What a racist top illustration.
1) If you avg. the colors of all humans it is not the light shade that is shown
2) Seems to imply lighter skin shade = smarter
(The article, however, is great)
1) If you avg. the colors of all humans it is not the light shade that is shown
2) Seems to imply lighter skin shade = smarter
(The article, however, is great)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27722154
What matters is just grabbing some pitchforks and cancelling someone.
Ugh. These people actively look for “racism” in everything and scream for attention/approval from the woke mob when they think they’ve found it.
> Any positive depiction
That's not 'someone'.
Downvotes are supposed to be a tool for filtering out spam, off-topic comments, links to malware and scams. They're used to cancel people for having an opinion that differs from the group.
In this case apparently the group disagrees what the function of melanin is.
1. Amount of environmental sunlight (latitude).
2. Amount of circumstantial exposure to sunlight (lifestyle).
If the assumption is that early humans have lived more outdoors than sitting in caves all day like the modern human does in practice, then yes they'll have darker skin overall.
Is it racist to just state basic facts, or should we brainwash everything to be uniform and average across time and space?
We do not really know how dark or light early hominids were.
There are dietary sources of Vitamin D and it's produced via Sun exposure. Folate levels are reduced by sunlight exposure. And there are dietary sources. So the two are in conflict vis sun exposure.
Because of the mild climate you can grow grains in northern Europe. That diet is low in Vitamin D and high in folatess. As a result Northern Europeans rapidly lost the ability to produce melanin over the last 5000 years.
On the other hand there are no black skinned native Americans because the founding population had already lost some of the genes needed.