posted
Interesting turn of events. Seems some of the folks involved in the reconstruction are doubting if it is possible to determine skin color from ancient DNA. Obviously this has implications across the board when trying to understand when and how major phenotype changes, such as skin color took place.
quote: There's no way to know that the first Briton had ‘dark to black skin’ says scientist who helped reconstruct his 10,000-year-old face
The bones are the oldest near-complete human skeleton ever found in Britain Experts tested DNA taken from bone powder by drilling a hole through the skull It showed there was a 76 per cent chance that Cheddar Man was ‘dark to black’ Scientist behind the test used says it is impossible to be certain of this fact
Cheddar man may not have been 'dark to black skinned' after all.
Last month, researchers claimed that they had been able to accurately reconstruct the face of the 'first Brit' based on his DNA - and sensationally revealed he had black skin and blue eyes.
But now, one of the main scientists who helped create the reconstruction of his 10,000-year-old face says he may not have been black at all.
Geneticist Susan Walsh at Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis, says we simply don't know his skin colour.
While her computer model shows being black is his 'probable profile', DNA testing is not advanced enough to say for certain.
.... A team of experts, including Professor Walsh, recently created a computer model that tries to predict a person's skin pigmentation, hair and eye colour, purely from their genes.
The test focused on 36 points of comparison in 16 genes, which are all linked to skin colour.
Dr Walsh and her colleagues analysed genetic data taken from more than 1,400 people.
They were mainly from Europe and the US, but also included people from Africa and Papua New Guinea.
....
The rest of the data was used to test how well the model could predict skin colour from DNA alone.
The model came up with 'black' or 'dark black' skin for Cheddar Man based on his DNA.
Some, particularly on the far-right, have questioned whether there was a political agenda behind the claims.
Dr Walsh believes that the tests can't prove Cheddar Man's skin colour and that his DNA may have degraded over the past 10,000 years.
Speaking to New Scientist, she said: 'It’s not a simple statement of "this person was dark-skinned".
'It is his most probable profile, based on current research.'
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: The people who created Cheddar Man called him black. They are scientists. They are Europeans. English is a European language. Black is defined in the English dictionary. That is the only "standard" that applies. Nobody anywhere was complaining about how they used the term because they didn't understand what they meant. They didn't say "Cheddar Man black" because no such term exists in English. That is something you made up.
Likewise when National Geographic said "Black Pharaohs" they didn't say "Nubian Black" they just said black. Nobody was confused about what they meant......
Just saying. English is a major language and most English speakers understand what black means just fine. THey use it every day in popular culture, media, the news, history books and everywhere else...
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: That's the thing. Whenever European scientists or scientists in general use racial labels or terms I always have retain some skeptecism. That Cheddar Man was dark skin is not in doubt but the question was exactly how dark was he?? Was he dark enough to be truly labeled as "black". Recall the genetic findings of the 7,000 year old La Brana hunter-gatherer showing them to have dark skin and blue eyes, yet nobody except Afronuts were quick to call them "black".
Selina Brace, Yoan Diekmann, Thomas J. Booth, Zuzana Faltyskova, Nadin Rohland, Swapan Mallick, Matthew Ferry, Megan Michel, Jonas Oppenheimer, Nasreen Broomandkhoshbacht, Kristin Stewardson, Susan Walsh, Manfred Kayser, Rick Schulting, Oliver E Craig, Alison Sheridan, Mike Parker Pearson, Chris Stringer, David Reich, Mark G Thomas, Ian Barnes doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/267443
Supplementary Materials
Pigmentation Susan Walsh, Manfred Kayser
See Supplementary Table S2 for sequencing data and allelic states that entered the analyses below. Predictions are based on methods and tools published in Walsh et al., Forensic Sci Int Genet, 2013, and Walsh et al., Hum Genet, 2017.
