Idiotic Musings from the West

Miss Firing said:
"Muh (an)incestor"

View attachment 26545
View attachment 26546
Click to expand...

I am trying to think why. At basal genetic level, we are ALL basically black people. Africa is where we come from, where we evolved as a species. As such, all our baseline genetic code is evolved to survive Africa.
Africa is the ONLY continent to straddle both the tropics and have majority of its landmass IN the tropics. So all our baseline evolution is for african conditions. Hence why dark skin is THE dominant gene of humans - in Africa ur main concern is to be out in the sun as long as possible and not burn, so blacker the better. else we'd have to waste time and resources covering ourselves in mud like pigs or elephants do.

This is why if you mix snow white and blackest of black person, the kid doesnt turn out off -white in skin tone but dark brown or light black.

Now, the main advantage of black skin is obvious - UV blocking and preventing burning. For any animal species which is supposed to be naked under the sun, that is the main thing to adapt to in tropical climate.
the ONLY advantage of white skin, is that it is more efficient in absorbing vitamin D from sunlight, which is our main source of vitamin D.
Melanin has this tradeoff - if u block UV, you also block the sunlight spectrum that makes vitamin D.

So therefore, it makes sense that Euros are the whitest people - they see the last sun and have to lose this sun-block to get their vitamin D up and running. This is why the whitest euros dont come from the coldest places but places with least sunshine and thats why inuits are dark - they get glare from reflective snow most of the year from living on ice all year round.

So therefore, white skin would've evolved after X thousands of years of humans living in Europe. 3000 sounds too low to me, considering humans have been in europe since 30,000 years. but then again, who am i to judge the speed of evolution ???
 
GaudaNaresh said:
I am trying to think why. At basal genetic level, we are ALL basically black people. Africa is where we come from, where we evolved as a species. As such, all our baseline genetic code is evolved to survive Africa.
Africa is the ONLY continent to straddle both the tropics and have majority of its landmass IN the tropics. So all our baseline evolution is for african conditions. Hence why dark skin is THE dominant gene of humans - in Africa ur main concern is to be out in the sun as long as possible and not burn, so blacker the better. else we'd have to waste time and resources covering ourselves in mud like pigs or elephants do.

This is why if you mix snow white and blackest of black person, the kid doesnt turn out off -white in skin tone but dark brown or light black.

Now, the main advantage of black skin is obvious - UV blocking and preventing burning. For any animal species which is supposed to be naked under the sun, that is the main thing to adapt to in tropical climate.
the ONLY advantage of white skin, is that it is more efficient in absorbing vitamin D from sunlight, which is our main source of vitamin D.
Melanin has this tradeoff - if u block UV, you also block the sunlight spectrum that makes vitamin D.

So therefore, it makes sense that Euros are the whitest people - they see the last sun and have to lose this sun-block to get their vitamin D up and running. This is why the whitest euros dont come from the coldest places but places with least sunshine and thats why inuits are dark - they get glare from reflective snow most of the year from living on ice all year round.

So therefore, white skin would've evolved after X thousands of years of humans living in Europe. 3000 sounds too low to me, considering humans have been in europe since 30,000 years. but then again, who am i to judge the speed of evolution ???
Click to expand...
oldest human finding in africa yet...it doesnt mean in near future new finding of even older humans cant be found in world. its like we found a ancient civilization nd declared it "first human civilization". we hv to keep our mind open nd not dismiss any future finding. like scientist did in most cases. scientist or archiologist not stop their finding...neither they did good research in india like places.
india is home of dark black, light black, brown, light brown, asian nd even fair skin tone. so its more possible place for first human, than single mono tone african black skin. india is very diverse than africa in skin colours nd india geography allowed it for this. so it can possible to be home of human origin.
 
