Supposedly Euro light skin genes are popular in all Caucasins and exists in about all Humans

[Fire Haired]

Europeans on top, western Mid easterns on bottom. Even though there is a obvious skin color and sometimes hair and eye color difference between Europeans and mid easterns. The genes that are suppose to be the source for European pale skin are just about as popular in western mid eastern people around Palestine and Iraq.
http://m.ruvr.ru/204/544/1234/saam.jpghttp://static2.stuff.co.nz/1346411168/777/7591777.jpg
http://www.state.gov/cms_images/030408_happy.jpghttp://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01477/shoe_1477512c.jpg

Click here (http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/24/3/710.long) It is a study that was trying to prove pale skin in Europeans and east Asians is unrelated and evolved seperatly which they did. When they tested native people from around the world. For the genes that are suppose to be very important for creating pale skin in Europeans. They found out those genes are almost as popular in Middle easterns and north Africans as Europeans which makes me think it does not effect skin color that much. I did not understand why Wikpedia and SNPedia kept stubbornly saying those genes are only European and are very young that they spread acroos Europe only 6,000-12,000ybp. But now Wikpedia has finally updated and says they are major in created pale skin in west Eurasia(meaning middle east and Europe) i dont think they included north Africa even though it is just as popular there.

Here is a map Wikipedia has of SLC24A5 rs1426654 with alles A,A. All Humans have SLC4A5 rs1426654 but the major difference is if they have G,G, A,A, or A,G. The reason it is popular in North and south America is not because of Native Americans. They tested Puerto Ricans, African Americans, Hispanic Americans. U can see that the gene is kind of half half or 25% in Hispanic and Mexicans because they have pretty big amounts of Iberian blood and then also Native American it is hard to sy which they have more of i would guess native american. For African Americans it defintley has a presence it does not exactly tell how much British blood they have only that they have some.

I really have no idea how to explain why the san in deep south Africa have about 25% when all types of DNA tests show they are about 100% the same thing with no European or other Caucasian blood. It is also in east Africans like Ethopians who do have alot of Caucasian blood from around Arabia. Then it pops up in west Africans and some east asians, and Oceania. I guess African Americans could have brought some from Africa.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/Ala111Thr_allele_frequency_distribution0.png/550px-Ala111Thr_allele_frequency_distribution0.png

Here is a map of TYR A192C from the study i mentioned before which has also been associated with pale skin in Europeans. U can see it exists in almost only Caucasins it is about as popular in western mid easterns as it is in Europeans.
http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/24/3/710/F3/graphic-5.medium.gif

i think you guys can get what i am saying by now. The genes that have been belived to cause pale skin in Europeans is just about as popular in all Caucasins around the mid east and north africa and even non Caucasins in south India(Phenotype and globe13 aust dna shows they are close relatives to Caucasin family), some sub sharen Africans, and Oceania have these genes. This shows these supposbly white skinned genes dont always cause pale skin and they probably go pretty far back to the first humans.

They obviously are pretty popular in Caucasians i am now skeptical if they really cause skin to be that pale. I bet they help at least a little bit. If they do help cause pale skin what it shows is that Pale skin in Europeans did not devlope in Europe. They already had the genes at almost the same rate they do today when their ancestors arrived in Europe. I guess it would take time for those genes to become completly dominte in EUropeans ancestors then they would have spread acroos Europe which probably was not habited or who ever lived there bloodline does not exist anymore. Pale skin did not just randomley spread acroos europe if u think about that it is a little crazy. How a entire contient could randomley go from being brown skin to white skinned 6,000-12,000ybp when it was already densly populated. There would be signs in genetics of a group of people spreading acroos europe and eventulley all the other bloodlines died off.

There is no doubt that Europeans ancestors orignalley like 50,000-70,000ybp had the same skin color as other Caucasians in the mid east aand north Africa. The switch to completely pale skin could have happened before they migrated to Europe. Because ethnic groups around the Caucus like Geograins all kinds of DNA like aust dna have shown they have extremely little to no European blood less than Iranians or Indians but they literally are about as pale as Europeans. And it is not rare to for them to have light eyes or light hair. There is evidence that blue eys also orignated in the mid east not Europe. Since the percentages of the ancestral allele and the derived alle of blue eyes is diff in Europeans and mid easterns showing that mid easterns did not get their blue eye genes from European inter marriage. There is no doubt that the high amounts of light hair and eyes in Europeans happened when they were in Europe so i think they did have to adapt to Europe by becoming paler at least alittle bit. The age estimates for pale skin spreading to Europe as being 6,000-12,000ybp is way to recent. The best i have heard is 11,000-19,000ybp which makes some sense since there were tons of migrations out of southern Refuges in Europe at that time after the last ice age ended 19,000ybp. The prediction for blonde hair i heard was 11,00ybp that is still to recent in my opinon but kind of connects to when they think pale skin spread and the end of the last ice age.

since the mid east has been on the news so much since like the 1990's. Now westerners can see what those people look like. I have always been surprised by how European they look when they have western cloths. Their leaders obviously try to be modern and wear all European stuff and honestly they look really white. I know that they are brown skinned but there is no doubt some do have pale skin like Europeans and it comes from the same source.

Just look at some of these photos of Mid eastern people wearing totally western cloths.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-bMs2EoiYnmo/T9sREq00j0I/AAAAAAAAAAs/tHsMCWSYiss/s320/Syrian+government.jpghttp://blogs.guardian.co.uk/news/archives/maliki.jpghttp://www.iran-press-service.com/ips/bm~pix/ahmadi-14~s600x600.jpg

[Shah-Jehan]

What is the conclusion of this thread?:bored:

[Krampus]

we dont know

[Fire Haired]

My cocclsuion is the genes that are suppose to cause pale skin in Europeans dont exactley always cause pale skin. I doubt they have a big effect. Also the age estimates that the those genes were born in Europe only 20,000ybp are not true. Since they are just about as popular in other Caucasians in the mid east and north Africa. It is true that there are some pale skinned mid easterns and north africans and that they get their paleness from the same source as Europeans do. Europeans ancestors 50,000-70,000ybp would have had the same skin color as mid easterns and north africans today but the pale skin stuff was already in them just less popular. At some point Europeans had to become pale it could have happened before they migrated to Europe since ethnic groups around the Caucus like Georgians are pretty much as pale as Europeans but have a little to no European blood according to aust dna which is suppose to tell ur full ancestry.

I also think the age sestimates to how old European paleness are way to recent. There is no way pale skin could have spread acroos Europe only 6,000-12,000ybp when Europe had been densely populated and there had been people there for over 40,000 years by that time. Aust dna has shown all Europeans go back to a Paleothic family Cro magnon were just humans that lived in Europe during the Paleolithic age over 11,000ybp. This Paleolithic family is the source of completely pale skin in Europeans and high amounts of light hair and eyes. When humans for the first time spread out all over Europe they would have already been pale skinned and had alot of light hair and eyes. Maybe there were families in Europe that died out while the one Europeans come from is the only to survive. Ancient DNA in Europe some of it is over 30,000 years old kind of show that they probably were in the same family as modern Europeans. Aust DNA from 7,000 years old hunter gather in Spain showed he had more European blood than almost all modern Europeans. So at the most recent pale skin and light hair and eyes spread across Europe i think 11,000-19,000ybp since that hunter gather in Spain mtDNA haplogroup was common in mtDNA samples in Europe from that time.

I think the more pigmentation genes they get from pre historic Europeans will show that these pale skin and light hair and eye colors are alot older than the estimates.

[Tropico]

Woop Puerto Rico got a lot.

[Fire Haired]

It does not tell how much Spanish blood is in puerto Rico because if a people group without these genes inter marries with Spainish even if they are like 20% Spainish the A,A allies will pop up alot.

[Fire Haired]

I am wondering if anyone has an opinion on what skin color the first humans or just the Human family all humans today come from there could have been others. Since Oceania people have the same black skin as sub sharen Africans even though they are unrelated possibly just as related to sub afro's as all non Africans are. It would make sense that is the skin color the first humans have. Mongliods and Oceania accroding to aust DNA, y dna and mtdna haplogroups are in the same family makes sense since both live in eastern Asia and austriilla is pretty far east. 42,000 year old mtDNA and other type of DNA in China shows mongliod and Oceania had split for probably over 10,000 years by that time. I would guess they split over 60,000 years ago but why do all Mongliods have straight hair and brown, reddish, and pale skin.

For the Caucasian family they probably come orignalley from the same non African family has Mongliod Oceania do but maybe not. Caucasians stayed in the mid east and 60,000-70,000ybp would look exactly like modern mid easterns and north Africans. So brown skinned some times pale. They also would have had alot of brown hair unlike everyone else in the world who has all black hair. Indians well DRavidens are kind of their own family. Since they have the same skull shape, body and facial hair, ahir texture and body build as Caucasians it would make sense those are their closest relatives. But in mtDNA and Y DNA haplogroups they group with Mongliod Oceania and in aust dna they are a little more related to Mongliod Oceania than Caucasians. Since they have some of those supposedly European pale skin genes probably means they are more related to Caucasians. Their skin color is pretty black or dark brown but that could be adaption to India but orgignalley they had skin color like Caucasians in the mid east and north africa.

My best guess is black skin, 2nd brown to reddish, 3rd brown to white.