La Braña (Spain, Mesolithic) Eye colour —All loci are present and have good coverage. Blue eye 0.459 Int. eye 0.155 Brown eye 0.387 Final prediction: Intermediate (hazel/green) eye colour Explanation: All probabilities are less than 0.5 so it is a combination of all categories, as brown is relatively high, it is more than likely a light hazel eye colour individual, but perceived green (blue/yellow) cannot be ruled out. Hair colour—There is 1 locus (TYRP1 rs683) with low coverage (1x), hence a heterozygote is possible. Prediction is a range that includes what the 1x coverage found (derived G allele) and the possibility of an A ancestral allele being present. TYRP1 rs683 TYRP1 rs683 (homozygote GG) (heterozygote GA) Blond 0.018 0.014 Brown 0.612 0.595 Red 0 0 Black 0.37 0.391 Light 0.033 0.025 Dark 0.967 0.975 Prediction range: Brown 0.612 – 0.595 Black 0.37 – 0.391 Final Prediction: Black/Dark Brown hair colour Explanation: The probability value of black is >0.25 so it has a significant impact on prediction, and will darken the high brown probability. This individual would be perceived to have black hair. Dark Brown however cannot be ruled out. Skin pigmentation—Only 1 locus (BNC2 rs10756819) is missing, however the profile does contain 3 loci with low coverage (n=1x), hence a heterozygote is possible. When factoring in possible genotype combinations, a prediction range has been generated. The range consists of assuming the 3 loci with low coverage are correct as homozyogote for their sequenced allele (ASIP rs1667394 A allele (derived), OCA2 rs1545397 A allele (ancestral), TYRP1 rs683 A allele (ancestral)) and omitting BNC rs10756819 in the prediction model as it has no coverage, to including this marker with a homozygote ancestral G allele and also derived A allele. The following range for skin colour prediction is possible for this individual with these parameters: Omitting rs10756819 G ancestral allele A derived allele Very Pale 0 0 0 Pale 0 0 0 Intermediate 0.174 0.042 0.205 Dark 0.463 0.209 0.435 Dark-Black 0.363 0.749 0.360 Prediction range: Very Pale 0 Pale 0 Intermediate 0.042 - 0.205 Dark 0.209 - 0.435 Dark-Black 0.749 - 0.36 Final prediction: Dark/Dark-to-Black skin Explanation: The combined effect of probabilities in the dark and dark-to-black colour categories provide an indication that the individual has darkly pigmented skin, it is unlikely that this individual has the darkest possible skin pigmentation, however, it cannot be ruled out as the missing marker does influence that detail, but certainly skin colour is dark in complexion.
Cheddar Man (UK, Mesolithic) Eye colour —There is 1 locus (LOC105374875 (formally known as SLC24A4) rs12896399) with low coverage (1x) hence a heterozygote is possible. Prediction includes a range that includes what the 1x coverage found (ancestral G allele) and the possibility of an A derived allele being present. LOC105374875 rs12896399 LOC105374875 rs12896399 (homozygote GG) (heterozygote GA) Blue eye 0.564 0.711 Int. eye 0.189 0.143 Brown eye 0.247 0.145 Prediction range: Blue eye 0.564 - 0.711 Int. eye 0.189 - 0.143 Brown eye 0.247 - 0.145 Final prediction: Intermediate (blue/green) eye colour Explanation: This individual has light or blue/green eye colour, it is not light blue, there are elements of brown/yellow in the eye to give a proposed perceived green colour. Better coverage at the low sequenced marker would clarify this but blue/hazel cannot be ruled out. It is certainly not a brown eyed or clear blue-eyed individual. Hair colour—There is 1 locus PIGU rs2378249 with low coverage (1x) hence a heterozygote is possible. Prediction is a range that includes what the 1x coverage found, ancestral A allele, but also includes the possibility of a heterozygote being present. PIGU rs2378249 PIGU rs2378249 (homozygote AA ) (heterozygote CA) Blond 0.014 0.013 Brown 0.719 0.759 Red 0.011 0.023 Black 0.257 0.205 Light 1 0.999 Dark 0 0.001 Prediction range: Brown 0.719 – 0.759 Black 0.257 – 0.205 Final Prediction: Dark Brown/Black hair colour Explanation: The probability value of black is >0.2 so it has an impact on prediction, and will darken the high brown probability. However there are light pigment alleles indicating a lighter shade phenotype. Better coverage at the low sequenced marker would help clarify this. This individual would be perceived as having dark brown hair. Black however cannot be ruled out. Skin pigmentation—There are 3 loci (BNC2 rs10756819, TYR rs1126809, MC1R rs3212355) missing, and the profile does contain 2 loci (LOC105374875 rs12896399 and PIGU rs2378249) with low coverage (n=1x) hence a heterozygote is possible at those sites. When factoring in possible genotype combinations, a prediction range may be generated. The range consists of assuming the two loci with low coverage are correct as homozygote for their sequenced allele (LOC105374875 rs12896399 G allele and PIGU rs2378249 A allele) and omitting the 3 missing loci from the prediction model as they have no coverage, to including these markers with their ancestral (BNC2 rs10756819-GG, TYR rs1126809-GG, MC1R rs3212355-CC) and also their derived allele counterparts. The following range for skin colour prediction is possible for this individual with these parameters: ancestral alleles used derived alleles used Very Pale 0 0 Pale 0 0 Intermediate 0.394 0.125 Dark 0 0 Dark-Black 0.606 0.875 Prediction range: Very Pale 0 Pale 0 Intermediate 0.394 - 0.125 Dark 0 - 0 Dark-Black 0.606 - 0.875 If we omit the three missing alleles, our tool produces 0.891 and 0.109 probabilities for the intermediate and dark-black category respectively, changing the prediction ranges to 0.891-0.125 and 0.109-0.875. However, note that this completely removes the locus from the prediction model, hence the prediction will not perform optimally (how the prediction model was made), therefore it is best to have some allele present to infer the most probable range for Cheddar Man