Last edited:
GaudaNaresh said:
I am trying to think why. At basal genetic level, we are ALL basically black people. Africa is where we come from, where we evolved as a species. As such, all our baseline genetic code is evolved to survive Africa.
Africa is the ONLY continent to straddle both the tropics and have majority of its landmass IN the tropics. So all our baseline evolution is for african conditions. Hence why dark skin is THE dominant gene of humans - in Africa ur main concern is to be out in the sun as long as possible and not burn, so blacker the better. else we'd have to waste time and resources covering ourselves in mud like pigs or elephants do.

This is why if you mix snow white and blackest of black person, the kid doesnt turn out off -white in skin tone but dark brown or light black.

Now, the main advantage of black skin is obvious - UV blocking and preventing burning. For any animal species which is supposed to be naked under the sun, that is the main thing to adapt to in tropical climate.
the ONLY advantage of white skin, is that it is more efficient in absorbing vitamin D from sunlight, which is our main source of vitamin D.
Melanin has this tradeoff - if u block UV, you also block the sunlight spectrum that makes vitamin D.

So therefore, it makes sense that Euros are the whitest people - they see the last sun and have to lose this sun-block to get their vitamin D up and running. This is why the whitest euros dont come from the coldest places but places with least sunshine and thats why inuits are dark - they get glare from reflective snow most of the year from living on ice all year round.

So therefore, white skin would've evolved after X thousands of years of humans living in Europe. 3000 sounds too low to me, considering humans have been in europe since 30,000 years. but then again, who am i to judge the speed of evolution ???
Click to expand...
I think the lack of bathing and the mud blocking the sun caused people to turn white.
 
vin pahadi (kumauni) said:
oldest human finding in africa yet...it doesnt mean in near future new finding of even older humans cant be found in world. its like we found a ancient civilization nd declared it "first human civilization". we hv to keep our mind open nd not dismiss any future finding. like scientist did in most cases. scientist or archiologist not stop their finding...neither they did good research in india like places.
india is home of dark black, light black, brown, light brown, asian nd even fair skin. so its more possible place for first human, than single mono tone african black skin. india is very diverse than africa in skin colours.
Click to expand...
it is not just findings. its genetics. genetic studies are decisive. humans come from africa. the end. no if and or buts.
yes, we have admixture with neanderthal, who also come from africa, but million plus years ago and effectively are non african in genetic basal nature to a much greater degree than species homo sapiens sapiens.
Like, even if u r not geneticist/biologist, you may understand the concept of the science predicting and then data confirming what should be the case for genetic diversities, allele drift rate, etc. for point of origin vs point of recent spread.
And ALL these data overwhelmingly confirm that species homo sapiens sapiens come from africa. Ancient civilization is different, since that is not reflective in some objective current data like genetic science. Who is more ancient civ IS all about where did u dig up the last oldest one and that can change anytime. yes.
But where do plants, animals, this that originate is not subject to JUST 'where did u find oldest specimen' for extant species. in fact, that hardly matters if your genetic science is sufficiently advanced, because in this day and age, i can tell more about where u come from based on observing genetic sample from you than finding physical world observation of your specimens.

Put it this way, thanks to genetic science getting decently advanced, even if we find human remains outsie africa that is older than african specimen by several thousand years, scientific community would most likely push the date of human migration out of africa to an older date rather than change humans originating in africa. And these arent woke gender science people, this is hardcore biology and biochemistry where not even biologist straight up gets a say, coz genetics is not actually biology, its like 80% chemistry and 20% biology, where biology is your base but its ALL chemistry lol.
U can fail chemistry and become a biology grad in pure bio like zoology or botany, but if u fail chemistry, u wont even get past year 1 in genetic science/genetic specialization.
so dont worry about this being a woke belief kind of a thing,this is more like a physics kind of thing where einstien makes prediction, the math adds up but we cant prove for another 50-60 years and then we do and go waaao...
Not obviously as decisive as physics is (nothing is as decisive as physics is when physics is decisive lol).

