posted
I've begun to notice that there's a bit of an unanswered question: whether or not black is reflective of tropical and/or subtropical adaptation or if blackness is reflective of African heritage and genetics?
Is this Andaman Islander black or not black?
Is this Solomon islander black or not black? Would telling people they are thousands of years removed from Africans change attitudes people would have walking along the street that they're black?
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Black is not was not will not be restricted to Africa.
posted
Native ethnic groups/populations from the tropics are dark brown ('black') in pigmentation. If you look at reflectance spectroscopy (685 nm) they all have skin reflectance values of under 50%, while ethnic groups/populations above the tropics reflect more than 50%.
Posts: 949 | From: England | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Cass/: Native ethnic groups/populations from the tropics are dark brown ('black') in pigmentation. If you look at reflectance spectroscopy (685 nm) they all have skin reflectance values of under 50%, while ethnic groups/populations above the tropics reflect more than 50%.
That's all nice and dandy. But what about the intermingling of ethnic groups and migrations of ethnic groups? Hmmmm? lol smh
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
everyone uses that term in their own personal way, you won't get to the bottom of it, check the first abusir mummy thread for more info
Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
Incidentally, I just bought through iTunes a song ("Melanesian Beauty") by an artist named "Briixie" (you can check out his work here). I think the guy is Papuan or some other Melanesian ethnicity, but you can tell there's a very strong reggae influence when listening to the song. I dunno how the majority of Melanesian or Negrito people identify, but it made me wonder if the modern idea of "blackness" has created a cultural association between them and African/Afro-Diasporan people despite the very real genetic (not to mention geographic) populations. It would be as if "blackness" can be a social or cultural grouping that transcends the underlying population substructures.
posted
"black' is a term devised by Europeans to separate Africans from what most of them are, brown. Brown is a much larger category if you include most Africans in it.
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Modern?
Over a thousand years ago the Zanj knew the 'Indonesian' region as black not 'black'.
Al~Jahiz put it on record.
At university I knew a New Guinea man. He told us he is black but wouldn't join our ASA because not African.
An interesting read is Doc Ben's They all look alike! all of them? 2 vols.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Over a thousand years ago the Zanj knew the 'Indonesian' region as black not 'black'.
Al~Jahiz put it on record.
what is your reference that the Arab writer Al-Jahiz said something about the Indonesian region ?
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Over a thousand years ago the Zanj knew the 'Indonesian' region as black not 'black'.
Al~Jahiz put it on record.
At university I knew a New Guinea man. He told us he is black but wouldn't join our ASA because not African.
An interesting read is Doc Ben's They all look alike! all of them? 2 vols.
Logically, they were part of the Islamic spread as they migrated along.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: "black' is a term devised by Europeans to separate Africans from what most of them are, brown. Brown is a much larger category if you include most Africans in it.
I can't believe the Lioness wrote this.
Tell, who hacked Lioness computer?
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
True.
Zanj set themselves up as merchantmen in the Abbasid homeland. Basra was a boomtown in the 8th century when trade with Indonesia was established.
al~Jahiz wrote down Zanj opinions on colour matters in the 9th century. It may well be the first Afrocentric view on global blacks not related biologically but socially. It indicated growing racial animosity.
That same century? Well, we know what happened.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
Oshun
When you write 'tropically adapted' does tropical mean climate or does tropical mean zodiacal latitude?
posted
I say neither because you can find black people outside of Africa and you can find non-black people in the tropics
Posts: 861 | From: usa | Registered: Apr 2015
| IP: Logged |
Over a thousand years ago the Zanj knew the 'Indonesian' region as black not 'black'.
Al~Jahiz put it on record. [/qb]
I know it's not May 28th yet but where's the record of the Arab writer Al-Jahiz saying that the Zanj knew Indonesians to be black?