and we therefore derive the ranges above from the extreme allele constellations only. Final prediction: Dark/Dark-to-black skin Explanation: The missing loci certainly impact on this prediction; however utilizing the input of all ancestral alleles is the preferred option over the use of the derived alleles at these loci – hence 0.394 for intermediate and 0.606 for Dark-black would be the most probable profile. That being said a broad range is present in both the intermediate and dark-black categories due to the missing loci. Also this effect, of skipping a skin colour prediction category with regards probability values, tends to be observed more often in admixed individuals. What is important to note is the input of the dark-black prediction is significant on the intermediate category and therefore it is acceptable to propose a dark complexion individual over an intermediate/light prediction even though the intermediate range is large. It is unlikely that this individual has the darkest possible pigmentation, however it cannot be ruled out. Better sequencing coverage would clarify to what degree this individual has a dark complexion. Sven (UK, Neolithic) Eye colour —All loci are present and have good coverage. Artefact bases are proposed for locus SLC45A2 rs16891982 (T allele). Blue eye 0.022 Int. eye 0.090 Brown eye 0.887 Final prediction: Brown eye colour Explanation: The highest probability is well above the threshold 0.7p for brown, so a strong brown prediction is proposed. Hair colour—All loci are present and most have good coverage. An artefact base is proposed for locus SLC45A2 rs16891982 (T allele). For loci SLC45A2 rs28777, OCA2 rs12441727, OCA2 rs1470608, they are assumed to be heterozygotes, although coverage is low (1x) for one of the alleles. Artefact bases are proposed for locus MC1R rs1110400 (A allele) and MC1R rs885479 (A allele) as there is >40x coverage for the more represented allele, therefore it is assumed that it is not a heterozygote at these loci. There is 1 locus (TYRP1 rs683) with low coverage (1x) hence a heterozygote is possible. Prediction is given as a range that includes what the 1x coverage found (derived G allele), and the possibility of an A ancestral allele being present at this locus for hair colour prediction. TYRP1 rs683 TYRP1 rs683 (homozygote GG) (heterozygote GA) Blond 0.029 0.024 Brown 0.583 0.566 Red 0 0 Black 0.387 0.409 Light 0.066 0.051 Dark 0.934 0.949 Prediction range: Brown 0.583 – 0.566 Black 0.387 – 0.409 Final Prediction: Black/Dark Brown hair colour Explanation: The probability value of black is >0.25 so it has a significant impact on prediction, and will darken the high brown probability. This individual would be perceived to have black hair. Dark Brown however cannot be ruled out. Skin pigmentation—All loci are present and most have good coverage. An artefact base is proposed for locus SLC45A2 rs16891982 (T allele). For loci SLC45A2 rs28777, OCA2 rs12441727, OCA2 rs1470608, they are assumed to be heterozygotes although coverage is low (1x) for one of the alleles. Additional sequencing of this marker would clarify this. Artefact bases are proposed for locus MC1R rs1110400 (A allele) and MC1R rs885479 (A allele) as there is >40x coverage for the more represented allele, therefore it is assumed that it is not a heterozygote at these loci. There is 1 locus (TYRP1 rs683) with low coverage (1x) hence a heterozygote is possible. Prediction is given as a range that includes what the 1x coverage found (derived G allele), and the possibility of an A ancestral allele being present at this locus for skin colour prediction. TYRP1 rs683 TYRP1 rs683 (homozygote GG) (heterozygote GA) Very Pale 0 0.008 Pale 0.142 0.117 Intermediate 0.673 0.565 Dark 0.055 0.116 Dark-Black 0.122 0.195 Prediction range: Very Pale 0 – 0.008 Pale 0.142 – 0.117 Intermediate 0.673 - 0.565 Dark 0.055 – 0.116 Dark-Black 0.122 - 0.195 Final prediction: Intermediate/Dark skin Explanation: The effect of probability in the dark-to-black colour category has an impact on the high intermediate prediction. It is highly unlikely this individual has the darkest possible skin pigmentation and taken collectively, these probabilities indicate that the individual would fall more into an intermediate skin colour category. However dark cannot be definitively ruled out. Loschbour (Luxembourg, Mesolithic) Eye colour —All loci are present and have good coverage. Blue eye 0.564 Int. eye 0.189 Brown eye 0.247 Final prediction: Intermediate (blue/green) eye colour Explanation: This individual has light or blue/green eye colour, it is not light blue, there are elements of brown/yellow in the eye to give a proposed perceived green colour, however blue/hazel cannot be ruled out. It is certainly not a brown eyed or clear blue-eyed individual. Hair colour—All loci are present and have good coverage. Artefact bases are proposed for locus TYR rs1126809 (A allele) and HERC2 rs1667394 (G allele) as there is >20x coverage for the more represented allele, therefore it is assumed that it is not a heterozygote at these loci. Blond 0.005 Brown 0.532 Red 0 Black 0.463 Light 0.022 Dark 0.978 Final Prediction: Black/Dark Brown hair colour Explanation: The probability value of black is >0.25 so it has a significant impact on prediction, and will darken the high brown probability. This individual would be perceived to have black hair. Dark Brown however cannot be ruled out. Skin pigmentation—All loci are present and have good coverage. There is a similar artefact assessment as above for rs1126809 and rs1667394. Very Pale 0 Pale 0 Intermediate 0.893 Dark 0.069 Dark-Black 0.038 Final prediction: Intermediate skin Explanation: The highest probability of approximately 0.9 for intermediate indicates a light skinned (white) individual. He would not have the darkest possible skin pigmentation but does have tanning ability, so could be perceived as darker than white (pale) in the summer months.
