racial groups and what they say about mans origin

Many times I have wondered to myself how different racial groups became so drastically different in such a short period of time. It just doesn't seem possible with the accepted dates that we migrated around the world. With all of the stories from different cultures, especially the fascinating indian creation myths, it is hard not to consider the ancient astronaut theory, or the possibility that the human race is older and once was more advanced than we could imagine. Is it possible that different groups could have been created with different dna from different races possibly from different places in the universe? Could we be a lot older than generally accepted? or could all of this be explained by simple genetics and the differences in the regions they settled? I have pondered this many nights and I would genuinely like to know your thoughts and feelings on this subject.

reply to post by 2weird2live2rare2die


But are we actually in a Universe ???

Or are we all looking from a "common source" from Outside Looking Into an experience we call the Universe ???

And are our experiences just Stories we are reading via the Soul ???

i don't really know what to say. so... sure i guess that could be true.

reply to post by 2weird2live2rare2die

or could all of this be explained by simple genetics and the differences in the regions they settled?

This seems likely.

Isolated populations, when in very different environments, evolve faster than an animal which is occupying an evolutionary niche or remaining in the same environment for generations upon generations.

I don't think the human race is any older than it seems, though 200,000 years is a pretty long time, a lot longer than the 10-6 thousand that young earth Creationists claim.

I'm going to go way out on a crazy limb here, off of the top of my head because I've thought about this before.

Most species on earth are very uniform in appearance, coloring, size, strength, and ability because variations that are less beneficial disappear and variations that are more beneficial thrive due to natural selection. The end result is that all species stay uniform. There are exceptions, and those exceptions exist in domesticated animals due to human intervention. We call this intervention "breeding." A chihuahua and a great dane are the EXACT SAME SPECIES, and yet their apparent physical differences are far greater than say, the differences between lion and tiger, and yet a lion and tiger are different species and if they attempt to procreate the offspring is always infertile.

All dogs are grey wolves, but we've bred them for different tasks, and therefore there are a huge variety of dogs on the planet.

So maybe we humans were actually BRED

I have no idea what I'm talking about, but it's been fun.

The different races of human beings is due to evolution. Not only adapting to which ever parts of the planet we populated, but also adapting with the limited set of genes that were around us. For instance, oriental people evolved differently to not only their respective corner of the globe, but also with the relative few people in their region, while white European people adapted to not only their respective environment, but also the group of people who initially migrated with them.

Unfortunately, because of the sensitivity of subject, scientific studies and findings are looked down upon. There was a scientist named, James Watson, who was a Nobel Prize winner for his part in the unraveling of DNA, was basically degraded for his study on this very issue.

Here is an article in his situation, though it's important to realize that what happened to him, is only indicative of the mindset as a whole, as it pertains to this topic. I suggest that everyone read it.

Source: www.independent.co.uk...

So in sum, this issue is easily explained but you won't likely hear about it anytime soon because some people perceive it to be racist against minorities. Scientists would be very reluctant, and rightly so, to adopt this field of study because you couldn't report the data in an accurate manner.

--airspoon




[edit on 29-7-2010 by airspoon]

Originally posted by Sunsetspawn
I have no idea what I'm talking about, but it's been fun.

I think you do. The premise of "drastically different" is very loaded and not accurate. The differences are practically superficial, the similarities far, far outweighing them. We can mix and have offspring from any combination. Why is the commonality concealed from, it seems, so many? It's a great delusion.

Is it true that dogs used to be smarter before humans used them as pets?

reply to post by EnlightenUp


i just meant drastically different as in a lion and a tiger are drastically different in appearance but can still reproduce. i didn't mean for this post to sound racist or ignorant once again my simple christian instincts have gotten me in trouble. no what i meant was the obvious differences in appearance. i wonder how much of a difference there is genetically between different races, anyone have an idea about that?

