaninKing: ^ No one is putting words in your mouth OR in your fingers. Common sense dictates if someone states something simple in a thread that they don't care about the subject matter, than obviously they find little value in it. You stated this several times, probably in frustration since you lack any credible sources that refute the presented data and offered only, opinion.
My question is rather simplistic regarding your statement that blacks have much better useage of their time rather than uncovering white Albinistic origins. In your opinion, What are examples of these greater topics you are referring to?
quote:any credible sources that refute the presented data and offered only, opinion.
Respectfully.....You REALLY need to go back and read MY posts again...you like the other one...clearly got me and the other person's posts CONfused ...maybe you will be man enough, UNlike the other one, to admit so once you've gone back and reviewed the thread..what, if any, info did you see me refute and/or attempt to refute- other than the other poster's posts re; the albinism/visual defect issue??? Please iyah, settle yourSelf...
btw....I still waiting for the answer to my question because I want to KNOW...you seemed KNOWledgable enough to answer it is why I asked it in the first place...or do I have to google that **** mySelf because YOU don't know hence you're focusing on dam near everything else I've said BUT that....KMRT...
IF THERE IS ANYONE ELSE IN THIS THREAD THAT IS KNOWLEDGABLE ON THE MATTER, CAN SOMEONE PLEASE ANSWER MY QUESTION ABOVE IN THIS THREAD RE; FRECKLES...I'LL COPY AND PASTE IT HERE SO NO ONE HAS TO GO LOOK FOR IT AGAIN...
MK: Yes, she/he is displaying obvious signs of Photophobia, AND Freckles, AND blond hair, AND blue eyes, AND white skin. All very VALID SYMPTOMS of ALBINISM. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TR: Forgive my CONfusion here...please...but I have a valid question? Are not freckles made of melanin? I'm not asking about the brown spots that some older people get, that are caused by sun damage...
I AM TRYING TO LEARN SOMETHING HERE...TIA...
HTP
Posts: 3446 | From: U.S. by way of JA by way of Africa | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
anyway, she has bright red hair..pale skin..deep brown eyes...black eyelashes...dark brown maybe black eyebrows- and no, she doesn't use mascara on her lashes and/or eyeliner on her brows, lol...hair on her legs and arms is so light red or whatever can't really seet.....oh, and he confirmed she IS a Natural redhead (TMI dammit!)... ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
OKKAAAAAYYYY.....THIS PART HERE:![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
....FOR EXAMPLE...LOL...THAT 'WHITE' GAL I MENTIONED ABOVE THAT MY COUSIN DEALS WITH...THEY HAVE THREE SONS...NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THOSE YOUTHS COULD PASS FOR 'WHITE' IF THEY TRIED...
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
We KNOW their nature as history bears it out...do we really CARE so much about THEIR ORIGINS to the point that we put US AND OUR OWN issues and problems to the side to discuss THEM AND THEIRS CONSTANTLY ROUND AND ROUND....AGAIN, I was jus saying that WE got OUR OWN issues and problems and paths to sort out...shouldn't that be some ish THEY need and/or should be worrying about and arguing over rather than WE....why are/should we go round and round page after page thread after thread getting nowhere but heated egos (for the many here who are CLEARLY driven by their egos) over THEIR problem(s) 
Printer-friendly view of this topic