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: The people who created Cheddar Man called him black. They are scientists. They are Europeans. English is a European language. Black is defined in the English dictionary. That is the only "standard" that applies. Nobody anywhere was complaining about how they used the term because they didn't understand what they meant. They didn't say "Cheddar Man black" because no such term exists in English. That is something you made up.
Likewise when National Geographic said "Black Pharaohs" they didn't say "Nubian Black" they just said black. Nobody was confused about what they meant......
Just saying. English is a major language and most English speakers understand what black means just fine. THey use it every day in popular culture, media, the news, history books and everywhere else...
posted
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Cheddar Man's genome shows that he lacked the SLC45A2 gene repsonsible for European 'whiteness' which means he had relatively dark skin. But the question is exactly how dark?? North Asians indigenous to high latitude areas the same as Cheddar Man are also dark-skinned but they obviously are not dark enough to be 'black'.
Why these North Asian populations remained dark was explained before. This makes me curious about Cheddar Man's diet and what he ate to supplement his vitamin D.
That said, to say he was as dark as populations indigenous to the tropics like Indians or Africans would make little sense.
Swenet is right to caution Afrocentrics or Africanists scholars in embracing this idea of a "black" Cheddar Man or other pre-Neolithic Hunter-Gatherer European. To me, the notion of indigenous "black" Europeans is nothing more than a trojan horse to maintain the Eurocentric claim on North Africa and breath new life into the debunked 'Hamitic' Hypothesis.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Cheddar Man's genome shows that he lacked the SLC45A2 gene repsonsible for European 'whiteness' which means he had relatively dark skin. But the question is exactly how dark?? North Asians indigenous to high latitude areas the same as Cheddar Man are also dark-skinned but they obviously are not dark enough to be 'black'.
it is clearly delusional to post this^^ photo and say it's not dark enough to fit the typical social construct "black". His skin appears darker than most people regarded as "black" in America -that is unless you define "blacks" as only the ones who are really really dark like some of the Dinka and Nuer in Sudan.
Again, "black" totally contentious terminology with no standard of measurement. It's all opinion and the people who are so vocal about using the word in anthropology never propose a standard that could be measured by electronic devices. They want wheels on the goal post
Why these North Asian populations remained dark was explained before. This makes me curious about Cheddar Man's diet and what he ate to supplement his vitamin D.
There is a thread in Deshret now called " The Caucasian Question" and a 2010 article posted the conclusion of which puts the vitamin D hypothesis into question:
Vitamin D production after UVB exposure depends on baseline vitamin D and total cholesterol but not on skin pigmentation.
Bogh MK1, Schmedes AV, Philipsen PA, Thieden E, Wulf HC. Author information
Erratum in J Invest Dermatol. 2010 Jun;130(6):1751. __________________________________
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Cheddar Man's genome shows that he lacked the SLC45A2 gene repsonsible for European 'whiteness' which means he had relatively dark skin. But the question is exactly how dark?? North Asians indigenous to high latitude areas the same as Cheddar Man are also dark-skinned but they obviously are not dark enough to be 'black'.
it is clearly delusional to post this^^ photo and say it's not dark enough to fit the typical social construct "black". His skin appears darker than most people regarded as "black" in America -that is unless you define "blacks" as only the ones who are really really dark like some of the Dinka and Nuer in Sudan.
Again, "black" totally contentious terminology with no standard of measurement. It's all opinion and the people who are so vocal about using the word in anthropology never propose a standard that could be measured by electronic devices. They want wheels on the goal post
The only one delusional here is YOU if you think your lies are going to be believed by anyone.
Everyone here knows as you do that colorless i.e. black-and-white photos fail to give the total context of complexion which is why you chose to compare the Inuit make with an equally black-and-white photo of Ludacris a "light-skinned" black man.
But we are still waiting for you show an example of Inuit ever be classified as being "black" that is having complexions similar to dark Africans, Indians, and aborigines of Australasia.
