Re: Race - why & when

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Resampling Stats: "Papers on resampling wanted <P03015b>"
• Previous message: Don Forbush: "North American discoveries of Mammouth remains"

Okay, I'll take a stab at this one.

What about this: what most people call "race," signified by
skin color, hair color & texture, etc. etc. seem most likely
to be adaptations to climactic conditions occuring over periods
of many thousands of years. Those peoples who've lived in hotter,
sunnier areas, such as Africa, for so long a time would need to
evolve darker skins to deflect some of the sun's harmful rays,
while those peoples who've spent many thousands of years evolving
in cold, not-so-sunny ragions, like Scandinavia, would need to
have lighter skin to absorb as much sun as possible.

Something like this--which is what _I_ was taught in the '70s.
Is this still considered good science to teach 9th graders?
Does anyone have a "better" explanation of why we all aren't
the same shade of green?

David, browsing layman

--

---

If you don't like this post | "Freedom's just another word

then DON'T read my next one!|  for nuthin' left to lose"

Simple enough for you? Huh? |          -Kris Kristofferson






 Next message: Resampling Stats: "Papers on resampling wanted <P03015b>"
 Previous message: Don Forbush: "North American discoveries of Mammouth remains"