Was the first human black?
If the first humans were from africa, does that mean “Black Skin” is the “Normal” real human colour, and white is ABNORMAL?
- Anonymous1 month ago
If you subscribe to the "Out of Africa" theory, then "Yes". the first humans needed higher melanin to protect them from damage due to sunlight exposure.
However, the production of melanin carries some evolutionary price in that it takes energy for the body to produce it and at low sunlight latitudes it blocks the sunlight needed by the body to produce vitamin D.
Therefore the less levels of melanin during the ice age & in temperate zones would have evolutionary benefits.
Hence, people come in a variety of melanin levels.
- John PLv 72 months ago
The first humans arose in eastern Africa, with dark skins. I guess that Americans would call them 'black'.
- robert2020Lv 62 months ago
The first people migrated out of Africa, across Suez, then the rest of the world. So the were brown, like the people are today, there. That's the majority of the old world.
The three main racial devisions, came at the extremes of climate. Northern Europe; Sub- Saharan Africa; and north of the Himalayan mountains.
- Anonymous2 months ago
It's just semantics. People nit pick over the term Human. Black people are perfectly Human and can breed with Whites, proving that they're the same species. Anunakki aliens from extraterrestrial space picked up Black humans from Africa, took them to the headwaters of the Tigris-Euphrates, and gene spliced them with their alien dna. This resulted in White people who can breed with either the original Black people or with the Anunakki. There's a mummy from Ur, that of Queen Shub-ad also known as Nin Puabi among the alien Anunakki, brought to the British Museum almost 100 years ago by the British archaeologist Woolley and it has a huge brain pan and is 75 % Human. Technology and Civilisation were transmitted to Whites in Ur and Sumer by the Anunakki aliens.Source(s): Zechariah Sitchin
- What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
- Gray BoldLv 72 months ago
No. Most mammals have light skin that is covered by fur, and biologists believe that early human ancestors started out this way also. Dark skin probably evolved after humans lost their body fur, because the naked skin was vulnerable to the strong UV radiation.
- Anonymous2 months ago
Genesis describes adam .. the first of all human creation.
No, adam was definitely NOT black.
Also, i note that most in the white race are christians .
Compare this to black races .. africa, india, ME .. worship satan, non christian religions.
The yellow race .. rep. by dragon = nephilims = bloodline.
The bible open my eyes !
Well .. well.
- Anonymous2 months ago
Yes. Humans evolved from an ape, which lived in forests and had fur, because the forest is cooler. Our ancestors evolved on the open African savanna, where there are few trees and lots of sunshine. Fur was not needed to stay warm. In fact our ancestor evolved to be almost completely hairless and a lot of sweat glands to help keep us cool to avoid heat strokes. Because of the lack of fur, our ancestors needed the dark pigment eumelanin to block the sun's UV rays from causing skin cancer. Albino Africans are born without eumelanin, and they typically get skin cancer by their early 20s.
Light skin evolved later, when humans migrated out of Africa 60,000 years ago. Some places they migrated to, such as SE Asia and Australia, are similar in climate to Africa so they need dark skin. However, some humans migrated to places with cold climates, such as Europe and north Asia, where they needed to wear clothes or animal skins to stay warm since they were in the middle of the last ice age. The clothing blocks sunlight which is also needed in small amounts to make vitamin D. Vitamin D shortage can result in rickets, which can cause deformed or broken bones, even death. As a result light skin evolved rather quickly among north Asians and Europeans. Because humans have been hunter gatherers until recently, having deformed or broken bones would negatively impact people's ability to hunt. Therefore light skin was absolutely essential for these people living in cold climates. Besides light skin, they also evolved other features that help them conserve body heat, such as more body and facial hair, thin lips, tall and narrow nose bridges, straight hair, short arms and legs, rounded torso, and more fat under the skin. We see these features both in Europeans and in north Asians, such as the Japanese, Koreans, Mongolians and the northern Chinese. Some people living in the tropics, for example SE Asians, Indians, Arabs and North Africans, also have some of these heat conserving traits. They did not evolve them but instead they have ancestors who migrated to those areas, primarily because of population booms in northern China and in the Middle East and Europe after agriculture was invented 10,000 years ago, after the last ice age ended. Another reason is that 24,000 years ago, the ice age reached its maximum and much of Europe were covered by miles thick ice sheets, and many Europeans with cold adapted traits had to migrate to the Middle East to avoid extinction.
- ZirpLv 72 months ago
As far as we can tell, darkbrown or black was the earliest skincolour.
The words "normal" and "abnormal" do not apply
- Anonymous2 months ago
The first hominid was some shade of brown, probably a pale shade if our closest cousins are anything to go by - and then humans got darker which probably saved our species from extinction. The current light-skinnedness of non-black human populations is a young feature. Even blue and green eyes are an older feature than white skin which really blows the minds of racists who can't uncouple the two features. We don't know how black the earliest humans were but looking at the sheer range of skin tone over Africa alone it seems likely that the really dark black that you see in the Congo and Senegal is probably later too. If I were the betting kind I'd put my money on the early humans having "Khoisan" shades of skin.
I've always thought it's really cool how chimps have two tone skin with white and "black" areas.
The thing about spontaneous mutations is that they don't need to be "the best" in order to survive. They just have to not actively kill you and not put someone off breeding with you. Take blue/green eyes for example. According to studies of mitochondrial dna all of us with blue/green eyes descend from a single woman, yet blue eyes spontaneously occur in nature in other mammals every now and again. It makes me wonder if babies whose eyes didn't go brown when expected were put down or left out in the woods due to some superstition like how twins are still destroyed in some backwards parts of the world for being "wrong" and just once some family went against the grain and raised their blue eyed child and something bad didn't happen, in fact maybe something really good happened that the tribe attributed to the blue-eyed baby born around that time, and that girl lived to have children of her own (who were brown eyed because it's recessive) and when the inevitable cousin-shagging resulted in more blue eyes there was a legend in place about "the good thing" that happened because of blue eyes.
I'm quite fond of my white hide but it IS abnormal. I don't mind saying that. For all the talk of easier vitamin D absorbtion being a great advantage I'd like to point out that there are many darker populations who also live their lives unexposed to much direct sunlight from the correct angle who get their vitamin D from other sources. It can't have been such a huge advantage that everyone around the strange pale people were dying like flies by comparison - though I suppose it was an advantage if you wanted to take up farming in temperate regions since the early neolithic diet was particularly crap (this was before the secondary product revolution, so pre-dairy even) compared to the mesolithic one. Make no bones about it, people like me who glow on moonlit nights are the end result of some highly impressive inbreeding.
- 2 months ago
"Normal" is the middle of the bell curve. Behavior and intelligence on either end is, by definition, "abnormal".
So an IQ greater than 100 is "abnormal"; below 100 is also "abnormal" or "subnormal".
Sexual preferences; to be straight is "normal"; you get the gist.
Teachers used to grade on a curve. Now you get a participation trophy and an "A" for just not disrupting the classroom.