I'm told you before that you are a failure of a Euronut subversive agent! The only one falling for you are not so bright folks like xyzman and Clyde.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Understanding skin color is part of biology. The process is not necessarily perfect and this article on cheddar man shows this to be the case.
It is important to focus on the science behind skin color as that is an important tool to use in other cases. But as even this article shows, that won't stop controversy or accusations of "politics" from still being thrown around.
The key is that the original article did not mention that they based the skin color of the reconstruction on DNA comparison with other populations. So the results are going to still vary and not be necessarily precise or accurate even in this case.
Ultimately if people are looking to understand skin color and how it has changed around the world, techniques like this may help but it isn't necessarily going to resolve some open questions or debates.
Of course even more importantly we will see if they use this technique on other reconstructions in other areas or not outside Europe.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Cheddar Man's genome shows that he lacked the SLC45A2 gene repsonsible for European 'whiteness' which means he had relatively dark skin. But the question is exactly how dark?? North Asians indigenous to high latitude areas the same as Cheddar Man are also dark-skinned but they obviously are not dark enough to be 'black'.
it is clearly delusional to post this^^ photo and say it's not dark enough to fit the typical social construct "black". His skin appears darker than most people regarded as "black" in America -that is unless you define "blacks" as only the ones who are really really dark like some of the Dinka and Nuer in Sudan.
Again, "black" totally contentious terminology with no standard of measurement. It's all opinion and the people who are so vocal about using the word in anthropology never propose a standard that could be measured by electronic devices. They want wheels on the goal post
Can we stick to the "science" of Cheddar Man's reconstruction? We have numerous threads already to discuss issues like "what is black" and so forth.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Cheddar Man's genome shows that he lacked the SLC45A2 gene repsonsible for European 'whiteness' which means he had relatively dark skin. But the question is exactly how dark?? North Asians indigenous to high latitude areas the same as Cheddar Man are also dark-skinned but they obviously are not dark enough to be 'black'.
Why these North Asian populations remained dark was explained before. This makes me curious about Cheddar Man's diet and what he ate to supplement his vitamin D.
That said, to say he was as dark as populations indigenous to the tropics like Indians or Africans would make little sense.
Swenet is right to caution Afrocentrics or Africanists scholars in embracing this idea of a "black" Cheddar Man or other pre-Neolithic Hunter-Gatherer European. To me, the notion of indigenous "black" Europeans is nothing more than a trojan horse to maintain the Eurocentric claim on North Africa and breath new life into the debunked 'Hamitic' Hypothesis.
Yes, understanding skin color is important but the issue is how do you determine skin color in ancient populations "scientifically" and is there a process that is generally accurate.
Issues surrounding skin color did not start with Afrocentrics. Afrocentrics did not make this reconstruction and don't do most reconstructions. And is not really worth tying up this thread.
Ultimately if people believe science is above petty politics then we need a proven method that everyone agrees is accurate.
And if there is no process everyone agrees on or is not above reproach and debate, then we know this issue about skin color in ancient populations in various places will continue to be an issue. Heck it will still be en issue regardless honestly.
Of course skin color varies all over the planet. And this is why the science is important. In fact it is National Geographic and other such publications who first brought light of the dark skin in Eskimo populations but very few of them would qualify as dark enough to be black, but a few did/do exist. But that is not the key point. The key point is historically we know that dark skin or black skin was dominant in humans up to about 20,000 years ago and so science wants to know when and where very light or white skin evolved. And Cheddar Man is part of that.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:We predicted pigmentation characteristics for Cheddar Man and Sven using Hirisplex and a recently-developed method for predicting skin pigmentation. Previously, predictions on the level of skin pigmentation were mostly derived using two SNPs in SLC45A2 and SLC24A5 that indicate lack of hypo-pigmentation when in the ancestral state. However, here we integrate 36 rather than 2 SNPs allowing more precise prediction. Cheddar Man is predicted to have had dark or dark to black skin, blue/green eyes and dark brown possibly black hair, whereas Sven most likely had intermediate to dark skin pigmentation, brown eyes and black possibly dark brown hair (see Pigmentation section in the Supplementary Materials for a detailed discussion of the results). This is in line with the current hypothesis that alleles commonly associated with lighter skin were introduced in Western Europe by ANFs.
Skin color is a famously polygenic trait (mean that it is controlled by multiple genes), so there is a possibility that the sample of genes tested may not represent the whole picture with regards to these individuals' skin color. But it wouldn't be fair to characterize this study as concluding Cheddar Man was "black" in color because he had the ancestral allele for a single gene. They tested more than one gene here. Also, note they did find a later Neolithic individual with "intermediate" pigmentation.
Why these North Asian populations remained dark was explained before. This makes me curious about Cheddar Man's diet and what he ate to supplement his vitamin D.
