MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Red Hair: The Product of Race Mixing (and Sea Travel) (Life Sciences)
Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
N R Scott


In: Middlesbrough
View user's profile
Reply with quote

I have a new theory, it's a little counter intuitive, but here goes.

Red hair in humans pops up when you have populations that have a lot of genetic diversity in regard skin and hair colour. In the natural scheme of things you have a spectrum - from light hair, eyes and skin in the extreme north to very black hair, eyes and skin at the equator. With all populations falling somewhere on this light/dark spectrum. However, when you get populations that jumble all this up because of long distance travel (especially sea travel) between far distant lands then you get red hair randomly popping up.

So for example, the British Isles has a lot of red hair because it's perfectly positioned between the light-haired Nordic regions and the dark-haired Med/North African regions. So most Irish people for example will have both African and Scandinavian ancestors in their family due to these trade routes. So they have a bigger gene lottery.

Likewise, the spike in redheads seen in Russia is no doubt a consequence of the trade routes in the east between the Middle East and the Nordic North.
Send private message
N R Scott


In: Middlesbrough
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Red hair is generally viewed as being especially white, but actually a lot of its aspects are quite mixed. Freckles are dots of brown skin on white skin. Hazel eyes are a mixture of blue and brown. Green eyes are intermittent between blue and brown.

Normally most people will marry someone from the neighbouring tribe or village, who will be on a similar part of the light/dark spectrum to themselves. So there's normally not much room for random variation in the appearance of offspring. Plus travelling long distances across land is difficult as it means travelling through potentially hostile territory. Once you have sea travel though you have the potential for people to meet other people who look very different to themselves. Meaning a bigger palette of options for the offspring and more random mixes of the light and dark genes.

This would explain why there are no "red-haired nations" anywhere in the world, and why red hair is always a minority variation even in populations where it's more prominent. It might also explain why there are so many royals from history with red hair. As again, unlike the normal folk marrying local people from the neighbouring village, royals are often hooking up with foreign princes and princesses. Meaning, again, more variation.
Send private message
N R Scott


In: Middlesbrough
View user's profile
Reply with quote

I probably haven't explained my thinking too well there. So just to give an illustration of the light/dark spectrum I'll split the world in regions from north/cold to south/hot.


Region A: Polar north. Light blond hair, very white skin, light blue eyes.

Region B: Less north. Mousey-blond hair, white skin, dark blue eyes.

Region C: Midway: Brown hair, light brown skin, grey/brown eyes*

Region D: Further south: Dark brown hair, dark brown skin. Dark brown eyes.

Region E: Equatorial south. Black hair, skin and eyes.

(*I'm cheating a little by magically blending blue eyes into dark grey-brown eyes, but I haven't quite figure that part out yet.)


So normally due to limitations of travel someone from Region A would only have offspring with someone from Region A or Region B. Meaning the offspring would be blond, light-skinned, blue-eyed, or perhaps ever so slightly darker than that (i.e. slightly further down the scale). Same with all the other regions, only interacting with the regions next door to them.

However, once you have Region A people meeting Region E people then all hell breaks loose and strange variations pop up due to the sheer range of options. Sure, 9 out of 10 offspring may look something like Region C people, but 1 in 10 may have the luminosity of blond hair, but mixed with a darker tone not normally seen in standard blondes (red hair). Or eyes that are some strange mixture of bright blue and dark brown (hazel eyes).
Send private message
Hatty
Site Admin

In: Berkshire
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Region A: Polar north. Light blond hair, very white skin, light blue eyes.

Not an accurate description of reindeer herders in the circumpolar north. You wouldn't need a scenario of Region A meeting Region E for your light/dark spectrum to work.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Pretty impressive, Captain Scott.

As far as I know, red hair is treated as a normal recessive gene originating in a mutation of another one (which one, brown or blond, do they know?). Though I suppose -- since red hair and the 'translucent' skin that goes with it (how does that work genetically?) is considered unlucky and is certainly to some extent disadvantational medically -- we should not rule out that red hair is the original and the other, more favoured forms are mutations of it. After all, isn't that how evolution by natural selection is supposed to work?
Send private message
N R Scott


In: Middlesbrough
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Hatty wrote:
Not an accurate description of reindeer herders in the circumpolar north. You wouldn't need a scenario of Region A meeting Region E for your light/dark spectrum to work.

