Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
Genealogical relationships of Presidents of the United States
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,174 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 59102
We can do it ourselves with gene manipulation so thats doable. One could also argue homo sapiens is the outlier compared to other previous hominids. We would definitely be the odd man out at the hominid party. We have chins, relatively flat faces, high foreheads with small browridges and for no real good reason. Skin colour not so much as neandertals were white and carried a red hair and blue eyed gene. Others may have too, but we dont know.mysterious wrote: »Don't forget other Intellegent life can come here and dance and change thing around to really give this evolution bull**** down the potty.
Gene's switch on and off all the time. We can observe this even in living animals, never mind populations. Colours change too. Grey hair isnt grey, it looks it because the melanin cells in the follicle switch off and stop producing melanin. Brown eyes have blue in them but the brown overlays that. Green is a mixture of the two as is hazel. Grey has even less melanin than blue.Switched off lmao. Oh yeah if it were switched off someone turned it off, or the blue eyes come from another humanoid race. How come you don't find blue eyes anywhere else in the world?
I would agree that Europeans are outliers in the human population. We show some interesting external differences. Diverse eye colour. Diverse hair colour and texture and same for skin tones. We were among the first out of Africa, and it seems though there were subsequent migrations Europe was cut off for longer by successive ice ages, so had less mixing. We have the least amount of gene "mothers" and mutations of the major populations. Africans the most and Asians follow. This isolation and low population density increases novel features even over short time periods. We see this in any isolated group. So aliens or atlantis while possible explanations if that is peoples belief, dont require them.
Australia was colonised at least 60,000 years ago. Possibly by one of the earlier migrations out of Africa. A fascinating subject actually. Some researchers looking at the migrations into europe and australia have even lumped native australians closer to caucasians than to asians.http://www.hreoc.gov.au/photo_comp/images/0089_sm.jpg blue eyed native australian. Native Australians can also have light hair and even reddish hair and this was noted early on by europeans. But as Australia is a very high UV climate and less temperate than europe the same selection pressures werent there or there for long enough. Tasmania which would be closer to europe in climate was colonised much later. New Zealand wasnt colonised until much much later. In history times indeed, so no joy there. Overall its also a warmer climate. More like spain or italy or greece, whose populations show less blue eyes anyway(the ancient greeks didnt have a separate name for blonde, until the later celtic invasions from the north). The Chinese and Japanese and Asians in general have much less melanin than native Africans. While the climate can be similar, the populations werent as isolated or for long enough to make changes so blue eyed gene remained recessive. An indication of how recessive it is and how easily it can disappear is (as was mentioned earlier) blue eyes in mixed populations like the US is dying out within a few generations. In 400 years it could be almost gone. In the 10's of 1000's of years we're discussing it would have no hope of surviving in a mixed population. Japan.Interesting one. First colonised 30,000 years ago from asia. Then again another migration 140000 years ago. Some remnant of the original group may be found in the Ainu, who having been there longer are paler skinned and hairier than the Japanese as a whole http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ainu_people So much so that early researchers were convinced they were caucasians. But nope they're genetially asian. so it seems living in that environment started some of the changes we see in europeans.Why didn't it happen in Japan, China, Australia, New Zeland and other temperate zones. I can understand skin going darker in warmer climates. But your point is still not correct overall.You mean Vitamin D???
:o:o OOPs! 
Yep. Guilty as charged.Reptiles have mixed coloured eyes, but you will never see a proper blue eyed animal.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/18/23725015_2430393ead.jpg
http://www.cvm.missouri.edu/SCAAZV/images/lemurs/blue-eyed%20black%20lemur.jpg
http://www.solarnavigator.net/animal_kingdom/animal_images/Cat_white_fur_blue_eyes.jpg (you'll note white fur, low melainin)
http://www1.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/6899875/2/istockphoto_6899875-blue-eyed-cat.jpg (here just blue eyes)
http://images03.olx.com/ui/1/31/41/12133041_1.jpg
http://fc07.deviantart.net/fs44/i/2009/133/6/8/Blue_eyed_polar_fox_by_woxys.jpg (dave bowie as a mutt)
http://images03.olx.com/ui/1/59/68/12095168_3.jpg
http://aishagrace.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/86blue-eyed-bengal.jpg
Take your pick
Still doesnt explain the east west bias of blue eyes, if the western parts were populated by blue eyed atlanteansThe Blonde came from Scandinavia, where the Nordic humans settled. The race Germans wanted to recreate, when we were drilled that Darwinism shiite into our heads in schools.Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
0 -
We can do it ourselves with gene manipulation so thats doable. One could also argue homo sapiens is the outlier compared to other previous hominids. We would definitely be the odd man out at the hominid party. We have chins, relatively flat faces, high foreheads with small browridges and for no real good reason. Skin colour not so much as neandertals were white and carried a red hair and blue eyed gene. Others may have too, but we dont know.