Take for eg, the simple concept that we see during tracking domestication of plants : where did we domesticate a said plant like wheat, barley,rice, sorghum, etc ? answer : turns out where the greatest genetic diversity of the said variety exists in nature in terms of lineage differentiation. Ie, if u track lineage of a plant, like male-female dna gene, older the species, the bigger the diversity and breaks will be- duh its like families breeding, clans forming, splitting off but in genetic code that happens when you copy copy copy over many generations.
Well, Sub saharan Africa contains basically 75% of all the lineage variations of humans on the planet, despite making up only 1/10th of all humans alive today and they also have the two oldest, by far,lineage markers on the planet. There's many, many such parallels between african population of sub saharan region and that of domesticated plants and animals.

Why are domesticated plants and animals the correlation ?? because domesticated plants and animals spread at an astronomical rate and encounter new habitats at astronomical rate because humans move at the most astronomical rate of habitat adaptation and we obviously take our domesticated animals and plants with us to whichever new rock we go to on this planet.
 
Last edited:
srev2004 said:
I think the lack of bathing and the mud blocking the sun caused people to turn white.
Click to expand...
Uhh...lack of bathing and mud blocking IS what you do when u r white. to make skin protection. Why the hell would black people with babbarsher sun-blocker darkness for hot equatorial sun wanna cover themselves with mud in land of clouds and rain in ewwrope ??? they would do opposite - they'd wanna get whiter and lose this ultra tagraa sun-blocker skin coz now thanks to marked drop in sunlight, they dont make enough vitamin D (remember dark skin blocks vitamin D more) and are all vitamin D deficient peoples...
U got it ulta lol.
 
vin pahadi (kumauni) said:
how many percentage of genes we indian carry from africa???
Click to expand...
huh ? all humans who are on this planet carry genes from africa. Pretty much the ONLy genes that we have are not from africa are genes for white skin, lighter eye colours, lighter hair colours and one unique adaptation of one unique group of humans- tibetans - they produce significantly more red blood cells than humans ( who all produce same % by blood volume, no matter the climate they live in).
Thats it, the end. rest ALL genes come from Africa. So to answer your question of how many genes come from africa - out of tens of thousands of genes we carry, all but 10-20. so 99.999999% or so. maybe one or two more/less decimal points.

Edit - yes, mysterious ancestor is admixture. which is most likely an ape that is branching off of another ape who left africa 5 million years ago. These are microscopic variations in the overall gene code and are very minor in scope and scale overall, with most of our admixture genes being in the 'dead code' region - which may or maynot be inactive, as dead code just means genes we dunno what it does and doesnt seem to do anything either but doesnt necessarily mean inactive either.
 
Last edited:
GaudaNaresh said:
huh ? all humans who are on this planet carry genes from africa. Pretty much the ONLy genes that we have are not from africa are genes for white skin, lighter eye colours, lighter hair colours and one unique adaptation of one unique group of humans- tibetans - they produce significantly more red blood cells than humans ( who all produce same % by blood volume, no matter the climate they live in).
Thats it, the end. rest ALL genes come from Africa. So to answer your question of how many genes come from africa - out of tens of thousands of genes we carry, all but 10-20. so 99.999999% or so. maybe one or two more/less decimal points.
Click to expand...
this is new finding....no one 100% sure. they r running in estimation.
Screenshot_20250303-194344_1.webp
 
GaudaNaresh said:
huh ? all humans who are on this planet carry genes from africa. Pretty much the ONLy genes that we have are not from africa are genes for white skin, lighter eye colours, lighter hair colours and one unique adaptation of one unique group of humans- tibetans - they produce significantly more red blood cells than humans ( who all produce same % by blood volume, no matter the climate they live in).
Thats it, the end. rest ALL genes come from Africa. So to answer your question of how many genes come from africa - out of tens of thousands of genes we carry, all but 10-20. so 99.999999% or so. maybe one or two more/less decimal points.

Edit - yes, mysterious ancestor is admixture. which is most likely an ape that is branching off of another ape who left africa 5 million years ago. These are microscopic variations in the overall gene code and are very minor in scope and scale overall, with most of our admixture genes being in the 'dead code' region - which may or maynot be inactive, as dead code just means genes we dunno what it does and doesnt seem to do anything either but doesnt necessarily mean inactive either.
Click to expand...
conclusion they give is still hold further research in indian gene study.
Screenshot_20250303-195237_1.webp
 
vin pahadi (kumauni) said:
this is new finding....no one 100% sure. they r running in estimation.
View attachment 26552
Click to expand...
yes. but this is also quite interesting coz we hardly have any neanderthal remains and sites IN India.
people may seethe, people may cope, but at the end of the day, we are ALL black hoteps with teeny tiny mixture with some other apes outside africa.
This is why whenever we mix with black hoteps, our offsprings are closer closer to black hoteps DEPENDING on how closer is our drift to them.
Think about it - tamils have less drift from black, so the genetics are not trying to return to black as much when mixing. this is why when u mix black plus tamil, the effect is much more middle ground - kamala doesnt have kinky hair.
Now mix swede and a nigerian. 90% of the time, if not always, its kinky hair. why ??because blonde hair is even bigger drift from baseline, so when mixed, gets overriden by baseline even harsher.
these bigger drifts of alleles that cause things like 'whiteness' are actually your body's version of jugaad. its a 'oh shit' make-shift solution to a problem. and thats why when jugaar meets rolls royce, jugaar switches to rolls royce in 1 nano-second, these highly shifted alleles swing hardest back to baseline when they mix with hotep.

This can only happen, if origin is with hotep and we are mostly hotep underneath.
 
GaudaNaresh said:
yes. but this is also quite interesting coz we hardly have any neanderthal remains and sites IN India.
people may seethe, people may cope, but at the end of the day, we are ALL black hoteps with teeny tiny mixture with some other apes outside africa.
This is why whenever we mix with black hoteps, our offsprings are closer closer to black hoteps DEPENDING on how closer is our drift to them.
Think about it - tamils have less drift from black, so the genetics are not trying to return to black as much when mixing. this is why when u mix black plus tamil, the effect is much more middle ground - kamala doesnt have kinky hair.
Now mix swede and a nigerian. 90% of the time, if not always, its kinky hair. why ??because blonde hair is even bigger drift from baseline, so when mixed, gets overriden by baseline even harsher.
these bigger drifts of alleles that cause things like 'whiteness' are actually your body's version of jugaad. its a 'oh shit' make-shift solution to a problem. and thats why when jugaar meets rolls royce, jugaar switches to rolls royce in 1 nano-second, these highly shifted alleles swing hardest back to baseline when they mix with hotep.

This can only happen, if origin is with hotep and we are mostly hotep underneath.
Click to expand...
i dont think mixture result of different races solve this mistery....otherwise scientist already concluded this nd stop their work in researching about genes etc. nd give final conclusion about it. 😂😝
 
vin pahadi (kumauni) said:
i dont think mixture result of different races solve this mistery....otherwise scientist already concluded this nd stop their work in researching about genes etc. nd give final conclusion about it. 😂😝
Click to expand...
do u understand resolution ?
naked chicks ? Ya ? Ok. Put it this way. Genetic science has progressed enough for u to know that this is naked pamela anderson spread eagle pic but with 1980s pixel ratio.
Just coz u scientist and u know its naked pamela anderson spread eagle 1980s pixel ratio, doesnt mean u stop research to make picture 4k pixel 2025 pixel ratio.
we know we are all hotep. that is the 1980s palema anderson. what exactly is the extent of hotepness and whether she got hair transplant for eyebrows or has her og hair, aka mixed non hotep or not, we yet need to find out.
Ab ayi baat samajh mein ?
 
The Juggernaut said:
Depopulate Canada? I think Liberals will win in elections.
Click to expand...
Canadians are not crazy. Canada has one shtick in military. We make excellent snipers and scouts and occasionally, combat air force peoples. pretty much all the longest kill shots, longest scouting records fo the last 40-50 years of NATo people is muh canuckle-heads.
So Canada going to send troops means Canada sends 186 people who will fight, do excellently, run the hell back to canada at slightest hint of trouble and count KPD.
This is Canada's ROO-AA for afghanistan for eg or korea or ww2. We make good scout+logistic planner + sniper. The end.

Liberal win in Canada seems very unlikely, even with Jaggu bhai's support. Basically NDP is collapsing in support, it will go down in seats by as much as 25-33% is prediction o all sources.

Alberta+prairies are kattar Conservative, so that is gone, Quebec will go expected normal route - 75% BQ, 20% Liberal and 5% conservative. Ontario is polling neck and neck for Libbu-con and ndp wiped out, with con slightly ahead but that is also normal.
What is abnormal to the outside eye/polling trend,is the silent western bro of the group- BC- has flipped HARDCORE conservative. Cons are expected to take at least 80% of BC seats. THAT is what is making it 'gg trudeau' given that BC hasnt voted conservative in federal election since our moms and dads were like teenagers coz BC is the ultimate west coast hippie mecca.
But this is also because NDP wrecked little businesses in BC with their stupid dehati tax raises and Libbus ARE completely exposed for having Chinku puppet connection IN BC because guess what ? Richmond, BC is the ground zero for China gate/warp portal into Canada. That is like noida to Vancouver's delhi, fyi.

This is why we all here from canada said that jaggu bhai and captain blackface were BOTH trying to paddle so hard with the india interference smokescreen to save em from China corrruption scandal and it works for the most part, but NOT IN GROUND ZERO OF CHICOMNADA. duh. the dam has burst from what i hear from people there.
BC people want trudeao out, coz they are too fed up with chicom millionaires buying mansions in vancouver and parking chicom black money there and turning even literal jhopris of vancouver with plaster falling off the walls into 1.5 million dollar homes and therefore city is dying.
 
Last edited:
GaudaNaresh said:
do u understand resolution ?
naked chicks ? Ya ? Ok. Put it this way. Genetic science has progressed enough for u to know that this is naked pamela anderson spread eagle pic but with 1980s pixel ratio.
Just coz u scientist and u know its naked pamela anderson spread eagle 1980s pixel ratio, doesnt mean u stop research to make picture 4k pixel 2025 pixel ratio.
we know we are all hotep. that is the 1980s palema anderson. what exactly is the extent of hotepness and whether she got hair transplant for eyebrows or has her og hair, aka mixed non hotep or not, we yet need to find out.
Ab ayi baat samajh mein ?
Click to expand...
look i understand scientist hv enough reason to draw conclusions about africa is home to early humans. from genetic diversity present in africa than other places etc.
but some questions still raises about this theory:-
creation.com

‘Out of Africa’ theory problems are growing

Traditional 'Out of Africa' ideas about human evolution are collapsing under new fossil and genetic data.
creation.com creation.com
so i m still open for new advancement nd discoveries about it. we see time to time how science theories proof wrong time to time. how many times we see modification nd addition in scientific theories.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

haldilal
Döner Kebab Republic of Turkey: Idiotic Musings
Replies
16
Views
807
FalconSlayers
FalconSlayers
Satish Sharma Ji
North American Puppet State- Idiotic Musings
Replies
15
Views
1K
Nutcracker
Nutcracker
fire starter
  • Sticky
Sinking State of Bangladesh: Idiotic Musings
108 109 110
Replies
2K
Views
155K
GaudaNaresh
G
haldilal
Failed Terrorist State of Pakistan: Idiotic Musings
222 223 224
Replies
4K
Views
348K
Corvus Splendens
Corvus Splendens
bong
Oogabooga Musings from SEA
Replies
3
Views
487
crazywithmath
C

Latest Replies

Featured Content

Trending Threads

Share this Site

Back
Top