There is a thread in Deshret now called " The Caucasian Question" and a 2010 article posted the conclusion of which puts the vitamin D hypothesis into question:
Vitamin D production after UVB exposure depends on baseline vitamin D and total cholesterol but not on skin pigmentation.
Bogh MK1, Schmedes AV, Philipsen PA, Thieden E, Wulf HC. Author information
Erratum in J Invest Dermatol. 2010 Jun;130(6):1751. __________________________________
Why these North Asian populations remained dark was explained before. This makes me curious about Cheddar Man's diet and what he ate to supplement his vitamin D.
There is a thread in Deshret now called " The Caucasian Question" and a 2010 article posted the conclusion of which puts the vitamin D hypothesis into question:
Vitamin D production after UVB exposure depends on baseline vitamin D and total cholesterol but not on skin pigmentation.
Bogh MK1, Schmedes AV, Philipsen PA, Thieden E, Wulf HC. Author information
Erratum in J Invest Dermatol. 2010 Jun;130(6):1751. __________________________________
Why these North Asian populations remained dark was explained before. This makes me curious about Cheddar Man's diet and what he ate to supplement his vitamin D.
There is a thread in Deshret now called " The Caucasian Question" and a 2010 article posted the conclusion of which puts the vitamin D hypothesis into question:
Vitamin D production after UVB exposure depends on baseline vitamin D and total cholesterol but not on skin pigmentation.
Bogh MK1, Schmedes AV, Philipsen PA, Thieden E, Wulf HC. Author information
Erratum in J Invest Dermatol. 2010 Jun;130(6):1751. __________________________________
Most Pigment Dilution Did not Occur From a Greater Need for Vitamin D
Basics in Human Evolution edited by Michael P Muehlenbein Academic Press; 1 edition (July 24, 2015)
pp 278-279
I am glad you converted!
why?
Every time I criticized the vitamin D hypothesis, you were there to oppose me... Now with you on my side anything is possible Posts: 1781 | From: New York | Registered: Jul 2016
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Cheddar Man's genome shows that he lacked the SLC45A2 gene repsonsible for European 'whiteness' which means he had relatively dark skin. But the question is exactly how dark?? North Asians indigenous to high latitude areas the same as Cheddar Man are also dark-skinned but they obviously are not dark enough to be 'black'.
it is clearly delusional to post this^^ photo and say it's not dark enough to fit the typical social construct "black". His skin appears darker than most people regarded as "black" in America -that is unless you define "blacks" as only the ones who are really really dark like some of the Dinka and Nuer in Sudan.
Again, "black" totally contentious terminology with no standard of measurement. It's all opinion and the people who are so vocal about using the word in anthropology never propose a standard that could be measured by electronic devices. They want wheels on the goal post
Can we stick to the "science" of Cheddar Man's reconstruction? We have numerous threads already to discuss issues like "what is black" and so forth.
You can't be serious
You titled this thread "was Cheddar man white after all"
(as opposed to "black") unless you are suggesting a new 40 page thread entitled " When to use 'white' and when not to"
and you are probably relieved that a European can't be black (you hope)
Dougianism's concept on skin color is that there are two types of people in the world, topical and non-tropical. The pure tropical peoples are "black" and the non-tropical people (the bad type of people) are "white".
Dougianism likes the idea of black Asians but black Europeans hell no. Inuits or dark Asians in the North are an annoyance the mess up the paradigm and open the door for black Europeans to creep in.
Doug loves the idea of "Black Asians" on a political level as another group oppressed by the "white" European.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: I post a black "Malay" and you (Djehuti) claim that the label "Malay" is a racial label meaning all the people are some special subset of Asian humanity. But then you go on to claim they are mixed, but what population in Asia or on earth is NOT mixed? What does that have to do with it. You are going in circles making illogical arguments in order to reinforce an argument that the Malays are a separate "race" as in separate from the Aborigines of Malaysia. HOw on earth is that? How do you have an aboriginal population that is NOT the basis of the modern population in the same area? See that is the problem you are spouting some old European nonsense because it is the Europeans who word for word codified everything you are arguing about Malays and you can't show me any such thing prior to European writings in the 18th and 19th century. Remember the concept of Malay being a "brown race" came from Blumenbach himsself. And the whole point is to separate these people from the "blacks" when obviously the browns can only come from blacks as black people are brown in the first dam place. And what I mean is that those Malays who are dam brown are basically black folks and not some special separate category.
And as I posted earlier the Chinese or "NOrthern Asians" considered the original people of Malaysia or the "Malays" to be black people.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
But you must remember that when white folks weren't writing science in the 18th and 19th century. They were writing racist propaganda to omit and cover up the fact that as a species humans ultimately originate in a tropical environment which makes black skin among humans the the aboriginal state of ALL human populations no matter where they are on the planet. THAT is what the whites are trying SO hard to destroy and cover up because THEY want to be PRIME human which they cannot be because they only just got here not even 10,000 years ago. (Of course "they" were here as humans but they weren't white).
