It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by OpenSecret2012
There's 2 1/2 schools of thought on this:
1. Other beings came to our planet, experimented on long ago humans, splicing, dicing, splicing, and made offshoots... resulting in blue-eyed, blond hair, pale skinned humans. The sun hurt them so they moved to where the sun hurt them less.
2. Pale skin is a recessive trait in the genetics of dark-skinned humans. Sooner or later pale skinned kids are gonna squirt out. Like attracts like. Pale skinned will be more attracted to other pale skinned. The sun hurts them, they move to where it hurts them less.
1/2. Almost same as #1. Human scientists theirselves did the splicing, dicing, splicing, long ago. The result ending the same in the long run.
Europeans came from Middle East. From IRAN, and those northern middle eastern countries. One day save some dough, travel there yourself and look at the people there. Majority have dark skin. But many (in the same families) have light skin, pale skin. If they go mate with other pale skins, and their kids mate with even more pale skins, and they move to where sun hurts less, then you get tribes of people who mostly have the recessive pale skinned genes.
It is very different for red haired men than it is for women.
Originally posted by Hajduk
Red hair is also sometime associated with inbreeding. Many royal families used to have inter family marriages. You also see a lot of red hair in Quaker and Huterite colonies where there is not enough outbreeding.
That is not to say that all red haired people are a product of inbreeding, but red hair is a homozygous recessive allele that is usually masked by dominant alleles acquired by outbreeding. It would explain why perhaps kings had higher percentage of red hair than in the general population with random mating where the chances of inheriting a rare, recessive trait is only like 4%.
Some also believe that redhair, particularly in Ireland, Scottland, and Scandinavia was a result of poor nutrition.
[edit on 1-5-2005 by Hajduk]
Originally posted by Lee_the_red
It is very different for red haired men than it is for women.
Byrd
The site has compiled a whole lot of rumors... and hasn't done any fact-checking on them.
Let's see..
Red hair doesn't make a "race." I've got brown hair and my brown-haired son and I are not of a different race than my black-haired spouse or my black-haired child. My father has black hair, my mother had brown hair and they're both Caucasian and not of a different race.
It takes more than hair color to make a different race (it's actually a sociopolitical division and not a biological thing but I don't want to do an anthropology lecture today.)
a) not that many rulers had red hair. In most cultures it's considered a sign of a curse and red haired children were abandoned or put to death. People from the north end of Europe tended to be more fair-haired than the rest of the population, but I can guarantee that rulers of China, Japan, India, Persia (with few exceptions), Greece, etc, etc, etc were not red-haired. Less than 1/10th of the English rulers had red hair.
b) Nephilim are mentioned rarely in the Bible and are not red-haired.
c) The Jews are not a race, but the members of their religion (where marriage and kinship were tightly controlled) came from the Mediterranean area where non-dark hair was fairly rare (not unknown, but rare.)
d) no "race" of giants have been found. A few unusually large human skeletons have been found -- similar to modern-day giants (Shaquille O'Neal is one, actually. Yes, I know he doesn't seem like a giant because we see huge basketball players all the time. But when your average man is 5'6" tall, anything two feet taller than that is a giant.)
[edit on 25-12-2004 by Byrd]