Early Briton ancestor 'had dark skin and blue eyes'

Vixen · 7th February 2018, 05:39 AM

People with an interest in ancient history and archaeology will have known of this for a long time. Now that the Natural History Museum (NHM) has reconstructed a model of 'Cheddar Man', so-called as the remains were found in Cheddar Gorge, West England, near Bristol, at Gough's Cave.

The NHM has a fascinating section in the Red Zone dedicated to Human Evolution and includes life-size models of various branches of the Homo- species, such as Neanderthalsis, so-named after the region it was discovered in.

Thanks to lurid headlines about the individual's skin and eye colour, it has attracted a lot of media interest.

This is good in terms of educating the masses, but not exactly news, surely?

Quote:

First modern Britons had 'dark to black' skin, Cheddar Man DNA analysis reveals
The genome of Cheddar Man, who lived 10,000 years ago, suggests that he had blue eyes, dark skin and dark curly hair.

The fossil, known as Cheddar Man, was unearthed more than a century ago in Gough’s Cave in Somerset. Intense speculation has built up around Cheddar Man’s origins and appearance because he lived shortly after the first settlers crossed from continental Europe to Britain at the end of the last ice age. People of white British ancestry alive today are descendants of this population.

Apparently, many people are very upset about this and have taken to social media to express scepticism.

Discuss.

Thread moved from Social Issues & Current Events.

Posted By:zooterkin

GlennB · 7th February 2018, 05:47 AM

Originally Posted by Vixen

Apparently, many people are very upset about this and have taken to social media to express scepticism.

Discuss.

I can imagine some racist far-right groups getting 'upset' about it, but that's about all.

MikeG · 7th February 2018, 05:48 AM

I'm curious about it, as I had previously thought that eye pigment and skin colour had evolved together.

GlennB · 7th February 2018, 05:54 AM

Originally Posted by MikeG

I'm curious about it, as I had previously thought that eye pigment and skin colour had evolved together.

Not an isolated find, it seems:

"La Braña 1, name used to baptize a 7,000 years old individual from the Mesolithic Period, whose remains were recovered at La Braña-Arintero site in Valdelugueros (León, Spain) had blue eyes and dark skin."

Porpoise of Life · 7th February 2018, 05:55 AM

Artisanally cave aged Cheddar Man?
The first Britons must have been hipsters.

Vixen · 7th February 2018, 05:55 AM

Originally Posted by MikeG

I'm curious about it, as I had previously thought that eye pigment and skin colour had evolved together.

Skin colour is to do with two genes named SLC45A2 and SLC24A5, and are associated with variation in skin color in people of European and African descent.

Eye colour is associated with a gene called OCA2 that affects how much brown pigment your cells produce. People with 1 or 2 copies of the A variant of this marker tend to have more brown pigment in their eyes, so they are likely to have darker eyes.

Other factors include:

Quote:

Brown pigment is only part of the story. What else makes your eyes unique?

Light scattering: There's no blue pigment in blue eyes. Instead, this color shows up in people with almost no brown pigment because of blue wavelengths of light that hit the eye and scatter back.

Yellow/red pigment: A yellow/red pigment molecule called pheomelanin can combine with different levels of blue light scattering and brown pigment to create green and hazel.

Rings: Some people have a darker ring around the inner edge of the iris. Almost everyone has a dark ring around the outer edge of the iris called the limbal ring.

Crypts: Some people have gaps, called crypts, between the cells in one of the layers of their irises. This can give the iris a marbled or starburst look.

Source: 23andme

Belz... · 7th February 2018, 06:04 AM

So, like Thulsa Doom, then?

jonesdave116 · 7th February 2018, 06:25 AM

Originally Posted by GlennB

I can imagine some racist far-right groups getting 'upset' about it, but that's about all.

Yep. Here's a little scenario I dreamed up; imagine that the ancestors of those white supremacist types were black (obviously they were, due to being from Africa initially) and were still black up until not many thousands of years ago. Also imagine that our species was directly responsible for wiping out the white neanderthals (assuming they were white; given where they lived, and for how long, this is likely). So, the black ancestors of those white supremacist types were responsible for wiping out a bunch of perfectly decent white folk! How can they sleep at night!

Cheetah · 7th February 2018, 06:54 AM

I feel reckless, I would be willing to place a small bet that your dreamed up scenario is pretty close to the truth.

Fizil · 7th February 2018, 07:01 AM

I do find the dating interesting. I would have expected the populations in Northern Europe to already be well on their way to light skin by 8000 BCE.

However one of the final paragraphs mentioned something:

Quote:

Scientists believe that populations living in Europe became lighter-skinned over time because pale skin absorbs more sunlight, which is required to produce enough vitamin D. The latest findings suggest pale skin may have emerged later, possibly when the advent of farming meant people were obtaining less vitamin D though dietary sources like oily fish.

I hadn't considered the possible multi-variate causes of pale skin, but this makes a certain amount of sense. Inuit populations have darker skin, despite living in arctic conditions, but I knew that was because their diet made "paling" unnecessary. It should have been obvious that the same was true elsewhere. It is interesting to think that it was only the advent of farming, and Vitamin D deficiency in the food supply, that may have triggered the need for environmental adaptation of skin color.

Belz... · 7th February 2018, 07:02 AM

Originally Posted by Fizil

I do find the dating interesting..

Marriage is even better.

Cheetah · 7th February 2018, 07:05 AM

But not as good as the real thing.

casebro · 7th February 2018, 07:48 AM

Originally Posted by jonesdave116

Yep. Here's a little scenario I dreamed up; imagine that the ancestors of those white supremacist types were black (obviously they were, due to being from Africa initially) and were still black up until not many thousands of years ago. Also imagine that our species was directly responsible for wiping out the white neanderthals (assuming they were white; given where they lived, and for how long, this is likely). So, the black ancestors of those white supremacist types were responsible for wiping out a bunch of perfectly decent white folk! How can they sleep at night!

But you forgot to take into effect that modern Europeans are 3% Neanderthal, and that the interbreeding only worked one way. Somebody was stealing some deficient women. Heathens.

Porpoise of Life · 7th February 2018, 07:50 AM

Originally Posted by Fizil

I hadn't considered the possible multi-variate causes of pale skin, but this makes a certain amount of sense. Inuit populations have darker skin, despite living in arctic conditions, but I knew that was because their diet made "paling" unnecessary. It should have been obvious that the same was true elsewhere. It is interesting to think that it was only the advent of farming, and Vitamin D deficiency in the food supply, that may have triggered the need for environmental adaptation of skin color.

Very interesting, and it makes sense that the adaptation of light skin didn't become neccessary until our diets changed.

It does raise a question for me... Neanderthals are usually thought to be fairskinned, but they were hunter-gatherers too as ar as I know.

Was their change in skin color due to a different mutation or selection pressure? Did they require more vitamin D to function, or were they not as good at synthesizing it as we were?
Or is it just that they've been in northern regions for so long that a relatively small selection pressure on skin color had enough time to affect the population, regardless of diet?

Vixen · 7th February 2018, 10:14 AM

Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life

Very interesting, and it makes sense that the adaptation of light skin didn't become neccessary until our diets changed.

It does raise a question for me... Neanderthals are usually thought to be fairskinned, but they were hunter-gatherers too as ar as I know.

Was their change in skin color due to a different mutation or selection pressure? Did they require more vitamin D to function, or were they not as good at synthesizing it as we were?
Or is it just that they've been in northern regions for so long that a relatively small selection pressure on skin color had enough time to affect the population, regardless of diet?

They possibly had much more bodily hair, which would act as a vacuum keeping cold air out (rather like an animal pelt)? Just a guess, based AIUI the fact indigenous Africans have little body hair. Perhaps Neanderthals were thinner on top, to absorb more sun. But who knows?

The article says it is a 76% probability the Cheddar guy had dark skin, which means there is a 24% chance he did not.

jonesdave116 · 7th February 2018, 11:16 AM

Originally Posted by casebro

But you forgot to take into effect that modern Europeans are 3% Neanderthal, and that the interbreeding only worked one way. Somebody was stealing some deficient women. Heathens.

My God! So you are saying that not only did the black ancestors of the white supremacists wipe out a bunch of white people, but they also raped the women?
These people have got some serious explaining to do!

casebro · 7th February 2018, 02:27 PM

Originally Posted by Fizil

.....Inuit populations have darker skin, despite living in arctic conditions, but I knew that was because their diet made "paling" unnecessary. It should have been obvious that the same was true elsewhere. It is interesting to think that it was only the advent of farming, and Vitamin D deficiency in the food supply, that may have triggered the need for environmental adaptation of skin color.

They have also only been dwelling in the Arctic for a short time, evolutionary. They are eastern Asians. Perhaps an acestral ree of the Sammi of Finland would tell us how long?

macdoc · 8th February 2018, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Somebody was stealing some deficient women. Heathens.

fortunate cattle can't interbreed....

mgidm86 · 8th February 2018, 04:28 PM

Originally Posted by GlennB

I can imagine some racist far-right groups getting 'upset' about it, but that's about all.

Why else would MSM put this on their front pages? If it ain't racist, misogynistic, ant-gay or Trump-hate it won't sell! This story fits right in.

From the OP:

Quote:

Thanks to lurid headlines about the individual's skin and eye colour, it has attracted a lot of media interest.

This isn't science, this is politics.

theprestige · 8th February 2018, 04:32 PM

I keep reading the thread title as "Early Bitcoin Ancestor..."

Hlafordlaes · 8th February 2018, 04:40 PM

Originally Posted by Vixen

People with an interest in ancient history and archaeology will have known of this for a long time. ... This is good in terms of educating the masses, but not exactly news, surely?

News to me. Thanks for posting it.

Originally Posted by GlennB

I can imagine some racist far-right groups getting 'upset' about it, but that's about all.

Totally.

Originally Posted by jonesdave116

Yep. Here's a little scenario I dreamed up; imagine that the ancestors of those white supremacist types were black (obviously they were, due to being from Africa initially) and were still black up until not many thousands of years ago. Also imagine that our species was directly responsible for wiping out the white neanderthals (assuming they were white; given where they lived, and for how long, this is likely). So, the black ancestors of those white supremacist types were responsible for wiping out a bunch of perfectly decent white folk! How can they sleep at night!

Good one.

***
It's the mayfly mentality one gets from having a short human lifespan relative to the pace of biological and geological change that makes 'nowadays' seem like the only valid, true standard. This makes certain emotional attachments both understandable and silly.

Trebuchet · 8th February 2018, 07:38 PM

Perhaps if the dark skin had stuck I wouldn't have had so many stinkin' skin cancers!

deadrose · 8th February 2018, 07:42 PM

It's our sunlight-deprived existence here in Washington, keeping us melanin-challenged, along with the annoyingly clean air not blocking the sun's rays enough.

Trebuchet · 8th February 2018, 08:20 PM

Originally Posted by deadrose

It's our sunlight-deprived existence here in Washington, keeping us melanin-challenged, along with the annoyingly clean air not blocking the sun's rays enough.

And I was originally from Montana, where the sun shines more and the air is even cleaner.

Minoosh · 8th February 2018, 09:23 PM

Originally Posted by jonesdave116

Yep. Here's a little scenario I dreamed up; imagine that the ancestors of those white supremacist types were black (obviously they were, due to being from Africa initially)

But is obvious that the people leaving Africa were black? How do we know this?

Cheetah · 9th February 2018, 05:50 AM

Originally Posted by Trebuchet

Perhaps if the dark skin had stuck I wouldn't have had so many stinkin' skin cancers!

I can't help but wonder* what some people would have picked to distinguish "good people" from "bad people" if that were true.
Because they sure would have picked something, maybe to do with hair.

*I could not help it, I don't now why I wondered that, it happens I suppose.

casebro · 9th February 2018, 08:47 AM

Don't I recall the the "not brown eyes" mutation can be theoretically tracked to one person? Time?

eta: 6-10,000 years ago. Dunno what that says about Cheddar man.

jonesdave116 · 9th February 2018, 10:47 AM

Originally Posted by Minoosh

But is obvious that the people leaving Africa were black? How do we know this?

Well, given that the current peoples of Africa are black (with the exception of ancestors of immigrants from elsewhere), then I guess it is fair to assume that the people who left there 60 - 70 000 years ago also were. Otherwise, the scenario is that they were lighter, but then developed darker skin after leaving, which eventually lightened again at some point in their future.

Dancing David · 9th February 2018, 11:21 AM

Originally Posted by theprestige

I keep reading the thread title as "Early Bitcoin Ancestor..."

OMFSM, that is the best!

Vixen · 9th February 2018, 04:08 PM

Originally Posted by Minoosh

But is obvious that the people leaving Africa were black? How do we know this?

The two skin colour genes mentioned in the OP. It is not so much that the originating Africans were dark skinned, but rather, almost all Europeans and half of all African Americans today (according to 23andme) have this 'depigmentising' gene. In other words Europeans are 'depigmentised' blacks.

Strangely, these 'depigmentising' genes are not found in Asian populations.

To make things more complicated, Asians have the highest percentage of Neanderthal genes. Africans have none. So maybe, logically, the Neanderthals were never dark enough to be 'depigmented'...?

I tend to go along with the theory Homo Sapiens originated in the Middle East, ventured afar, and were then beaten back to the warmer climes, including Africa, by the last ice age (LGM) some 18K years ago, and then ventured back into Europe, some 10K years ago, whereas the Asians around the equator zone, never left, hence no dark genes to 'depigment'.

ETA: Here's the science AIUI:

The depigmentation gene is caused by a variant from G to A, to give A -A in the DNA sequence of the SLC24A5 gene, Marker: rs1426654.

from 23andme:

Quote:

Percent of 23andMe customers with variant
Variant: A
European
100.00%
African American
55.3%
Ashkenazi Jewish
100.00%
East Asian
2.73%
Hispanic or Latino
92.7%
South Asian
95.3%
Middle Eastern
99.9%

The other salient skin colour gene, Gene: SLC45A2
Marker: rs16891982 is marked by a change from a C to a G in the DNA sequence of the SLC45A2 gene.

Quote:

Percent of 23andMe customers with variant
Variant: G
European
99.6%
African American
47.9%
Ashkenazi Jewish
99.0%
East Asian
0.81%
Hispanic or Latino
87.2%
South Asian
18.3%
Middle Eastern
80.4%

As you can see, Asians have very little to none of either gene, thus must always have had that skin tone.

Mikemcc · 11th February 2018, 06:33 PM

A question then; If diet provoked reactions resulting in fair skin, does a modern. healthy diet lead to a relaxation in that requirement? Are our ancestors likely to revert to darker skin tones because there is a reduced drive to produce natural vitamin D?

Venom · 11th February 2018, 08:46 PM

Pan African Afrocentrists are going to jump on this for sure...
"See, we told you Hannibal was black"

Cheetah · 11th February 2018, 10:43 PM

"Nope! Then they would not have picked a Danish actor to portray him in the TV series, would they, huh, huh, huh?"

alfaniner · 12th February 2018, 04:53 AM

Kudos to the reconstructor. They managed to get just a hint of expression in the face and that helps make it look oddly familiar.

But every time I see "Cheddar Man" I think it's refering to his complexion texture.

Wolrab · 12th February 2018, 06:04 AM

George Hamilton? Nope, brown eyes. Plus I don't think he's quite old enough..

Porpoise of Life · 12th February 2018, 06:09 AM

What's great to see in the reconstruction of the face is that the facial features of Cheddar Man don't really correspond to any of our current races.

Yes, he might have been 'black', but he didn't look like a modern day sub-Saharan African or Melanasian person would look. And me might be an ancestor of later British populations, but he doesn't look particularly 'European' either.

Which just goes to show that our current ideas of race don't really apply to our ancestors that much.

Bikewer · 12th February 2018, 06:58 AM

Way back when I was reading the fantasy novels of Robert E. Howard (Conan, Kull...), he did a series featuring “Bran Mak Morn”, a Pictish warrior.
He described the Picts as the “indigenous” inhabitants of Britain, and being “dark and swarthy”...
Howard tended to make up most of his anthropology, but maybe he got this right....

Giordano · 12th February 2018, 02:39 PM

Originally Posted by Vixen

The two skin colour genes mentioned in the OP. It is not so much that the originating Africans were dark skinned, but rather, almost all Europeans and half of all African Americans today (according to 23andme) have this 'depigmentising' gene. In other words Europeans are 'depigmentised' blacks.

Strangely, these 'depigmentising' genes are not found in Asian populations.

To make things more complicated, Asians have the highest percentage of Neanderthal genes. Africans have none. So maybe, logically, the Neanderthals were never dark enough to be 'depigmented'...?

I tend to go along with the theory Homo Sapiens originated in the Middle East, ventured afar, and were then beaten back to the warmer climes, including Africa, by the last ice age (LGM) some 18K years ago, and then ventured back into Europe, some 10K years ago, whereas the Asians around the equator zone, never left, hence no dark genes to 'depigment'.

ETA: Here's the science AIUI:

The depigmentation gene is caused by a variant from G to A, to give A -A in the DNA sequence of the SLC24A5 gene, Marker: rs1426654.

from 23andme:

The other salient skin colour gene, Gene: SLC45A2
Marker: rs16891982 is marked by a change from a C to a G in the DNA sequence of the SLC45A2 gene.

As you can see, Asians have very little to none of either gene, thus must always have had that skin tone.

Actually it is even somewhat more complicated than that. Additional loci contribute, some alterations that make for lighter skin in Europeans are also found in Africa, and some gene variants that arose in Eurasia migrated back into Africa.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/...man-skin-color

An origin of all modern humans in Africa some 300,000+ years ago, and their migrations within Africa, rather than within middle east, seem pretty strongly supported by the and by the bulk of other studies.

Mojo · 12th February 2018, 03:11 PM

Originally Posted by alfaniner

Kudos to the reconstructor. They managed to get just a hint of expression in the face and that helps make it look oddly familiar.

But every time I see "Cheddar Man" I think it's refering to his complexion texture.

I picture a diary-based superhero, but I can't imagine what his superpower would be.

jonesdave116 · 12th February 2018, 04:06 PM

Originally Posted by Mojo

I picture a diary-based superhero, but I can't imagine what his superpower would be.

Turning water into cheese?

7th February 2018, 05:47 AM	#2
GlennB Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Pie City, Arcadia Posts: 22,732	Originally Posted by Vixen Apparently, many people are very upset about this and have taken to social media to express scepticism. Discuss. I can imagine some racist far-right groups getting 'upset' about it, but that's about all.
	__________________ "Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut

7th February 2018, 05:48 AM	#3
MikeG Now. Do it now. Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: UK Posts: 23,184	I'm curious about it, as I had previously thought that eye pigment and skin colour had evolved together.
	__________________ "The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.

7th February 2018, 05:54 AM	#4
GlennB Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Pie City, Arcadia Posts: 22,732	Originally Posted by MikeG I'm curious about it, as I had previously thought that eye pigment and skin colour had evolved together. Not an isolated find, it seems: "La Braña 1, name used to baptize a 7,000 years old individual from the Mesolithic Period, whose remains were recovered at La Braña-Arintero site in Valdelugueros (León, Spain) had blue eyes and dark skin."
	__________________ "Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut

7th February 2018, 05:55 AM	#6
Vixen Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: Moomin Valley Posts: 12,742	Originally Posted by MikeG I'm curious about it, as I had previously thought that eye pigment and skin colour had evolved together. Skin colour is to do with two genes named SLC45A2 and SLC24A5, and are associated with variation in skin color in people of European and African descent. Eye colour is associated with a gene called OCA2 that affects how much brown pigment your cells produce. People with 1 or 2 copies of the A variant of this marker tend to have more brown pigment in their eyes, so they are likely to have darker eyes. Other factors include: Quote: Brown pigment is only part of the story. What else makes your eyes unique? Light scattering: There's no blue pigment in blue eyes. Instead, this color shows up in people with almost no brown pigment because of blue wavelengths of light that hit the eye and scatter back. Yellow/red pigment: A yellow/red pigment molecule called pheomelanin can combine with different levels of blue light scattering and brown pigment to create green and hazel. Rings: Some people have a darker ring around the inner edge of the iris. Almost everyone has a dark ring around the outer edge of the iris called the limbal ring. Crypts: Some people have gaps, called crypts, between the cells in one of the layers of their irises. This can give the iris a marbled or starburst look. Source: 23andme
	__________________ If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb

7th February 2018, 06:04 AM	#7
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In the details Posts: 72,392	So, like Thulsa Doom, then?
	__________________ Master of the Shining Darkness

7th February 2018, 05:55 AM	#5
Porpoise of Life Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 4,161	Artisanally cave aged Cheddar Man? The first Britons must have been hipsters.

7th February 2018, 06:25 AM	#8
jonesdave116 Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2015 Posts: 1,648	Originally Posted by GlennB I can imagine some racist far-right groups getting 'upset' about it, but that's about all. Yep. Here's a little scenario I dreamed up; imagine that the ancestors of those white supremacist types were black (obviously they were, due to being from Africa initially) and were still black up until not many thousands of years ago. Also imagine that our species was directly responsible for wiping out the white neanderthals (assuming they were white; given where they lived, and for how long, this is likely). So, the black ancestors of those white supremacist types were responsible for wiping out a bunch of perfectly decent white folk! How can they sleep at night!
	__________________ “There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo “Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin

7th February 2018, 06:54 AM	#9
Cheetah Muse Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 867	I feel reckless, I would be willing to place a small bet that your dreamed up scenario is pretty close to the truth.
Cheetah Muse Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 867	__________________ "... when you dig my grave, could you make it shallow so that I can feel the rain" - DMB

7th February 2018, 07:01 AM	#10
Fizil Muse Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 641	I do find the dating interesting. I would have expected the populations in Northern Europe to already be well on their way to light skin by 8000 BCE. However one of the final paragraphs mentioned something: Quote: Scientists believe that populations living in Europe became lighter-skinned over time because pale skin absorbs more sunlight, which is required to produce enough vitamin D. The latest findings suggest pale skin may have emerged later, possibly when the advent of farming meant people were obtaining less vitamin D though dietary sources like oily fish. I hadn't considered the possible multi-variate causes of pale skin, but this makes a certain amount of sense. Inuit populations have darker skin, despite living in arctic conditions, but I knew that was because their diet made "paling" unnecessary. It should have been obvious that the same was true elsewhere. It is interesting to think that it was only the advent of farming, and Vitamin D deficiency in the food supply, that may have triggered the need for environmental adaptation of skin color.
Fizil Muse Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 641

7th February 2018, 07:02 AM	#11
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In the details Posts: 72,392	Originally Posted by Fizil I do find the dating interesting.. Marriage is even better.
	__________________ Master of the Shining Darkness

7th February 2018, 07:05 AM	#12
Cheetah Muse Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 867	But not as good as the real thing.
Cheetah Muse Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 867	__________________ "... when you dig my grave, could you make it shallow so that I can feel the rain" - DMB

7th February 2018, 07:48 AM	#13
casebro Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 15,088	Originally Posted by jonesdave116 Yep. Here's a little scenario I dreamed up; imagine that the ancestors of those white supremacist types were black (obviously they were, due to being from Africa initially) and were still black up until not many thousands of years ago. Also imagine that our species was directly responsible for wiping out the white neanderthals (assuming they were white; given where they lived, and for how long, this is likely). So, the black ancestors of those white supremacist types were responsible for wiping out a bunch of perfectly decent white folk! How can they sleep at night! But you forgot to take into effect that modern Europeans are 3% Neanderthal, and that the interbreeding only worked one way. Somebody was stealing some deficient women. Heathens.
	__________________ Great minds discuss ideas. Medium minds discuss events. Small minds spend all their time on U-Tube and Facebook.

7th February 2018, 07:50 AM	#14
Porpoise of Life Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 4,161	Originally Posted by Fizil I hadn't considered the possible multi-variate causes of pale skin, but this makes a certain amount of sense. Inuit populations have darker skin, despite living in arctic conditions, but I knew that was because their diet made "paling" unnecessary. It should have been obvious that the same was true elsewhere. It is interesting to think that it was only the advent of farming, and Vitamin D deficiency in the food supply, that may have triggered the need for environmental adaptation of skin color. Very interesting, and it makes sense that the adaptation of light skin didn't become neccessary until our diets changed. It does raise a question for me... Neanderthals are usually thought to be fairskinned, but they were hunter-gatherers too as ar as I know. Was their change in skin color due to a different mutation or selection pressure? Did they require more vitamin D to function, or were they not as good at synthesizing it as we were? Or is it just that they've been in northern regions for so long that a relatively small selection pressure on skin color had enough time to affect the population, regardless of diet?
	Last edited by Porpoise of Life; 7th February 2018 at 07:54 AM.

7th February 2018, 10:14 AM	#15
Vixen Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: Moomin Valley Posts: 12,742	Originally Posted by Porpoise of Life Very interesting, and it makes sense that the adaptation of light skin didn't become neccessary until our diets changed. It does raise a question for me... Neanderthals are usually thought to be fairskinned, but they were hunter-gatherers too as ar as I know. Was their change in skin color due to a different mutation or selection pressure? Did they require more vitamin D to function, or were they not as good at synthesizing it as we were? Or is it just that they've been in northern regions for so long that a relatively small selection pressure on skin color had enough time to affect the population, regardless of diet? They possibly had much more bodily hair, which would act as a vacuum keeping cold air out (rather like an animal pelt)? Just a guess, based AIUI the fact indigenous Africans have little body hair. Perhaps Neanderthals were thinner on top, to absorb more sun. But who knows? The article says it is a 76% probability the Cheddar guy had dark skin, which means there is a 24% chance he did not.
	__________________ If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb

7th February 2018, 11:16 AM	#16
jonesdave116 Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2015 Posts: 1,648	Originally Posted by casebro But you forgot to take into effect that modern Europeans are 3% Neanderthal, and that the interbreeding only worked one way. Somebody was stealing some deficient women. Heathens. My God! So you are saying that not only did the black ancestors of the white supremacists wipe out a bunch of white people, but they also raped the women? These people have got some serious explaining to do!
	__________________ “There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo “Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin

7th February 2018, 02:27 PM	#17
casebro Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 15,088	Originally Posted by Fizil .....Inuit populations have darker skin, despite living in arctic conditions, but I knew that was because their diet made "paling" unnecessary. It should have been obvious that the same was true elsewhere. It is interesting to think that it was only the advent of farming, and Vitamin D deficiency in the food supply, that may have triggered the need for environmental adaptation of skin color. They have also only been dwelling in the Arctic for a short time, evolutionary. They are eastern Asians. Perhaps an acestral ree of the Sammi of Finland would tell us how long?
	__________________ Great minds discuss ideas. Medium minds discuss events. Small minds spend all their time on U-Tube and Facebook.

8th February 2018, 01:52 PM	#18
macdoc Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Planet earth on slow boil Posts: 7,865	Quote: Somebody was stealing some deficient women. Heathens. fortunate cattle can't interbreed.... .with humans
	__________________ _{Mainstream climate science sources • http://www.skepticalscience.com/empi...al-warming.htm • http://ossfoundation.us/projects/env...g/human-caused}_{• http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/...e-responsible/} _{Travelphotos >https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries}

8th February 2018, 04:28 PM	#19
mgidm86 Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 4,707	Originally Posted by GlennB I can imagine some racist far-right groups getting 'upset' about it, but that's about all. Why else would MSM put this on their front pages? If it ain't racist, misogynistic, ant-gay or Trump-hate it won't sell! This story fits right in. From the OP: Quote: Thanks to lurid headlines about the individual's skin and eye colour, it has attracted a lot of media interest. This isn't science, this is politics.
mgidm86 Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 4,707	__________________ I don't care. https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/daredevil-dave-2-motorcycle/id1013225596?mt=

8th February 2018, 04:32 PM	#20
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 26,628	I keep reading the thread title as "Early Bitcoin Ancestor..."

8th February 2018, 04:40 PM	#21
Hlafordlaes Disorder of Kilopi Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: State of Flux Posts: 7,290	Originally Posted by Vixen People with an interest in ancient history and archaeology will have known of this for a long time. ... This is good in terms of educating the masses, but not exactly news, surely? News to me. Thanks for posting it. Originally Posted by GlennB I can imagine some racist far-right groups getting 'upset' about it, but that's about all. Totally. Originally Posted by jonesdave116 Yep. Here's a little scenario I dreamed up; imagine that the ancestors of those white supremacist types were black (obviously they were, due to being from Africa initially) and were still black up until not many thousands of years ago. Also imagine that our species was directly responsible for wiping out the white neanderthals (assuming they were white; given where they lived, and for how long, this is likely). So, the black ancestors of those white supremacist types were responsible for wiping out a bunch of perfectly decent white folk! How can they sleep at night! Good one. *** It's the mayfly mentality one gets from having a short human lifespan relative to the pace of biological and geological change that makes 'nowadays' seem like the only valid, true standard. This makes certain emotional attachments both understandable and silly.
	__________________ Driftwood on an empty shore of the sea of meaninglessness. Irrelevant, weightless, inconsequential moment of existential hubris on the fast track to oblivion. Spends that time videogaming.

8th February 2018, 07:38 PM	#22
Trebuchet Penultimate Amazing Photo Contest Winner Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: The Great Northwet Posts: 16,683	Perhaps if the dark skin had stuck I wouldn't have had so many stinkin' skin cancers!
	__________________ Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.

8th February 2018, 07:42 PM	#23
deadrose Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: the wet side of the mountains Posts: 2,784	It's our sunlight-deprived existence here in Washington, keeping us melanin-challenged, along with the annoyingly clean air not blocking the sun's rays enough.

8th February 2018, 08:20 PM	#24
Trebuchet Penultimate Amazing Photo Contest Winner Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: The Great Northwet Posts: 16,683	Originally Posted by deadrose It's our sunlight-deprived existence here in Washington, keeping us melanin-challenged, along with the annoyingly clean air not blocking the sun's rays enough. And I was originally from Montana, where the sun shines more and the air is even cleaner.
	__________________ Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.

8th February 2018, 09:23 PM	#25
Minoosh Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 6,916	Originally Posted by jonesdave116 Yep. Here's a little scenario I dreamed up; imagine that the ancestors of those white supremacist types were black (obviously they were, due to being from Africa initially) But is obvious that the people leaving Africa were black? How do we know this?
Minoosh Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 6,916

9th February 2018, 05:50 AM	#26
Cheetah Muse Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 867	Originally Posted by Trebuchet Perhaps if the dark skin had stuck I wouldn't have had so many stinkin' skin cancers! I can't help but wonder* what some people would have picked to distinguish "good people" from "bad people" if that were true. Because they sure would have picked something, maybe to do with hair. *I could not help it, I don't now why I wondered that, it happens I suppose.
Cheetah Muse Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 867	__________________ "... when you dig my grave, could you make it shallow so that I can feel the rain" - DMB Last edited by Cheetah; 9th February 2018 at 05:54 AM.

9th February 2018, 08:47 AM	#27
casebro Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 15,088	Don't I recall the the "not brown eyes" mutation can be theoretically tracked to one person? Time? eta: 6-10,000 years ago. Dunno what that says about Cheddar man.
	__________________ Great minds discuss ideas. Medium minds discuss events. Small minds spend all their time on U-Tube and Facebook. Last edited by casebro; 9th February 2018 at 08:56 AM.

9th February 2018, 10:47 AM	#28
jonesdave116 Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2015 Posts: 1,648	Originally Posted by Minoosh But is obvious that the people leaving Africa were black? How do we know this? Well, given that the current peoples of Africa are black (with the exception of ancestors of immigrants from elsewhere), then I guess it is fair to assume that the people who left there 60 - 70 000 years ago also were. Otherwise, the scenario is that they were lighter, but then developed darker skin after leaving, which eventually lightened again at some point in their future.
	__________________ “There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo “Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin

9th February 2018, 11:21 AM	#29
Dancing David Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 39,075	Originally Posted by theprestige I keep reading the thread title as "Early Bitcoin Ancestor..." OMFSM, that is the best!
	__________________ I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar

9th February 2018, 04:08 PM	#30
Vixen Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: Moomin Valley Posts: 12,742	Originally Posted by Minoosh But is obvious that the people leaving Africa were black? How do we know this? The two skin colour genes mentioned in the OP. It is not so much that the originating Africans were dark skinned, but rather, almost all Europeans and half of all African Americans today (according to 23andme) have this 'depigmentising' gene. In other words Europeans are 'depigmentised' blacks. Strangely, these 'depigmentising' genes are not found in Asian populations. To make things more complicated, Asians have the highest percentage of Neanderthal genes. Africans have none. So maybe, logically, the Neanderthals were never dark enough to be 'depigmented'...? I tend to go along with the theory Homo Sapiens originated in the Middle East, ventured afar, and were then beaten back to the warmer climes, including Africa, by the last ice age (LGM) some 18K years ago, and then ventured back into Europe, some 10K years ago, whereas the Asians around the equator zone, never left, hence no dark genes to 'depigment'. ETA: Here's the science AIUI: The depigmentation gene is caused by a variant from G to A, to give A -A in the DNA sequence of the SLC24A5 gene, Marker: rs1426654. from 23andme: Quote: Percent of 23andMe customers with variant Variant: A European 100.00% African American 55.3% Ashkenazi Jewish 100.00% East Asian 2.73% Hispanic or Latino 92.7% South Asian 95.3% Middle Eastern 99.9% The other salient skin colour gene, Gene: SLC45A2 Marker: rs16891982 is marked by a change from a C to a G in the DNA sequence of the SLC45A2 gene. Quote: Percent of 23andMe customers with variant Variant: G European 99.6% African American 47.9% Ashkenazi Jewish 99.0% East Asian 0.81% Hispanic or Latino 87.2% South Asian 18.3% Middle Eastern 80.4% As you can see, Asians have very little to none of either gene, thus must always have had that skin tone.
	__________________ If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb Last edited by Vixen; 9th February 2018 at 04:25 PM.

11th February 2018, 06:33 PM	#31
Mikemcc Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: UK Posts: 1,703	A question then; If diet provoked reactions resulting in fair skin, does a modern. healthy diet lead to a relaxation in that requirement? Are our ancestors likely to revert to darker skin tones because there is a reduced drive to produce natural vitamin D?

11th February 2018, 08:46 PM	#32
Venom Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: United States Posts: 1,283	Pan African Afrocentrists are going to jump on this for sure... "See, we told you Hannibal was black"

11th February 2018, 10:43 PM	#33
Cheetah Muse Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 867	"Nope! Then they would not have picked a Danish actor to portray him in the TV series, would they, huh, huh, huh?"
Cheetah Muse Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 867	__________________ "... when you dig my grave, could you make it shallow so that I can feel the rain" - DMB Last edited by Cheetah; 11th February 2018 at 10:44 PM.

12th February 2018, 04:53 AM	#34
alfaniner Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 18,065	Kudos to the reconstructor. They managed to get just a hint of expression in the face and that helps make it look oddly familiar. But every time I see "Cheddar Man" I think it's refering to his complexion texture.
	__________________ Science is self-correcting. Woo is self-contradicting.

12th February 2018, 06:04 AM	#35
Wolrab Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 4,227	George Hamilton? Nope, brown eyes. Plus I don't think he's quite old enough..
Wolrab Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 4,227	__________________ "Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov

12th February 2018, 06:09 AM	#36
Porpoise of Life Illuminator Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 4,161	What's great to see in the reconstruction of the face is that the facial features of Cheddar Man don't really correspond to any of our current races. Yes, he might have been 'black', but he didn't look like a modern day sub-Saharan African or Melanasian person would look. And me might be an ancestor of later British populations, but he doesn't look particularly 'European' either. Which just goes to show that our current ideas of race don't really apply to our ancestors that much.