The human species is one of, if one of the most adaptable animals on the planet. The development of the way we use our arms, fingers and brains was heavily promoted by the last ice age, and severe climate change.
Partly for these same reasons, its hardly surprising if the way we pass on genetic benefits, to our offspring, is also particularly dynamic and malleable towards what’s good for our species (compared with most of the planets other species).

So don't be surprised there are many genetic diversities; especially if-when you consider how (for established social-economic reasons) migrants (often) tend to be more intelligent-talented (as well as other separate things like being e.g. younger) than the people they leave behind.
The human race started in Africa, and has been migrating ever since. However North Africans (are in terms of IQ tests) more intelligent than Europeans, on the other hand South Africans (tend) to posses a different make-up, say other types of intelligence that are less measured by Western I.Q tests, and so put them far below Europeans. I.e. you can’t use Colour-looks as either accurate (or therefore fair) “markers” given that White Europeans are known to genetically differ (from one another) more than e.g. Black Africans, and so the same is equally true of Black Africans having more genetic diversity between each other, than say a white European.

The words to Google are “Racial Differences in Intelligence”. Obviously knowing, or even thinking about these kind of things seriously violates the ideology of political correctness. Talking about it, in an “insensitive way” can easily make scientists (apparent) politics cost their job. Which is partly why I'm interested in it. Banned books, and media prohibited subjects, are usually unpopular because they’re good for the intelligent mind-the welfare of all races.
Politics is the by far the biggest reason why this science remains sciences last taboo, why public understanding has intentionally being kept backwood (so we would intergrate with cheap Labour, rather than fight "them" The Newcomers (at least that's the failing theory).

Caucasians = modified by Nordics
Negroids = modified by Anunnaki
Mongoloids = modified by Grey Aliens
Arabs = Negroids + Mongoloids


[edit on 29-7-2010 by sphinx551]

reply to post by 2weird2live2rare2die

Is it possible that different groups could have been created with different dna

gorilla --> blacks
champanzees --> whites
orangutans --> asians


[edit on 29-7-2010 by LordBucket]

At the last two comments. I just don't have anything to say.
second line. :/

It does explain as to why some black little kids have such a large back of their head.

Originally posted by EnlightenUp
The differences are practically superficial, the similarities far, far outweighing them. We can mix and have offspring from any combination. Why is the commonality concealed from, it seems, so many? It's a great delusion.

What seems even more concealed from so many is the basic premise that differences are not bad. And the differences between races and gender are definitely not just superficial (I'm taking superficial to mean 'of the surface'.) There are some pretty remarkable differences between the races, which I find particularly beautiful. The way that the world and chance have worked together to create such an amazing array of differences is almost unbelievably cool, in my opinion. A small change in genotype can have drastic alterations in phenotype. Its one of the reasons genetics is so fascinating. Of course, with world travel what it is, I would assume that all these differences will meld away eventually.

Unfortunately, it seems that it is only acceptable to study the differences in races in terms of susceptibility to specific genetic disorders and disease. It would be nice if we could collectively get over our assumption that differences are bad, and really check it out with an open mind. Curiosity and/or science isn't racism...it is...finding the world an interesting and wonderful place.

Originally posted by LordBucket
reply to post by 2weird2live2rare2die

 

Is it possible that different groups could have been created with different dna

apes --> blacks
champanzees --> whites
orangutans --> asians

What about native americans?
second line

reply to post by Blue Dreamer

What about native americans?

New world monkeys, presumably.

could it be the rhesus macaque? very funny name for a monkey, by the way.

reply to post by LordBucket


So I'm descended from monkeys with "flat-noses"?
lol

reply to post by Liberal1984


Are you sure that North Africans don't do better on IQ tests because of the Arabian influence that was there. I assume the Arabs were very intelligent as they were the most advanced civilization at the time they occupied NA. I don't have any evidence to back this up but I'd be willing to bet that people in southern Spain do better on IQ tests too.