That's a good point. I've been ignoring Oriental people (East Asians and Eskimos - they all look similar/the same in my opinion) simply because they don't fit my theory. I don't understand why they seem so immune to red or blonde hair. Especially given they do live in the northern regions. Even amongst mixed European/East Asian children it seems very uncommon. Whereas everywhere else red and blonde hair does pop up. If infrequently. You only have to type in "black people red hair" to see plenty of freckly, red/blonde-haired people of part-African descent.

As for blue eyes, I've been speculating that they're a product of the long dark winters. The eyes of Arctic Reindeer turn blue in the winter.

https://slate.com/technology/2013/10/arctic-reindeer-change-eye-color-blue-eyes-help-them-see-during-the-long-dark-winter.html

Also Husky dogs have blue eyes.

As for why Scandinavians have blue eyes and Eskimos don't I'm not sure. It could be that Scandinavians are settled and live through the winter, whereas Eskimos migrate around. Also, given they look so "Chinese" perhaps they're more recent arrivals. Again though, you do get red hair in Russia where east meets west. So if I limit my "polar" region to Northern European people it still kinda works.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

The eyes of Arctic Reindeer turn blue in the winter

Interesting. I seem to remember that (human) babies do this but the other way round. Or something. The reason I raise the point is that domestication appears to have a lot to do with prolonging the juvenile stage into adult life.

Also Husky dogs have blue eyes

But, we also speculated in Megalithic Empire, that it has a lot to do with selecting animals as pets and doing so on the basis of the "Oh, isn't that cute" factor eg no to eagle owls, yes to barn owls. Wolves have rather repellent yellow eyes, don't they? So when the odd blue-eyed one comes along...
Send private message
N R Scott


In: Middlesbrough
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mick Harper wrote:
red hair and the 'translucent' skin that goes with it (how does that work genetically?) is considered unlucky and is certainly to some extent disadvantational medically

I would guess that the very white translucent skin associated with red hair is no more white and translucent than the skin of very fair blonde-haired people. I think it's just that the browness of the freckles amplifies the sense of whiteness. I have dark reddish-brown hair and freckles and my skin still tans. In the summer my exposed arms go brown in comparison to the rest of my body, but because the brown tanning is nowhere near the dark browness of the freckles the arms look white on their own with nothing else to compare them to.

I would guess it's more the freckles themselves that carry the sense of unluckiness and medical disadvantage. Being a literal sign of impurity and imperfection. It might also be why red hair is traditionally viewed as a sign of sexual licentiousness. As it's evidence of race-mixing.

we should not rule out that red hair is the original and the other, more favoured forms are mutations of it

This is why I feel I might actually be on to something with this, as it's not what I wanted to believe. I started out looking for an original. Hoping there'd be some long lost glorious red-haired civilisation somewhere in the past. I wasn't hoping to find out I'm a mongrel.
Send private message
N R Scott


In: Middlesbrough
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mick Harper wrote:
The reason I raise the point is that domestication appears to have a lot to do with prolonging the juvenile stage into adult life.

Domestication is also where you see a lot of colour variation in animals. Normal species have their fixed colours, but cats, dogs, cattle and horses tend to come in all the same hair/fur colours that humans do. So perhaps red hair, blonde hair and all the varying eye colours are a consequence of Europeans domesticating themselves in a sense by building western civilisation.
Send private message
N R Scott


In: Middlesbrough
View user's profile
Reply with quote

N R Scott wrote:
I wasn't hoping to find out I'm a mongrel.

Ha, I've just read that back. Didn't mean it to sound quite so dry. No chance I'll ever get a job at No. 10 now. Especially when coupled with the rest of it

(East Asians and Eskimos - they all look similar/the same in my opinion)

At least I'll be able to play the mixed-race card.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

East Asians and Eskimos - they all look similar/the same in my opinion

While we're being racist, I should point out that there is one 'race' that doesn't get much of a mention consisting of Eskimos, Hairy Ainu, native Siberians, various 'hill tribes' of south Asia, Polynesians, Red Indians, Maoris and Australian aborigines that appear to be 'different' from Black, White and Oriental -- and possibly from one another.