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: If I suggested for one week May 28 through June 3rd
• no slander • full citations of sources • repeating in your own words what you dispute to make sure you understand a poster's view • leaving genetics alone when it's clear you're not up to speed
posted
I just read Razib Khan's blog about the genome sequencing of five middle bronze age Canananites/ Sidonians. They lacked the gene for lightskin, which would mean they were darker-skinned individuals:
'Selection has continued, so that alleles for lactose tolerance and lighter skin have changed in frequency even since that period. The derived allele for SLC45A2 is found at about 2/3 frequency in modern Lebanon, but was absent in these five Sidonians. Though the sample size is small, this was somewhat surprising, and suggests that they were a swarthier people than modern Lebanese.''
When you write 'tropically adapted' does tropical mean climate or does tropical mean zodiacal latitude?
Honestly I'm not sure. Much of the features black have are said to have formed as part of "tropical adaptions." I'm not entirely sure what is meant by that with respect to your question.
quote:Originally posted by the questioner: I say neither because you can find black people outside of Africa and you can find non-black people in the tropics
I said tropically adapted. I didn't say they had to live in the tropics.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
Zanj set themselves up as merchantmen in the Abbasid homeland. Basra was a boomtown in the 8th century when trade with Indonesia was established.
al~Jahiz wrote down Zanj opinions on colour matters in the 9th century. It may well be the first Afrocentric view on global blacks not related biologically but socially. It indicated growing racial animosity.
That same century? Well, we know what happened.
Had this continued, the world would have looked much different now. Why do you think it indicated growing racial animosity, instead of harmony?
It also may explain all the genetic intermingling we see. It was a time of turbulence in terms of migration and trans-migration. I find it funny how "western scientists" never mention this period in their genetic studies. I think it is incompetence. But it also could be done willingly.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: . Why do you think it indicated growing racial animosity, instead of harmony? .
The very title of that book The superiority of Blacks over Whites and instance after instance of prejudice, bias, and discrimination in its pages.
al~Jahiz also wrote, or said he would write a book voicing whites' views and there're extant rabid anti-black qoutes from him made by whites of the red Arabs.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: so then all light/white skin people could be called "White" according to your asinine logic. This Japanese is White then.
Afrocentrists are dumb
The distance between these African populations and intermediacy is closer then a Yellowish Japanese to a European.
quote:To resolve the controversy, researchers Nakagome et al. (2015) identified the differences between the Ainu people (direct descendants of indigenous Jomon) with Chinese from Beijing (same ancestry as Yayoi).
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: so then all light/white skin people could be called "White" according to your asinine logic. This Japanese is White then.
Afrocentrists are dumb
This is a ridiculous comparisson. Just because people with darker tones and curlier hair are often relegated to being black does not mean Europeans allowed anyone with white skin to be called white. The first event does not rely on the second.
Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the questioner: I say neither because you can find black people outside of Africa and you can find non-black people in the tropics
I said tropically adapted. I didn't say they had to live in the tropics.
Im not following you...... what do you mean by "adapted"?
Posts: 861 | From: usa | Registered: Apr 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: so then all light/white skin people could be called "White" according to your asinine logic. This Japanese is White then.
"E-M78 represents 74.5% of haplogroup E, the highest frequencies observed in Masalit and Fur populations…."
—Hisham Y. et al (2008)
Eurocentrists are dumb!!!!
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Oshun:
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: so then all light/white skin people could be called "White" according to your asinine logic. This Japanese is White then.
Afrocentrists are dumb
This is a ridiculous comparisson. Just because people with darker tones and curlier hair are often relegated to being black does not mean Europeans allowed anyone with white skin to be called white. The first event does not rely on the second.
It's not what momma don't allow its what it is.
Classic Japanese romantic literature is full of white girls like the one pictured. Then in Indonesia you have the White Chinese. Europeans have no monopoly on white complexions.
quote:why are Asians yellow? When I look at my skin, it doesn’t look yellow to me. If anything, it looks olive and if I’ve been in the sun at all, it’s brown. So if I’m not yellow-skinned, where does that idea come from? ...
