...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Deshret
»
The Melanin Scholars: Let's Debunk these Fools
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by michael1010: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by MindoverMatter718: [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by michael1010: [qb] I thinked I missed my calling. I should have become a special education teacher to assist the dumb mofo with reading impairments. So now to assist their dumbasses in their inability to read within context, I must go slowly and answer by number. Now read all of it you dumb mofo, not a sentence or two. [b] 1) What source are you going by that states the San of southern Africa evolved their lighterskin in heavily forested areas?[/b] [i]Larger than Denmark or Switzerland, and bigger than Lesotho and Swaziland combined, the 52,800 square kilometre [b]Central Kalahari Game Reserve[/b], which was set up in 1961, is the second largest game reserve in the world. Situated right in the centre of Botswana, this reserve is characterised by vast open plains, saltpans and ancient riverbeds. Varying from sand dunes with many species of trees and shrubs in the north, to flat bushveld in the central area,[b] the reserve is more heavily wooded in the south, with mophane forests to the south and east. [/b][/i] [i]The people commonly known throughout the world as Bushmen, but more properly referred to as the Basarwa or [b]San, have been resident in and around the area for probably thousands of years.[/b][/i][/qb][/QUOTE]I asked you for a source that specifically states the Sans lighter skin was due to adapting in heavily forested areas, so far not one has come up. This doesnt state that the San adapted their lighterskin due to residence in the central Kalahari game reserve. It says nothing at all about skin color, try again. In fact I already showed you the actual genetic data which specifically talks about the San in specific reference to their lighterskin complexion, wherein it states that the San carry a derived allele at the OCA2 loci, along with low frequncies of the European specific derived SLC24A5 allele. Let's see some genetic data asked of you, have it? [QUOTE]Originally posted by michael1010: [qb] [b]2) Darken? Are you insinuating these people (south Asians) were originally lighter and became less darker? If so, source please.[/b] Same answer as above, people who evolved in the forested or tree covered areas of South Asia are *less darker* than Africans who evolved in areas not heavily forested like Savannas.[/qb][/QUOTE]Oh now its less darker? Not less darkened huh. Ok then backtrack jackass. [QUOTE]Originally posted by michael1010: [qb] [b]3) Can you further elaborate on this because I don't quite get what you're saying here. How does the cloudy sky enable people to survive without this quality? By "this" I assume you mean melanin.[/b] This time read mofo. [b]Cloud cover can greatly affect the amount of UV radiation received at the earth's surface. Clouds that are dark and heavily burdened with water can absorb up to 80 percent of the radiation. [/b] http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hl-vs/sun-sol/expos/intensity-uv-intensite-eng.php Now use whatever common sense you have left; If melanin is needed to protect against UV intensity, and Clouds ABSORB 80% of the UV intensity, then people under heavily clouded skies, such as Germans, British, Irish, do not need as much melanin to survive.[/qb][/QUOTE]Yea I already explained this and corrected you, its not clouds that allows for these people to live without melanin, it's the lower UV intensity wherein the less melanin allows them to live under these darker cloudier skies. [QUOTE]Originally posted by michael1010: [qb] [b]4) So the people who reside in the arctics who are in fact Asian to begin with, due to glare of sun off of the snow made them more similar to themselves? Elaborate on this please, thanks.[/b] Light skin complexion typically correlates with higher latitudes, this is more obvious with Europeans, Northern Europeans are typically paler than southern Europeans. However, this correlation does not hold in the case of Asians. Asians in higher latitudes can be just as dark as Asians in much lower latitudes, because they needed to retain their melanin due to the UV intensity being increased when it’s reflected off snow.[/qb][/QUOTE]You're slow kid, the Eskimos retain a darker complexion all over their bodies, the Eskimos also cover their whole bodies heavily with clothing, this doesnt allow for any sunlight reflecting off of snow to hit the areas where the skin is being covered you dunce, hence they should only be dark in areas where the sun hits, I.e, faces. But this is not the case as explained theyre dark all over and as already explained this is what is known about how and why these individuals retain their levels of melanin despite living in colder lower UV envrionemts. Here's an example, southwest Asians cover themselves with clothing, and so the parts of their bodies which are exposed to the sun become darker, I.e, face and hands, possibly arms, but under their clothing they can be pale as hell. This should be the case with Eskimos if they retain melanin due to incresed UV reflecting off of snow because the Eskimos are also heavily covered in clothing. [QUOTE]Originally posted by michael1010: [qb] Now why is it that everyone can understand this except you, do you really suffer from low comprehension skills. You seem to think that this Vitamin D theory is universally accepted, but it’s not, and it’s time you open up to other explanations, and don’t put all you eggs in one basket. [/qb][/QUOTE]Ok doofis, so explain why the Inuits are so heavily dependent on their Vitamin D rich diet and ever since their diets started changing started developing vitamin D defiencies such as rickets ? Why are they encouraged to take these vitamin D supplements? :rolleyes: [QUOTE] [URL=http://www.winhs.org/news/news20070610.htm] Changes in Arctic Diet Put Inuit at Risk for Rickets [/URL] [b]For centuries, Inuit living in Canada's Arctic spent months without sunlight, and lifetimes wearing thick, fur clothing that blocked the sunlight from their dark skin.[/b] [b]Mother Nature provided vitamin D in other ways. Instead of making it through sun exposure, the Inuit got a healthy dose from traditional foods that happen to be rich in vitamin D: the skin of Arctic char; seal liver; the yolks of bird and fish eggs; and seal, walrus and whale blubber. [/b] [b]But as the Arctic has changed, so have eating habits. While seal and char (trout) are still staples in Nunavut's isolated communities, walrus and whale consumption have been in decline for 30 years. [/b] [b] The result is ****vitamin D deficiency***, which surfaces as ***rickets***[/b] , a disease most Canadians might be surprised to hear still exists in Canada. Thirty-one new cases of rickets were discovered in the first five years of Nunavut's creation. [/QUOTE]Of course its both lower UV with the necessity to produce vitamin D. [QUOTE]Originally posted by michael1010: [qb] I ain’t trying to hear I’m *deficient* in a goddamn thing.[/qb][/QUOTE]Pretty much says it all, denial. [QUOTE]Originally posted by michael1010: [qb] And I see you’re avoiding the answer to how humans survived 30,000 years in Europe with dark-skin in every post, but I already peeped it, you don’t have the answers, huh? So you ain’t fooling nobody with that bullsh*t.[/qb][/QUOTE]Are you an idiot? Wow, this tells me that your cognitively challenged to the max, because this has already been explained days ago, which was that like all early humans around the world before the advent of agriculture they were hunter gatherer fishers and herders. In this diet, just like the Inuits, contained a high level of Vitamin D allowing for the melanin levels to retain, just like the Eskimos. [/qb][/QUOTE]Dawg you're weak as hell and so is your vitamin D theory. If you're too damn dumb to understand that most of the vitamin D *and calcium* in food is found in higher frequencies in agricultural products--milk, cheese, all that dairy sh*t came about when humans domesticated goats and cows, so cut the bullsh*t, you're just making up sh*t, nothing to back it. Now answer---Why did humans remain Dark skinned for 30,000 in vitamin D was needed for survival. Keeping in mind the fact that agriculture is a recent phenomena in human history--max 10,000 years ago. Also don't play with the intelligent folks and try to play down fish, as if humans suddenly stopped eating it when agricultural arose. And you do know that the San are still hunter gatherers. [/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