.
However one of Doug's inconstancies, as with the Inuit, is not realizing Korea is not in the tropics >>>
Sniff to the black Asian thread long gone but in homage to threads of days gone by peruse this finest collection of vintage internet photo anthropology......
The land of Soul.... Korea.
"the land of soul", lol
Clyde on the other hand loves the idea of blacks all over the Northern Hemisphere. ( but as long as they're not "mongoloid")
Djehuti on the other hand, an Asian himself and a Southern one at that is very sympathetic to African issues pertaining to who was first on the planet and who had had some of the earliest civilizations. But he doesn't like the idea of "black Asians" . He always moves the goal post to try to make it not happen. Light skinned blacks he doesn't question as being "black". But Asians? They have to be as dark as a piece of charcoal to qualify
quote:Originally posted by Elmaestro: Every time I criticized the vitamin D hypothesis, you were there to oppose me... Now with you on my side anything is possible
I'm not on a side I consider the issue not resolved
Above, the same source says people in cold climates may have lightened due to the body diverting energy to other metabolic issues or to favor vitamin D production
It's not resolved You have multi millions of East Asians and Europeans with light skin. A random useless mutation? Maybe
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tukuler
multidisciplinary Black Scholar
Member # 19944
posted
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
That said, tt is right to caution Afrocentrics or Africanists scholars in embracing this idea of a "black" Cheddar Man or other pre-Neolithic Hunter-Gatherer European.
You guys and your fucked up definitions.
An Africanist is not a black you want to deride as too stupid to read and analyze correctly or who entertains eccentric supposedly pro-black notions (or even simply ideas you disagree with is enough to shout mad dog).
An AFRICANIST is someone in African Studies.
Cheddar Man is not Africana. Africanists don't claim shit about Cheddar Man.
Dr Yosef ben Jochannan was always warning us of accepting white Africanists' words because of their underlying EuroEurocentricity.
When African Studies first started taking off due to the Liberation Struggle your Africanists were still teaching Speke, Stuhlman, Meinhoff, Seligman, Coon, and Baker in institutions of higher learning.
With blacks from Africa and the Caribbean now coming onto campus they would stand in front a class spouting black Old Ghana while their notes read 'white Berbers introduced civ to the negro'. And at breaks that's what they'd tell the military and intelligence agents prepping for missions in Africa.
I'm an Africanist. Been one since African Studies was my journalism minor in university. I ccouldn't care less what color ol' Cheddar was. That doesn't add a thing to the study of Africa, her peoples cultures and heritage.
Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tukuler: Keys is a half n half who self-IDs black. Sade's nonna called her Tar Baby. It's the choice of many one black parent biracials to go black like Irish-Luo ex-POTUS Barack O'bama (ok 2 mush green beer and Lambay with Paddy friends 2day; and here's to all me not really Black Irish but Brogue sounding Caribbes).
Chinese, Sanskrit, Hebrew, Greco-Latin and Arabic writers identified whole populations in Africa and Asia as black.
But now all a sudden ...
While many do, like 'Raven' Symone, everyone 's not running away from black. It's psychotic thinking scientists don't use the term when publications and media prove otherwise.
Why go on and on about it? Everybody's mind is already made up. Ain't nothing going to change. [/QB]
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Cheddar Man's genome shows that he lacked the SLC45A2 gene repsonsible for European 'whiteness' which means he had relatively dark skin. But the question is exactly how dark?? North Asians indigenous to high latitude areas the same as Cheddar Man are also dark-skinned but they obviously are not dark enough to be 'black'.
it is clearly delusional to post this^^ photo and say it's not dark enough to fit the typical social construct "black". His skin appears darker than most people regarded as "black" in America -that is unless you define "blacks" as only the ones who are really really dark like some of the Dinka and Nuer in Sudan.
Again, "black" totally contentious terminology with no standard of measurement. It's all opinion and the people who are so vocal about using the word in anthropology never propose a standard that could be measured by electronic devices. They want wheels on the goal post
Can we stick to the "science" of Cheddar Man's reconstruction? We have numerous threads already to discuss issues like "what is black" and so forth.
You can't be serious
You titled this thread "was Cheddar man white after all"
(as opposed to "black") unless you are suggesting a new 40 page thread entitled " When to use 'white' and when not to"
and you are probably relieved that a European can't be black (you hope)
Dougianism's concept on skin color is that there are two types of people in the world, topical and non-tropical. The pure tropical peoples are "black" and the non-tropical people (the bad type of people) are "white".
Dougianism likes the idea of black Asians but black Europeans hell no. Inuits or dark Asians in the North are an annoyance the mess up the paradigm and open the door for black Europeans to creep in.