Gene's switch on and off all the time. We can observe this even in living animals, never mind populations. Colours change too. Grey hair isnt grey, it looks it because the melanin cells in the follicle switch off and stop producing melanin. Brown eyes have blue in them but the brown overlays that. Green is a mixture of the two as is hazel. Grey has even less melanin than blue.
I would agree that Europeans are outliers in the human population. We show some interesting external differences. Diverse eye colour. Diverse hair colour and texture and same for skin tones. We were among the first out of Africa, and it seems though there were subsequent migrations Europe was cut off for longer by successive ice ages, so had less mixing. We have the least amount of gene "mothers" and mutations of the major populations. Africans the most and Asians follow. This isolation and low population density increases novel features even over short time periods. We see this in any isolated group. So aliens or atlantis while possible explanations if that is peoples belief, dont require them.
Australia was colonised at least 60,000 years ago. Possibly by one of the earlier migrations out of Africa. A fascinating subject actually. Some researchers looking at the migrations into europe and australia have even lumped native australians closer to caucasians than to asians.http://www.hreoc.gov.au/photo_comp/images/0089_sm.jpg blue eyed native australian. Native Australians can also have light hair and even reddish hair and this was noted early on by europeans. But as Australia is a very high UV climate and less temperate than europe the same selection pressures werent there or there for long enough. Tasmania which would be closer to europe in climate was colonised much later. New Zealand wasnt colonised until much much later. In history times indeed, so no joy there. Overall its also a warmer climate. More like spain or italy or greece, whose populations show less blue eyes anyway(the ancient greeks didnt have a separate name for blonde, until the later celtic invasions from the north). The Chinese and Japanese and Asians in general have much less melanin than native Africans. While the climate can be similar, the populations werent as isolated or for long enough to make changes so blue eyed gene remained recessive. An indication of how recessive it is and how easily it can disappear is (as was mentioned earlier) blue eyes in mixed populations like the US is dying out within a few generations. In 400 years it could be almost gone. In the 10's of 1000's of years we're discussing it would have no hope of surviving in a mixed population. Japan.Interesting one. First colonised 30,000 years ago from asia. Then again another migration 140000 years ago. Some remnant of the original group may be found in the Ainu, who having been there longer are paler skinned and hairier than the Japanese as a whole http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ainu_people So much so that early researchers were convinced they were caucasians. But nope they're genetially asian. so it seems living in that environment started some of the changes we see in europeans.:o:o OOPs! Yep. Guilty as charged.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/18/23725015_2430393ead.jpg
http://www.cvm.missouri.edu/SCAAZV/images/lemurs/blue-eyed%20black%20lemur.jpg
http://www.solarnavigator.net/animal_kingdom/animal_images/Cat_white_fur_blue_eyes.jpg (you'll note white fur, low melainin)
http://www1.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/6899875/2/istockphoto_6899875-blue-eyed-cat.jpg (here just blue eyes)
http://images03.olx.com/ui/1/31/41/12133041_1.jpg
http://fc07.deviantart.net/fs44/i/2009/133/6/8/Blue_eyed_polar_fox_by_woxys.jpg (dave bowie as a mutt)
http://images03.olx.com/ui/1/59/68/12095168_3.jpg
http://aishagrace.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/86blue-eyed-bengal.jpg
Take your pick
Still doesnt explain the east west bias of blue eyes, if the western parts were populated by blue eyed atlanteans
A good interesting post that will no doubt be waved off in favour Atlanteans.0 -
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,174 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 59102
Ok yea, but, go back 100 years and suggesting for peer review that the earth was 4 billion years old would have had you laughed out of it. Closer to home. To suggest newgrange was purposely alligned astronomically and built 500 years before the pyramids would have had you sectioned:D To further suggest the Irish werent actually celts may have added a rubber room. The pyramids being built. not by slaves and in under ten years would have raised a laugh that charlie chaplin would have died for. Each generation is convinced it has the keys to the door of truth. They are right, but they can only get the door ajar a little bit. Maybe we can open it much more, but it would be hubristic in the extreme to say we can open it fully and walk through.fontanalis wrote: »A good interesting post that will no doubt be waved off in favour Atlanteans.
