Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Vitor
Are you sure?
Absolutely not right!
look here and make your own conclusions!
Trying to give skin pigmentation the most important factor for genetic correlation, is like trying to make assumption based on the most enviroment choosen genes.
Doesn't work.
Migration from the north?
1- South was allways more populated, there was not enough "nordic" people to change the genetic background of the southern people, even if there were massive migrations.
2-there was no one in the north 12000 years ago
I could go on and on... |
Map of Current groups has nothing to do with the situation. I am talking of isolated populations. There maybe more than one group but they happened in the same way and in similar if not same locations. Yes, there was a North 12000 years ago, the ice caps were mainly receded to scandinavia. Yet 10000 years old there was a North that was very much survivable and perhaps these people found a way to adapt and overcome the environment. It's educated guesses.
Your number "1" makes no sense and had nothing to do with what I was talking about. I was saying that as groups with blondism migrated and assimilated with populations to their south, such as my ancestors (Upper Paleolithics in central europe), they mixed and the outcome of such mixing was the creating of groups different groups with varying degrees of blondism and different features depending on the mixture, etc. This is in reply to your assertion that there are varying groups of Nordids.
This was in ancient times, there have been much migration and mixing since then, and now populations aren't isolated like they were back in ancient times.