|
Post by dragonfly on Feb 27, 2004 16:06:34 GMT -5
Skin colour is genetic !.All our physical characteristics are expressed through gene selection.(there is a wealth of information available on this topic)
It is very easy to find examples of this in the general community. For instance I have a female friend with white skin who married a man with dark black skin. They have 4 children with intermediate brown skin and a wonderful mixture of facial features.
More interestingly I have a female friend whos mother was Indian and a father who was English....she had very light skin. She married a man with dark skin ....however his father was of Jamaican descent but his mother was Irish. They had two children .One white and one black .
Simpler still is the fact that two white people with only white ancestory will only produce white children (disregarding the rare possibility of a genetic mutation).
As to the discrepancies in the Christian bible....they are the result of human error, translation difficulties, the fact that so much of it was written so long after the events described and also how those events were interpreted. The bible represents the combination of the human mind and society of the time it was written .....also many of the stories contained within are allergories and not literal.
I have said this before....the oppposite of an atheist is not Christian as many visitors to this site assume.There are many religious beliefs. Saying "your so called god" only refers to one.
|
|
|
Post by AntiReligion0000 on Feb 29, 2004 15:26:04 GMT -5
carly this wasn't a attack on christian's it was just a statement showing one of many reasion's why christianity is wrong i don't hate all christians just the ones who judge me by the music i listen to the way i dress or because i am atheist. this post wasn't ment to offend christian's in anyway if i wanted to insult them id just make a post saying there a bunch of ignorant moron's but i wouldn't because steroi typing is stupid. theres smart christians there dumb ones theres smart atheists theres dumb atheist's you cant steroi type people by what they belive or the color of there skin or anything.
|
|
|
Post by nonny on Mar 4, 2004 9:48:02 GMT -5
Melationan is what causes skin color, so it is the different mixtures of levels of melationan that cuases skin color.
|
|
Jewel
Broken-in Plebe
I don't want the world, I just want your half.
Posts: 80
|
Post by Jewel on Apr 7, 2004 12:44:42 GMT -5
I always thought there were a whole bunch of ppl in the "beginning" & that Adam & Eve were just 2 of them. Otherwise, Cain & Abel would've had to have sex w/ their mother in order to foster more children. Or perhaps Adam & Eve had more kids...? That sounds silly. Almost as silly as believing in a "virgin birth." Goofy stuff. Jewel
|
|
|
Post by Narninian on Apr 9, 2004 9:49:40 GMT -5
Race is a myth - The concept of race didnt start until scientists started looking at it in the 18th century, they tried to categorize humans into 3 races, mongoloid, caucasion and Negroid. Its not as simple as that.
Current Anthropologists and scientists realize that their is only one human race. People in isolated communities will start to look similar simply because of the limited gene pool. If we took all the people from say, New York City - put them in an isolated island for centuries upon centuries - their offspring would all start to look alike - would they be a seperate race - no? They would probably have a distinct look if you compared them to the rest of the world.
In regards to the Adam and Eve Story - While some Christians take the bible literally - most take it as a guidline of the truth. Some symbolic meanings. Fables to guide your life.
|
|
|
Post by Griffey on Apr 14, 2004 20:24:39 GMT -5
OK, so what's the exact definition of "race?" As I understand it, it's a distinctive variation within a species without reaching the level of seperate species (or even subspecies). In that case, I think it would be safe to say that there are different races, just how general or specific you want to be would cause problems. But is my definition screwed up or am I using something that doesn't apply here? OT: There's this one dude whose book I've read who thinks that there are 6 races: Aboriginal Australians, Pygmies, Khoisan, whites, blacks, and Asians. Way to be ultra-specific in some cases and ultra-general in others! I think he's messed up. And not a great writer.
|
|
|
Post by Narninian on Apr 18, 2004 0:06:42 GMT -5
Some Dogs have white hair, some dogs have black hair - some dogs have curly hair, some dogs have straight hair, some dogs grow up to be huge while other dogs are 1/6 of the size, some dogs are inherently vicious, some dogs tend to be more intelligent.
How many 'races' of dogs are there? - 1.
There are many different "Purebred" breeds of dogs - they aren't different races however. Humans can't be defined as simply as this either- While dogs breeding have been controlled - humans in geograpic areas tend to look alike from lots of interbreeding(not incest mind you but keeping the gene pool the same in a certain area). There are no 'Purebred' humans simply because of the nature of the world.
The variation in humans is extremely small when compares to other species.
|
|
|
Post by Hilly on Apr 18, 2004 9:37:25 GMT -5
There are many different "Purebred" breeds of dogs - they aren't different races however. Humans can't be defined as simply as this either- While dogs breeding have been controlled - humans in geograpic areas tend to look alike from lots of interbreeding(not incest mind you but keeping the gene pool the same in a certain area). There are no 'Purebred' humans simply because of the nature of the world. Hitler and Himmler had a different idea I think.
|
|