Why do I like the CT forum? I read all sorts of mad stuff and connections and interesting coincidences and I fcukin love that. I may not agree with 95.999% of it, but so what? I know I've been wrong about many things in the past, so all Im sure of is that I maybe wrong now, with a small side order of maybe right. Boring is the life lived with others who always agree with you. My take anyway. Though I was nearly apoplectic with the moon hoax thread
Atlantis. OK Good old Plato* mentions it and gives some detail. So what is Atlantis? My humble? It could be many things. It could be(and has good links with) the massive volcanic event on Santorini http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santorini a hub of the very advanced minoan culture(hot and cold running water/sanitation/building methods/2 and three storied houses/ships) which made the greeks of the time look like cavemen. The original shape of the island was a central port, enclosed by a ring of land(the rim of the caldera that would ultimately doom it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minoan_eruption ), similar to how Plato describes atlantis. The catastrophe that overtook Atlantis in short order so that it fell into the sea in a cataclysm would mirror santorini's end too. Also Plato describes the soil types of Atlantis, the red and the black, which is also found on santorini. Its a pretty good mix and if you take the later date he gives as the translation pretty damned close too. That's one take.
Another take would be a race memory of the flooding of low lying lands after the last ice age. Flood and catastrophe and lost land myths are in damn near every culture on earth, as is the noah type story. There's something to it. Its too endemic to be dismissed as ramblings of the ancients. The ancients were just like us and not morons by any stretch. They recounted their history as stories easily remembered by largely unlettered hands. Yes chinese whispers takes over, but observe Muslim scholars who can recall with 100% accuracy the entire Koran from memory. If all the Korans in the world were lost tomorrow, you could rewrite it by listening to these guys. And its not exactly a short book and a bloody complex one too, so I have more faith in oral transmission than many.
So the memory of loss of land and sudden floods, maybe a loss of order and more civilisation and over time that civilisation grows in the mind and the loss of a golden age is more keenly felt, throw in somewhere like santorini, that was an advanced "golden age" and Atlantis may have been born. It doesnt make it less real, indeed in some ways it makes it more real as its a shared human history. Tir na Nog is our own version. Tir na Nog is a good metaphor in some ways. We all lose youth, our own personal golden age that exaggerates in the memory when old and that which we can never return to, so no wonder this idea of a halcyon age, of gilded pleasure and knowledge and then loss holds such a fascination, both personal and cultural.
I wouldnt begrudge nor denigrate that notion, whether personal or cultural to anyone, even if I dont beleive in or maybe know about a "real" Atlantis. In one way Im glad some do.
*who BTW is really worth a read. Gigantic mind on the lad from Athens. If he appears on first impressions over complex and obtuse for the sake of it like too many "thinkers", keep reading. He's not, he really is that complex and profound. When current techno geeks sure of their brilliance read him and other "ancients" they often get a shock. In that I agree with mysterious, wisdom and great minds didnt start 100 years ago.Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
Is it possible that he could have been referring to the British Isles as Atlantis?
Its location, as "beyond the pillars of Hercules" certainly fit. Also when you consider some of the clearly astounding astronomical understanding of the ancients here with newgrange stonehenge etc. It makes sense they would be seen as a very advanced race.
Then if you look at a map of the B.I.'s
You could imagine it forming a 'ring' shape around a larger Isle of Man when the land bridges were there and the tide was lower.
This is just me rambling, but it makes sense to me, what about the volcano part of the story? Is there any volcanos in Ireland/England that have erupted in the past 5,000-10,000 years?0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
Mahatma coat wrote: »yeah, but the legend dosent say, it got a bit damp here and there, it says that the Island/City was submerged.
I've generaly considered Antartica as the best bet meself, Its covered with 'Water' and is fairly in the middle of the ocean.
then you have the Piri Rees map, which regrdless of its origins is still older than any modern knowledge of the coastline
I don't think that the Piri Reis map depicts antartica tbh. I think it is a continuation of S. America, it cenrtainly looks like it when you compare the actual coastline, with the bit thats supposed to be antartica.
Although that map is a very accurate one for its time, remarkably so.0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Advertisement