A list I made of random reconstructed faces.
The french woman (pataud woman) dated 17.000 years ago looks like a mulatto. But the italian caveman dated over 130.000 years ago looks white.
Is the reconstruction of the french woman an example of revisionism in paleontology, or did something weird happen during the 113.000 years that separates them?
>>73332990
These reconstructed faces are art not science. Many of their features were subject to artistic license. We don't actually know what they looked like.
according to ubisoft, this is a central european about 12.000 years ago
>>73332990
the Italian's facial features look more Asian than white, the skin colour is probably not an exact science
>>73332990
The trait for pale skin became prevalent 3-4k years after the end of the ice age and thousands of years after Neanderthal died out and they inherited these pale skinned genes 4,500 years ago when a population from Central Asia near began to invade India Arabia the Mediterranean Europe Asia and finally America.
>>73333512
Thats actually correct norweign manchild.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3027873/How-white-skin-evolved-Europeans-Pale-complexions-developed-region-8-000-years-ago-study-claims.html
http://www.livescience.com/42838-european-hunter-gatherer-genome-sequenced.html
>>73332990
The lightening process of skin color on European continent wasn't finished in all populations until I believe 7500-8000 years ago. Even Pelasgians living in Greece who preceded the 4 tribes constituting Ancient Greek population (Dorians, Ionians, Aeolians and the fourth one that I cba to google now) were darker in skin color and they appeard in Greece only like 5000 years ago. However when the process of skin lightening has finished, in Classical era you had already people over Mediterrean like Alexander the Great who Plutarch described as of "so fair complexion that ruddiness was seen on his skin from his chin to an upper chest area".
>>73332990
its because the italian caveman was part neanderthal.
The neanderthals had lived in europe during the ice age so likely would have had light skin
then after the ice age more homo sapiens came to europe from africa so there could have been some with darker skin than the previous neanderthals
The Italian one is a neanderthal m8 not a human.
All of the paleolithic men in Europe we have found didn't posses the two genes that explain for the most light skin in modern Euros while with the advent of farmers both variants were found(Otzi being the famous example, reason why he is depicted light skinned), this is why it is assumed paleoEuros were brown.
>>73334841
BUILD WALL
>>73335095
#FARMED.COM
>>73332990
>Is the reconstruction of the french woman an example of revisionism in paleontology, or did something weird happen during the 113.000 years that separates them?
Something happened, although it's not too wierd.
You see the Italian caveman was a close relative in the broader sense, but not a modern human, and not an ancestor of anyone living today. His 'people' settled Europe between glacials, lived there for a long time. Their skin certainly turned pale as a result.
Then there was another big glacial that wiped them out. Later still, as that glacial receded, true modern humans, black-skinned, resettled Europe. And, just like the previous population, their skin turned light quite quickly as a result of the climate.
>>73335183
I'm italian you retard.
>>73335338
>I'm italian you retard.
o-ok, you alright m8?
>>73335596
>Revisitionist in a thread about revisionism.
Shouldn't you be boring your cram school students?
>>73332990
how about florida man?
thanks for the replies guys. If I'm going to be a racist, at least its not going to be built on false pretenses of some enormous gap of hundreds of thousands of years of evolution. its just some thousand of years instead
>>73335563
Better now?
>>73333512
I thought the Izila were meant to be migrants from the middle east?
>>73336339
bump
