...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Deshret
»
European nations established only from Medieval times - whites are very new to Europe
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Clyde Winters: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by rasol: [qb] [QUOTE]Tens of thousands of scientists on this earth and not one of them came up with her explanation?[/QUOTE]....and yet you can't even name a single one who disagrees with Jablonski's theory of skin color. Dr. Winters: [b]we want a name.[/b] We do not ask for another blob-of-spam-distraction post, filled with bibilographic listings of people like Underhill and Sforza who AGREE WITH Jablonski, and equally completely refute you. [/qb][/QUOTE]If Jablonski's theory is correct please answer this question. If eating fish while living in the Artic helped the Eskimos remain dark, why is it that the Saami live in the Artic, and eat fish but their skin has turned white? The Jalonski theory has holes in it: [QUOTE] The tone of human skin can vary from a dark brown to nearly a colorless pigmentation, which appears pale pink due to the blood in the skin. Europeans have lighter skin, hair, and eyes than any other group on Earth.[3] In attempting to discover the mechanisms that have generated such a wide variation in human skin tone, Nina Jablonski and George Chaplin (2000) discovered that there is a high correlation between the tone of human skin of indigenous peoples and the average annual ultraviolet (UV) radiation available for skin exposure where the indigenous peoples live. Accordingly, Jablonski and Chaplin plotted the skin tone (W) of indigenous peoples who have stayed in the same geographical area for the last 500 years versus the annual UV available for skin exposure (AUV) for over 200 indigenous persons and found that skin tone lightness W is related to the annual UV available for skin exposure AUV according to (Jablonski and Chaplin (2000), p. 67, formula coefficients have been rounded to one-figure accuracy) where the skin tone lightness W is measured as the percentage of light reflected from the upper inner arm at which location on humans there should be minimal tanning of human skin due to personal exposure to the sun; a lighter skinned human would reflect more light and would have a higher W number. Judging from the above linear fit to the empirical data, the theoretical lightness maximum of human skin would reflect only 70 per cent of incident light for a hypothetical indigenous human-like population that lived where there was zero annual UV available for skin exposure (AUV = 0 in the above formula). Jablonski and Chaplin evaluated average annual UV available for skin exposure AUV from satellite measurements that took into consideration the measured daily variation in the thickness of the ozone layer that blocked UV hitting the earth, measured daily variation in opacity of cloud cover, and daily change in angle at which the sunlight containing UV radiation strikes the earth and passes through different thicknesses of earth's atmosphere at different latitudes for each of the different human indigenous peoples' home areas from 1979 to 1992. Jablonski and Chaplin proposed an explanation for the observed variation of untanned human skin with annual UV exposure. By Jablonski and Chaplin's explanation, there are two competing forces affecting human skin tone: 1. the melanin that produces the darker tones of human skin serves as a light filter to protect against too much UV light getting under the human skin where too much UV causes sunburn and disrupts the synthesis of precursors necessary to make human DNA; versus 2. humans need at least a minimum threshold of UV light to get deep under human skin to produce vitamin D, which is essential for building and maintaining the bones of the human skeleton. Jablonski and Chaplin note that when human indigenous peoples have migrated,[b] they have carried with them a sufficient gene pool so that within a thousand years, the skin of their descendants living today has turned dark or turned light to adapt to fit the formula given above[/b]--with the notable exception of dark-skinned peoples moving north, such as to populate the seacoast of Greenland, to live where they have a year-round supply of food rich in vitamin D, such as fish, so that there was no necessity for their skin to lighten to let enough UV under their skin to synthesize the vitamin D that humans need for healthy bones. [/QUOTE][b] A major problem with this theory is that it claims that people will lose their color within 1000 years. This is false. Southeast Asians live in countries where the UV levels are higher than Africa yet these people fail to be as dark as many African groups. Arabs have lived in Iraq for thousands of years yet they remain light skin, eventhough the UV levels are as high as Africa. Amerindians live in the Amazon basin for thousands of years where the UV levels are as high as Africa and they are not as dark as Africans. If this theory was valid, the people mentioned in above would all be as dark as Africans . The fact that they are not, disconfirms their theory. . [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3