Apparently, we can blame a German professor from the 19th century. Johann Friedrich Blumenbach (1752–1840).
In the years since good old Professor Blumenbach, the idea of Asians as yellow has been ingrained in our heads.
Surreal Squawking people are out to bait despite any plain evidence that exists. They had nothing to say against Lucy Liu repping #2 white skin here
Yes, that Japanese girl is white. Got nothing to do with European though we know both share Laz' ANE.
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: so then all light/white skin people could be called "White" according to your asinine logic. This Japanese is White then.
Afrocentrists are dumb
The Japanese are closer to being white today than the Irish and Italians were 100 years ago.
Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: [qb] so then all light/white skin people could be called "White" according to your asinine logic. This Japanese is White then.
Afrocentrists are dumb
The distance between these African populations and intermediacy is closer then a Yellowish Japanese to a European.
Not genetically, nor is this girl yellowish
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: Brenna Henn, in this 2014 interview on population genetics and population structure, considering African populations.
“African populations have the most genetic diversity in the world,” Henn said.“ If you compared people from the Kalahari Desert to people from Mali, they’d be as different from each other [genetically] as Italians and Chinese people.”
Then it is:
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: The distance between these African populations and intermediacy is closer then a Yellowish Japanese to a European.
So which is it?
Posts: 8785 | From: Discovery Channel's Mythbusters | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: I've begun to notice that there's a bit of an unanswered question: whether or not black is reflective of tropical and/or subtropical adaptation or if blackness is reflective of African heritage and genetics?
According to Tukular, Doug and Clyde "black" is a certain range of brown skin tones and nothing else.
So only if a tropically proportioned person, African or other type of person falls into this unmeasured but talked about range of browns are they black. If such person does not fall into this range of browns they are not black.
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
You know you are a liar.
I speak for myself.
My unique views seen through Afrikan eyes stem from MY researches and life experience.
I belong to no cabal.
There is no ES poster I have not openly disagreed with.
Just recently I bumped my definition of black in prescience of small minded muckrakers lies which are now de rigueur thanks to the Ghostly Trio.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
My point is until last century or so nearly all the peoples mentioned were recognized as blacks whereas today only people descended from or at the source of western hemi sphere transported enslaved Africans are called blacks.
I maintain indigenous Africans, some Arabs, large numbers of Indians, m[any] Indo-Chinese and of course Papuans and Melanesians are black people regardless of only remote genetic affiliation.
I do not recognize sociological blacks (people of only minute antecents of the above listed) as [anthropological] blacks. I don't go for nonsense as blacks passing for white. They are not [anthropological] blacks immediately identifiable as of one of the black peoples.
I do recognize such sociological blacks right to self-identify as black though physically they are not black.
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler:
Yes people black is color!
Well black is a color not a facial cast or body shape. I limit it to Old World peoples and include any hybrids of majority descent from a black people.
Black is by no means the same as negro in English which is restrictive.
Two centuries ago Euros introduced the concept "black but not negro" which today is modified to "black means negro" where negro is an extreme phenotype supposedly West African.
Because black is a skin colour type most African, some Arabs, many Indians, etc cannot escape the black label and outside of Euro countries such people are still black. Eg. decades ago during the Jesse Jackson mediated Iran hostage crisis the Iranians said they would release the blacks. They then freed an Indian and a Black American, the Black American decided to remain a hostage with American loyalty that superceded colour.
the difference in actual dark skin and sunburnt light skin in [theLioness'] agenda is obvious.
Not to mention [she] focuses on an individual rather than the group descent of the individual.
I invite all well meaning comments and critique, opposing views, as well as requests for clarification, expanding, or precising my actual written words but not what somebody said I said.
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: [qb] so then all light/white skin people could be called "White" according to your asinine logic. This Japanese is White then.
Afrocentrists are dumb
The distance between these African populations and intermediacy is closer then a Yellowish Japanese to a European.