Doug loves the idea of "Black Asians" on a political level as another group oppressed by the "white" European.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: I post a black "Malay" and you (Djehuti) claim that the label "Malay" is a racial label meaning all the people are some special subset of Asian humanity. But then you go on to claim they are mixed, but what population in Asia or on earth is NOT mixed? What does that have to do with it. You are going in circles making illogical arguments in order to reinforce an argument that the Malays are a separate "race" as in separate from the Aborigines of Malaysia. HOw on earth is that? How do you have an aboriginal population that is NOT the basis of the modern population in the same area? See that is the problem you are spouting some old European nonsense because it is the Europeans who word for word codified everything you are arguing about Malays and you can't show me any such thing prior to European writings in the 18th and 19th century. Remember the concept of Malay being a "brown race" came from Blumenbach himsself. And the whole point is to separate these people from the "blacks" when obviously the browns can only come from blacks as black people are brown in the first dam place. And what I mean is that those Malays who are dam brown are basically black folks and not some special separate category.
And as I posted earlier the Chinese or "NOrthern Asians" considered the original people of Malaysia or the "Malays" to be black people.
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
But you must remember that when white folks weren't writing science in the 18th and 19th century. They were writing racist propaganda to omit and cover up the fact that as a species humans ultimately originate in a tropical environment which makes black skin among humans the the aboriginal state of ALL human populations no matter where they are on the planet. THAT is what the whites are trying SO hard to destroy and cover up because THEY want to be PRIME human which they cannot be because they only just got here not even 10,000 years ago. (Of course "they" were here as humans but they weren't white).
.
However one of Doug's inconstancies, as with the Inuit, is not realizing Korea is not in the tropics >>>
Sniff to the black Asian thread long gone but in homage to threads of days gone by peruse this finest collection of vintage internet photo anthropology......
The land of Soul.... Korea.
"the land of soul", lol
Clyde on the other hand loves the idea of blacks all over the Northern Hemisphere. ( but as long as they're not "mongoloid")
Djehuti on the other hand, an Asian himself and a Southern one at that is very sympathetic to African issues pertaining to who was first on the planet and who had had some of the earliest civilizations. But he doesn't like the idea of "black Asians" . He always moves the goal post to try to make it not happen. Light skinned blacks he doesn't question as being "black". But Asians? They have to be as dark as a piece of charcoal to qualify
posted
Do you advise that Djehuti who first introduced Asians into the thread have his post deleted?
I would say not.
I think people get uncomfortable when quotes of theirs are posted that may not be consistent.
I would say Asians are relevant to this thread because anthropologically we are dealing with Eurasia and there is no physical barrier between Europe and Asia. So I can't say the Inuit Djehuti posted was off topic because it shows an actual person in the Northern climate with dark skin and we are dealing with another Eurasian, Cheddar man who was theorized to have dark skin.
You Doug M made a racially provocative thread title " Was Cheddar man white after all?" and the quote you posted in the ip didn't even have the word "white" in it
What do you expect with a race baiting title like that?
And your own comments about black = tropical make this topic then about all people's skin in tropical and non-tropical zones
this is what you said in the ip:
" Obviously this has implications across the board when trying to understand when and how major phenotype changes, such as skin color took place."
So here in the initial post you are talking about " implications across the board "
but now you are saying let's not talk about Asians.
Why is that?
politics
- and the fact that what you said elsewhere about Koreans is going to conflict what you are trying to say about Cheddar Man now
Maybe I'll wait until Friday to see if someone has taken this thread in a new direction. That's a long time in lioness years. Maybe Doug will take over page 2. This seemed like one of those hit and run topics. You drop the topic and disappear for a while
Anybody who wants to get deeper into the "science" of this topic ,look at the 4th post in this thread. I copied the Supplement to the original research article on Cheddar Man which discusses their skin pigmentation methodology . That kind of thing gets easily overlooked. Now it's that very methodology that is in question with this new update.
Was Cheddar man dark? maybe. It's uncertain at this point. Either the researchers are being honest and have updated their opinion on the subject - or from the start they knew that the darkness level of the skin was too speculative to be conclusive about but they acted like it was in order to get attention for their article and names so they hyped it
---------------------------------------------------- be careful around her, she remembers shytPosts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: That's the thing. Whenever European scientists or scientists in general use racial labels or terms I always have retain some skeptecism. That Cheddar Man was dark skin is not in doubt but the question was exactly how dark was he?? Was he dark enough to be truly labeled as "black". Recall the genetic findings of the 7,000 year old La Brana hunter-gatherer showing them to have dark skin and blue eyes, yet nobody except Afronuts were quick to call them "black".
After all these years you still don’t get the ISO in photography? I have explained this many times. The lightning is controlled by the ISO to make objects appear lighter or darker. This is one of the reasons why I think you are lying about your color complexion and who you are as a person.
Now here is the mind trick. Even for as a white person the ISO setting can be tricky, as you can show paler with higher resolutions.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic