New DNA analysis: The original Brits were black thousands of years ago

[Alam_dar]

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

 

image: http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/attachment.php?attachmentid=78662&stc=1

The first modern Britons, who lived about 10,000 years ago, had “dark to black” skin, a groundbreaking DNA analysis of Britain’s oldest complete skeleton has revealed.

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.

It was initially assumed that Cheddar Man had pale skin and fair hair, but his DNA paints a different picture, strongly suggesting he had blue eyes, a very dark brown to black complexion and dark curly hair.

The discovery shows that the genes for lighter skin became widespread in European populations far later than originally thought – and that skin colour was not always a proxy for geographic origin in the way it is often seen to be today......

continue reading:
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/feb/07/first-modern-britons-dark-black-skin-cheddar-man-dna-analysis-reveals
===========

 

Comment:

 

Everyone in this country is either an immigrant or the descendent of an immigrant. There is no such thing as a "british" human. We all came from Africa and arrived here at different times. Once we realise this then maybe we could try being nice to each other.

Edited February 7, 2018 by Mariyam

[Alam_dar]

@Mods: Please edit the title of the Thread. Thanks. 

Edited February 7, 2018 by Alam_dar

[sandeep]

Please don't link to garbage sites.  Thanks.

[Alam_dar]

4 minutes ago, sandeep said:

Please don't link to garbage sites.  Thanks.

I didn't want to link, but it automatically occurred.

That is why I request the mods to please edit the title of this thread. 

 

I am sorry for this inconvenience. 

[Muloghonto]

It'd make sense for the original inhabitants of Britain to be dark-skinned and then evolve into the pale versions we see today.

[Yoda-esque]

Everyone came from Africa,whats your point?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[Alam_dar]

28 minutes ago, Yoda-esque said:

Everyone came from Africa,whats your point?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

I think only the non-religious community believe in this African Origin theory, while it is somehow linked to the Theory of Evolution, which majority of the religious people deny. 

 

Secondly, I think after knowing that we all have the same origins, then it would reduce the hate and supremacy feelings over the others. There are still many white people who are supremacists. This news could help them to get rid of this disease. 

 

Humanity has been divided into religions, nationalism, races, castes etc. But such news provide us  an opportunity to go above these thinks and to feel the real humanity. 

[Muloghonto]

4 hours ago, Alam_dar said:

I think only the non-religious community believe in this African Origin theory, while it is somehow linked to the Theory of Evolution, which majority of the religious people deny. 

 

Secondly, I think after knowing that we all have the same origins, then it would reduce the hate and supremacy feelings over the others. There are still many white people who are supremacists. This news could help them to get rid of this disease. 

 

Humanity has been divided into religions, nationalism, races, castes etc. But such news provide us  an opportunity to go above these thinks and to feel the real humanity. 

Evolution is most strongly denied by Christians and Orthodox Jews, followed by Muslims.

 

The reason for muslim denial is simple : Koran states we come from Adam and Eve and if we don't, then the Koran is wrong, which means Koran isn't perfect, which means Islam isn't perfect. This is not a logical progression Muslims can handle.

 

For Christians, its even worse. 

Because if Adam and Eve are not real, then not only is the bible wrong, it also means, there is no original sin. No original sin = we are not all born sinners = there is no need for salvation of all = Jesus didn't die to save us all. 

Completely destroys Christianity. 

It isn't just about an error in their book, it destroys their entire fundamental basis of religion itself.

 

[MechEng]

Britain under Roman Empire had warm and humid weather, and there were vineyards grown in that region at that time.

[surajmal]

9 hours ago, Yoda-esque said:

Everyone came from Africa,whats your point?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk
 

 

[Muloghonto]

57 minutes ago, surajmal said:

 

From your article: 

"The hominins who made tools at Attirampakkam made a wide variety of items, some of which closely resembled the Middle Paleolithic style that emerged in Africa around 300,000 years ago"

 

Notice the word 'hominins'. Ie, it could be homo erectus as well. Infact, it most likely is, since upper-limit of species homo sapiens (us) is usually put at 250,000-300,000 years. Until we find homo sapiens remains older than Africa, Africa is the homeland of Homo Sapiens.

 

This fact, is also predicted by genetic research, where Africans have the highest genetic diversity of all, which is consistent with the picture of 'humans are from Africa and only a small group left Africa in a couple of migration spurts to populate rest of the world' picture.

 

[surajmal]

1 minute ago, Muloghonto said:

Notice the word 'hominins'. Ie, it could be homo erectus as well. Infact, it most likely is, since upper-limit of species homo sapiens (us) is usually put at 250,000-300,000 years. Until we find homo sapiens remains older than Africa, Africa is the homeland of Homo Sapiens.

 

 

 

I don't think you know how hypothesis testing is done. Oldest homo sapiens fossil was found in morocco last year. That far away for the cradle? And you telling me people in the field aren't having second thoughts about the original theory? 

And if there is smoke, there is fire. Subcontinent will take a while to dig since it has been heavily populated forever. 

Not that I'm saying, Out of Africa will be Out of India now (OOI is reserved for different context anyways). 

Quote

This fact, is also predicted by genetic research, where Africans have the highest genetic diversity of all, which is consistent with the picture of 'humans are from Africa and only a small group left Africa in a couple of migration spurts to populate rest of the world' picture.

One doesn't lead to the other. Original populations can have less diversity. 

[Muloghonto]

9 minutes ago, surajmal said:

I don't think you know how hypothesis testing is done. Oldest homo sapiens fossil was found in morocco last year. That far away for the cradle? And you telling me people in the field aren't having second thoughts about the original theory? 

Oh the theory has its detractors as far as 'exact location' in Africa goes. Africa is pretty humongous, you see and only reason we can say we found the oldest sets from Ethiopia is due to the rift-valley. If the earth wasn't splitting itself down the middle there for more than a mile deep at places, maybe we'd never have uncovered those bones. 

Quote

And if there is smoke, there is fire. Subcontinent will take a while to dig since it has been heavily populated forever. 

Not that I'm saying, Out of Africa will be Out of India now (OOI is reserved for different context anyways). 

One doesn't lead to the other. Original populations can have less diversity. 

But that's the thing- there is no real smoke outside of Africa. 

Everything we know of genetics and biology also predicts that humanity left Africa in small batches after being in Africa first and for a much longer period than outside. 

And no, original population has been evolving and expanding at same rate as immigrant population (remember, till farming, which is less than 20K years old - we've not found ANY evidence of farming older than that, anywhere in the world- so basically 6-10% of human existence is farmed, the people in Africa, Asia, Americas, etc. all more or less grew at the same rates population-wise, in the lush, jungle regions or when comparing the desertic regions). 

 

Only way original population has less diversity than immigrant population, is if almost all of the people left the continent and had no contact with the 'remaining originals'.

Ie, for out of Africa to be false, it'd mean mankind evolved outside Africa, then most of us packed up and left FOR Africa. Then nobody left Africa (of the ones who went) and rest of the world was populated by this very small group of 'original population outside Africa'. Which is a far less likely scenario than the simple idea of 'mankind evolved in Africa and only a small few left it in few small batches'. 

 

Either way, until we have actual species homo sapiens remains outside of Africa that are older, there is no questioning the OOA theory, especially since genetics are silent confirmatory of it. 

Edited February 8, 2018 by Muloghonto

[surajmal]

Quote

Everything we know of genetics and biology also predicts that humanity left Africa in small batches after being in Africa first and for a much longer period than outside. 

Thats a sample size problem. Until Dark matter/dark energy were theorized/"observed", Universe was going to end in a big crunch, now we are talking about big freeze. 
 

Quote

But that's the thing- there is no real smoke outside of Africa. 

 

Plenty of work being done on multiregional origins. 

Quote

 

And no, original population has been evolving and expanding at same rate as immigrant population (remember, till farming, which is less than 20K years old - we've not found ANY evidence of farming older than that, anywhere in the world- so basically 6-10% of human existence is farmed, the people in Africa, Asia, Americas, etc. all more or less grew at the same rates population-wise, in the lush, jungle regions or when comparing the desertic regions). 

 

Only way original population has less diversity than immigrant population, is if almost all of the people left the continent and had no contact with the 'remaining originals'.

Ie, for out of Africa to be false, it'd mean mankind evolved outside Africa, then most of us packed up and left FOR Africa. Then nobody left Africa (of the ones who went) and rest of the world was populated by this very small group of 'original population outside Africa'. Which is a far less likely scenario than the simple idea of 'mankind evolved in Africa and only a small few left it in few small batches'. 

 

Yes, Genetic drift can occur more "easily" in smaller populations. There are still crapload of other factors that determine allele frequency. Hence, I said, "Original populations CAN have less diversity". 

Quote

Either way, until we have actual species homo sapiens remains outside of Africa that are older, there is no questioning the OOA theory, especially since genetics are silent confirmatory of it. 

For something with as flimsy a foundation as OOA, one doesn't need definitive proof of an alternative to question it. 

[Muloghonto]

11 hours ago, surajmal said:

Thats a sample size problem. Until Dark matter/dark energy were theorized/"observed", Universe was going to end in a big crunch, now we are talking about big freeze. 

Sure. But there is far more sample size to Africa than not Africa. Again, evidence wins. 

11 hours ago, surajmal said:

 

Plenty of work being done on multiregional origins. 

If I remember the name properly, it was Carleton Coon who did a lot of work on it. And was thoroughly debunked. Plenty of work is being done because of racist reasons, pure and simple, as there are many people who are uncomfortable with the idea of originating from ' black Africans'. Doomed for failure, as Coon was. 

11 hours ago, surajmal said:

Yes, Genetic drift can occur more "easily" in smaller populations. There are still crapload of other factors that determine allele frequency. Hence, I said, "Original populations CAN have less diversity"

For something with as flimsy a foundation as OOA, one doesn't need definitive proof of an alternative to question it. 

It has far greater foundation than any other competing theory. As I said, genetics present a double-blind proof for it and you are simply talking out of your rear end if you think African genetic diversity is about simple genetic drift. It is not. Their alleles are far older than any other alleles in humanity. And far more diverse. Same with the mitochondria - older than ours, as mitochondria is a clone-copy from the mother. And guess where all mitochondria leads to - Africa. 

 

You are putting the cart before the horse by considering far inferior possibilities, simply because you've decieded, for whatever reason, you don't like the idea of your ancestors looking like Africans. 

 

[cowboysfan]

we are all africans.

[MechEng]

9 hours ago, cowboysfan said:

we are all africans.

we wuz da hood.

 

we wuz homies.