Not genetically, nor is this girl yellowish
People like her are being described as yellowish. I didn't come up with this. Beside that fact, there are dark skinned Japanese as well. So Real Quack losses on both sides. And if Real Quack really was that bright, he would have posted on her ethnic background too.
And I see Tukuler posted on that already.
Lastly, there are indeed whites who claim her as being "white" and connecting this to the "race intelligence" theory. I remember this incident from years ago.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Oshun: I've begun to notice that there's a bit of an unanswered question: whether or not black is reflective of tropical and/or subtropical adaptation or if blackness is reflective of African heritage and genetics?
According to Tukular, Doug and Clyde "black" is a certain range of brown skin tones and nothing else.
So only if a tropically proportioned person, African or other type of person falls into this unmeasured but talked about range of browns are they black. If such person does not fall into this range of browns they are not black.
The funny part is that this picture collage debunks your notion on many levels. First and foremost is your "World Skin Tone Equator Chart" theory.
posted
In your own words exactly what are you saying the above picture debunks? I don't know what you are talking about
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: In your own words exactly what are you saying the above picture debunks? I don't know what you are talking about
Your "World Skin Tone Equator Chart" theory. Is that not clear enough for you?
Now in your own words, in what range is your color complexion?
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
al~Jahiz also wrote, or said he would write a book voicing whites' views and there're extant rabid anti-black qoutes from him made by whites of the red Arabs.
Yeah, I see now. I overlooked that part.
This needs closer inspection on Arabic terminology.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: Brenna Henn, in this 2014 interview on population genetics and population structure, considering African populations.
“African populations have the most genetic diversity in the world,” Henn said.“ If you compared people from the Kalahari Desert to people from Mali, they’d be as different from each other [genetically] as Italians and Chinese people.”
Then it is:
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: The distance between these African populations and intermediacy is closer then a Yellowish Japanese to a European.
So which is it?
It's both of course. Everything is relative. They share the "deepest" clades and separate in "younger" clades.
The following sums up everything you've been saying for the last couple of years:
quote: African and Middle Eastern populations shared the greatest number of alleles absent from all other populations (fig. S6B).
Within Africa, the most private alleles were in southern Africa, reflecting those in southern African Khoesan (SAK) San and !Xun/Khwe populations (fig. S6C) (12).
Eastern and Saharan Africans shared the most alleles absent from other African populations examined (fig. S6D).
—Sarah A. Tishkoff et al. The Genetic Structure and History of Africans and African Americans
quote: In contrast, the ancestors of the non-Khoisan groups, including Bantu-speakers and non-Africans, experienced population declines after the split and lost more than half of their genetic diversity.
—Hie Lim Kim et al. Khoisan hunter-gatherers have been the largest population throughout most of modern-human demographic history
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: Your "World Skin Tone Equator Chart" theory. Is that not clear enough for you?
No a "World Skin Tone Equator Chart" is not enough.
Suppose we were looking at that chart, what is the theory
and why do you believe the theory is wrong?
According to your "World Skin Tone Equator Chart" theory the color complexions are separated into columns by regions, based on the equator. According to your theory the people you posted in that picture collage can't have the same color complexion or some that comes close.
This thread was funny too, a bit weird, but never the less:
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor: Your "World Skin Tone Equator Chart" theory. Is that not clear enough for you?
No a "World Skin Tone Equator Chart" is not enough.
Suppose we were looking at that chart, what is the theory
and why do you believe the theory is wrong?
According to your "World Skin Tone Equator Chart" theory the color complexions are separated into columns by regions, based on the equator. According to your theory the people you posted in that picture collage can't have the same color complexion or some that comes close.
Now in your own words, in what range is your color complexion?
far left. that's me
I don't know why you always bring up that chart. It just shows mainstream scientific analysis that skin color gets darker nearer to the equator due to higher UV and lighter further away form the equator due to lower UV That is not my theory it is mainstream science. The chart is predictive, it assumes people have been living in those various regions long enough to adapt through selection to the extent that it matches the chart. In reality people have been in the various regions for varying periods of time therefore their skin darkness or lightness does generally correspond to proximity to the equator but not strictly and there are some other lesser factors, diet and so on.
^^ This other predictive chart shows Africa, where people have been much longer than elsewhere (except Cass' ancestors) and we see the pattern, nearer to the equator people are darker. People in the upper part of South America, will probably get darker in a few thousand more years although he see the same patten, on the Southern end, further from the equator much lighter
haven't you learned this yet?
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: I don't know why you always bring up that chart.
I am not the one who brought it up, it was you. You did so multiple times.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: It just shows mainstream scientific analysis that skin color gets darker nearer to the equator due to higher UV and lighter further away form the equator due to lower UV That is not my theory it is mainstream science.
So your picture collage comparisons chart is in conflict. Hmmmm
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: That is not my theory it is mainstream science.
Still in conflict.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: The chart is predictive, it assumes people have been living in those various regions long enough to adapt through selection to the extent that it matches the chart.
Indeed, it assumes.
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: In reality people have been in the various regions for varying periods of time therefore their skin darkness or lightness does generally correspond to proximity to the equator but not strictly and there are some other lesser factors, diet and so on.
Yep, there you go.
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
^^ This other predictive chart shows Africa, where people have been much longer than elsewhere (except Cass' ancestors) and we see the pattern, nearer to the equator people are darker. People in the upper part of South America, will probably get darker in a few thousand more years although he see the same patten, on the Southern end, further from the equator much lighter
^^This map also shows indigenous people of Tasmania in the 2nd to last lightest shade,who other than the majority of the presumed oldest indigenous populations of the equator and a few others were (last of fully indigenous no longer in existence)some of the richest melinated people.
A people who have inhabited this climatic causal skin lightening zone from what recent evidence says ,from at least ~40,000 ybp and have had no gene flow from outside populations for at least 8,000 ybp
Tasmania is equidistant to the the equator as to northwest Europe.
So is it easier for skin colour to lighten or to darken due to climatic confines and then what does allele frequency and/or cultural selection play into this reality?
Posts: 1 | From: London | Registered: Sep 2015
| IP: Logged |
^^This map also shows indigenous people of Tasmania in the 2nd to last lightest shade,who other than the majority of the presumed oldest indigenous populations of the equator and a few others were (last of fully indigenous no longer in existence)some of the richest melinated people.
A people who have inhabited this climatic causal skin lightening zone from what recent evidence says ,from at least ~40,000 ybp and have had no gene flow from outside populations for at least 8,000 ybp
Tasmania is equidistant to the the equator as to northwest Europe.
So is it easier for skin colour to lighten or to darken due to climatic confines and then what does allele frequency and/or cultural selection play into this reality?
Thanks for the contribution, this was a nice debut (opening post).
Posts: 22234 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
In several centuries more people will get lighter. Because of social factors (white skin is preferred over dark skin, thus sexual selection will reflect this) and artificial pressures (humans no longer live out in the open where they are exposed to UV), the future holds in store an entire human population with white skin.
quote:Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,:
^^ This other predictive chart shows Africa, where people have been much longer than elsewhere (except Cass' ancestors) and we see the pattern, nearer to the equator people are darker. People in the upper part of South America, will probably get darker in a few thousand more years although he see the same patten, on the Southern end, further from the equator much lighter
quote:Originally posted by Real tawk: In several centuries more people will get lighter. Because of social factors (white skin is preferred over dark skin, thus sexual selection will reflect this) and artificial pressures (humans no longer live out in the open where they are exposed to UV), the future holds in store an entire human population with white skin.
What you post is irrelevant and complete BOGUS based on social spectrum.
By the way as the climate rises (global warming), there will be more need for to become darker.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic