ORIGINS of White, Black, Brown, Yellow, Types of HUMAN Races

[Rawnrr]

Scientific understanding comes from documented repeated applications of experiments that yield the same result.
If the scriptures do contain sciences that can hold up to repeated experimentation, then they really should be explored. But until they are explored and documented then it will only remain as theory.

All it needs is people to do the actual work. Without that work, asking people to simply believe is what pushes the work to areas of religion and scripture instead of science.

[OPVerma]

Originally Posted by Rawnrr

Scientific understanding comes from documented repeated applications of experiments that yield the same result.
If the scriptures do contain sciences that can hold up to repeated experimentation, then they really should be explored. But until they are explored and documented then it will only remain as theory.

All it needs is people to do the actual work. Without that work, asking people to simply believe is what pushes the work to areas of religion and scripture instead of science.

Indian Scriptures are record of Actual Events occurred during past 155.4 trillion years verified by me Mathematically , Experimentally, and Observational that is presented in 4 books ( 900 pages ) . You can see some of my threads on SF ( Astronomy )- Challenging and defeating mainstream theories and calculations.

You can see my recent post ' Whirlpool Model of Galaxy Formation' on Facebook link <https://www.facebook.com/knowyouandgod/>
and let me know whether I am asking people to simply believe ?

[Rawnrr]

Originally Posted by OPVerma

Indian Scriptures are record of Actual Events occurred during past 155.4 trillion years verified by me Mathematically , Experimentally, and Observational that is presented in 4 books ( 900 pages ) . You can see some of my threads on SF ( Astronomy )- Challenging and defeating mainstream theories and calculations.

You can see my recent post ' Whirlpool Model of Galaxy Formation' on Facebook link <https://www.facebook.com/knowyouandgod/>
and let me know whether I am asking people to simply believe ?

Congratulations on doing the work....So if it holds up to the scrutiny of other scientists and their work, you have done well to further those beliefs.

[OPVerma]

Originally Posted by Rawnrr

Congratulations on doing the work....So if it holds up to the scrutiny of other scientists and their work, you have done well to further those beliefs.

Thank you for acknowledging. However those are not beliefs, Those are coherent, cohesive and verified sciences.

[Rawnrr]

Originally Posted by OPVerma

Thank you for acknowledging. However those are not beliefs, Those are coherent, cohesive and verified sciences.

All science is a belief. Pure science is simply a recording of evidence to support a theory/belief. The theory will then evolve and change as evidence and experience grows.
The death of science occurs when people close their minds to further perspectives beyond their own.

[pseudonymus]

The phenotypical differences in race is due in the most part to adaptation to a region's climate.

The more untraviolet radiation, the more melanin, the more melanin, the darker the skin tone. Maps showing UV concentration and skin tone correlation: Skin Color Link & UV Link.

People with very light skin [Europeans & east Asians] have less melanin because in those northern regions, not a lot of UV light is present. Instead, our skin [Europids & East Asians] have stuff in our skin that helps make vitamin D.

A major difference is that all Non-Africans [primarily Europeans & Asians] have Neanderthal DNA in us, whereas Black people do not: Link.

East Asians, having very narrow eye slits, is indicative of adaptation in a region with a lot of snow, such as Siberia. The light of the sun reflecting off of snow can cause snow blindness. And so, we can tell, that originally East Asians developed in a very cold and snow region.

Long eyelashes indicates that people such as Europids came from an area with a lot of sand or snow blowing around, so they developed long eyelashes to keep the stuff from going into their eyes. And so on like that.

And so, the difference in race is due to adaptation of environment as well as to interbreeding with other species [Neanderthals and so on].

[OPVerma]

Originally Posted by pseudonymus

The phenotypical differences in race is due in the most part to adaptation to a region's climate.

The more untraviolet radiation, the more melanin, the more melanin, the darker the skin tone. Maps showing UV concentration and skin tone correlation: Skin Color Link & UV Link.

People with very light skin [Europeans & east Asians] have less melanin because in those northern regions, not a lot of UV light is present. Instead, our skin [Europids & East Asians] have stuff in our skin that helps make vitamin D.

A major difference is that all Non-Africans [primarily Europeans & Asians] have Neanderthal DNA in us, whereas Black people do not: Link.

East Asians, having very narrow eye slits, is indicative of adaptation in a region with a lot of snow, such as Siberia. The light of the sun reflecting off of snow can cause snow blindness. And so, we can tell, that originally East Asians developed in a very cold and snow region.

Long eyelashes indicates that people such as Europids came from an area with a lot of sand or snow blowing around, so they developed long eyelashes to keep the stuff from going into their eyes. And so on like that.

And so, the difference in race is due to adaptation of environment as well as to interbreeding with other species [Neanderthals and so on].

I do agree that climatic conditions can alter our physical make up to some extant, yet there are inherent racial differences due to the different proginators . Though Russians (proginator Kashyap ) and Mongolians ( proginator Vashisth )live in similar climatic zone they differ widely in looks.

[OPVerma]

[quote=Lucky 1]

Originally Posted by sky123

It is just evolution........ Every human being alive today can trace there genetic origin to 41 surviving woman of child bearing age in Africa's Great Rift Valley from about 70,000 years ago when there was a die off in the human population and only 41 women survived.

Today there are exactly 41 unique genetic lines of human beings and everyone alive today carries the genes for all the different racial types.

Meaning skin color is nothing more than a adaptation to solar light levels...that's it!
People who dwell in equatorial regions develop darker skin......people who live in regions of low ultraviolet concentrations have lighter skin and eye's

DNA research has shown conclusively that you could take a Caucasian couple.... Put them in an equatorial environment and in about 15 to 20 thousand years there descendants would have dark skin and dark eyes to handle the sun.

Same in reverse for a couple with dark skin.

This whole skin and eye color adaptation has to do with ultraviolet light levels and processing vitamin D.

The amazing part is that those 41 genetic lines give such a diversity of appearance world wide!
The study of origins of man is one of my passions and a prime reason l spent about a month in the Great Rift Valley a few years back....well it was an amazing hunting trip too!

Subsequent to 100 million years, Kashyap ( a genetic scientists) the son of Marich married 60 daughters of Daksha and produced genetically different varieties of humans, animals and insects. You quote 41, however Pof. Bryan Sykes quotes 33 daughters of Eve to be the original mothers.

Climatic conditions do affect our physical make up but the basic difference/ skeleton remains unchanged. An African may live in Tundra for generations, but he would never become like an Eskimo.

It is nice to hear your interest in Human Evolution and your trip to Rift Valley. However, after publication of my Title 'The Real History of the Ancient World' that is based on 'The Densification Theory of Human Evolution' in 2003, the NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC Magazine , in their Nov 2004 issue declared that Darwin was wrong and humans are not descended from apes.

[Altair]

Well.. it looks like you actually haven't read the article yourself.

Here's the article..

Was Darwin Wrong? By David Quammen
National Geographic – November 2004

Evolution by natural selection, the central concept of the life's work of Charles Darwin, is a theory. It's a theory about the origin of adaptation, complexity, and diversity among Earth's living creatures. If you are skeptical by nature, unfamiliar with the terminology of science, and unaware of the overwhelming evidence, you might even be tempted to say that it's "just" a theory.

In the same sense, relativity as described by Albert Einstein is "just" a theory. The notion that Earth orbits around the sun rather than vice versa, offered by Copernicus in 1543, is a theory. Continental drift is a theory. The existence, structure, and dynamics of atoms? Atomic theory. Even electricity is a theoretical construct, involving electrons, which are tiny units of charged mass that no one has ever seen.

Each of these theories is an explanation that has been confirmed to such a degree, by observation and experiment, that knowledgeable experts accept it as fact. That's what scientists mean when they talk about a theory: not a dreamy and unreliable speculation, but an explanatory statement that fits the evidence. They embrace such an explanation confidently but provisionally—taking it as their best available view of reality, at least until some severely conflicting data or some better explanation might come along.

Read the entire article here: http://www.uvm.edu/~pbierman/classes...arwinWrong.pdf

Sorry dude.. Evolution is real, it happens. In humans, in other animals, in plants, in viruses and bacteria. If it didn't then live would've died out long ago, actually it wouldn't even have existed in the first place. Change is a fundamental part of our universe, and it's no different with living species who adapt and change due to circumstances.

[Lucky 1]

Originally Posted by Altair

Well.. it looks like you actually haven't read the article yourself.

Here's the article..



Read the entire article here: http://www.uvm.edu/~pbierman/classes...arwinWrong.pdf

Sorry dude.. Evolution is real, it happens. In humans, in other animals, in plants, in viruses and bacteria. If it didn't then live would've died out long ago, actually it wouldn't even have existed in the first place. Change is a fundamental part of our universe, and it's no different with living species who adapt and change due to circumstances.

I Agreed......that article in National Geographic is a bunch of horse hockey written by a nitwit that doesn't understand science.

His nonsense about "theories" right there shows he's clueless!