The problem here is that they all seem immune to cultural development and are a standing objection to the 'we are all the same under the skin' arguments of multicultural orthodoxy. I might have to shift 'Black' into that column depending on whether Dom's mate is right about the fifteen IQ points. And the Orientals. And some of the Whites don't pass muster either. In fact just us blue-eyed blonds really. Sorry, Scottie, red-haired people need not apply.
Send private message
Boreades


In: finity and beyond
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mick Harper wrote:
Maoris


Ah, that reminds me. There's a place called New Zealand in Wiltshire. A tiny hamlet it is, to be sure, but there it is, right next to Lyneham airfield. Someone (elsewhere) commented it should have a dual language sign 'cos, from the Maori perspective, Aotearoa is the original name.

Fool that I am, speaking before thinking, I asked
What was it called by the native population before the Maori arrived?


I got a chastising reply:
Captain James Cook described the inhabitants of New Zealand as Polynesian, and subsequent archaeological, and academic, research over the last 100 years indicates that to be true. Conspiracy theories to the contrary are lacking evidence, and propagated by some people who should ( and probably do) know better


I did say how sorry I was
Oh dear, sorry to read the old "academic" excuse. Which means university intelligentsia repeating the orthodoxy they learnt when they were students. With the usual casual arrogance that native oral traditions - from the Maori themselves - are not be trusted by patronising white folk.


Here's one piece of the "lacking" evidence, from the Ngäti Hotu people (pre-Maori).

Chapter One Preview: One Woman's Battle for Recognition of Ngäti Hotu - By Monica Matamua
In the traditions of Ngäti Tüwharetoa of Taupö, Ngati Hotu were an aboriginal people living in that area at a time when the people of Tüwharetoa i te came to live in the lands claimed by their ancestor Tia. It was thought the original people took the name Ngäti Hotu to be spared from being destroyed by the Tainui and Te Arawa peoples. One story among the Tainui people says that Kupe found these islands inhabited by a short, light-skinned whose tribes were named Türehu-türangi, Pokepoke-wai, Hä-moamoa, Patu-paiarehe and Türehe. Monica's ancestors were here too, the Urukehu often mentioned by early historians and connected with the legendary Türehu people.


The rest of chapter one is here:
https://www.elocal.co.nz/Articles/2636
I have a transcript of the full Chapter One for anyone interested.

What's the significance? Ngäti Hotu were often red haired or fair haired, with green or blue eyes, certainly not a Maori characteristic.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

M J Harper in An Unreliable History of the Second World War wrote:
Minorities are a problem for all societies. ‘Favouring one’s own’ is built in at the genetic level for all living things (to protect the genes) but genetic plurality also has to be built in (to protect the genes from a lack of diversity) so all species are ‘societies’ holding the ring for these two conflicting requirements. Human societies included, and as a general rule the more sophisticated a society the better able it is to maintain pluralities.

Not the least shocking thing about the Nazi Holocaust (actually holocausts) is that Germany 1933-45 was a very sophisticated society. In many ways the most sophisticated in human history at the time. Or, as the Nazis would put it, the most advanced when it comes to controlling the gene pool for the benefit of that society. Nor were they the only sophisticated people keen on ‘eugenics’. It was all the rage.

Minorities have something to answer for as well. Since they are always unpopular they have a duty to ‘fit in’ if they know what’s good for them. But they have genes of their own to protect. It can also pay to be a member of a minority, even a persecuted one. This is the Etna Principle: do you farm the rich slopes of the volcano knowing that sooner or later all you have, and occasionally you yourself, will be swept away in a cataclysm? Most minorities, given the choice, prefer membership of their minority and accept intolerance as their lot.

Pressures to conform from the majority do not ordinarily reach the point of ‘Conform or die’ but German Nazis were a step-change worse than Spanish Inquisitors in not offering the choice.
Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic

Jump to:  
Page 1 of 1

MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group