Well that will upset the racists

[KentPhilip]

Does this mean that all the black people in Brixton and places like that will turn white over millions of years?

[NotAllThere]

so Black people are 'more evolved'.

A common misconception about evolution is that, e.g. humans are more evolved than chimps, or chimps are more evolved than cockroaches. The fact is they're all equally evolved - they're the product of exactly the same number of years of evolution.

If consider more evolved to mean having spent more time evolving as a single distinct species, then crocodiles are a good bet.

Over many thousands of years, dark skinned people living in the north of the globe will gradually develop lighter skin. The evolutionary pressure is there, since lighter skinned people are healthier in less sunny climes. Similarly if a light-skinned red-haired Scot's family were to move to the Congo, over time their descendants would develop darker skin - even if they didn't breed with the locals.

There are no distinct races within humanity. Racism is irrational - merely an outworking of xenophobia.

[vetran]

A common misconception about evolution is that, e.g. humans are more evolved than chimps, or chimps are more evolved than cockroaches. The fact is they're all equally evolved - they're the product of exactly the same number of years of evolution.

If consider more evolved to mean having spent more time evolving as a single distinct species, then crocodiles are a good bet.

Over many thousands of years, dark skinned people living in the north of the globe will gradually develop lighter skin. The evolutionary pressure is there, since lighter skinned people are healthier in less sunny climes. Similarly if a light-skinned red-haired Scot's family were to move to the Congo, over time their descendants would develop darker skin - even if they didn't breed with the locals.

There are no distinct races within humanity. Racism is irrational - merely an outworking of xenophobia.

If the original state was white / pink skin and in reaction to their environment they develop darker skin then yes they are 'more evolved' just as version 2 of software which includes features requested by customers having seen version 1 is more evolved.

As you say in millennia the skin colour may well change to fit their environment again. Not sure the absence of 'breeding with locals' would achieve that. Natural selection is mainly down to breeding with successful outcomes, with modern medicine its entirely possible there will be very few unsuccessful outcomes. Unless having dark skin means you die before issue in colder climates then there is no reason for nature to change.

Racism & Xenophobia is perfectly normal its part of one of our defence mechanisms, avoiding people that don't look or behave like us, this is what builds tribes. Its not acceptable to make decisions based on it in the modern world that is the difference.

[Mich the Tester]

If the original state was white / pink skin and in reaction to their environment they develop darker skin then yes they are 'more evolved' just as version 2 of software which includes features requested by customers having seen version 1 is more evolved.

No, you still can't say that one or the other is 'more eveolved'. Those people who live near the equator and still have dark skin (seeing as dark skin is thought to be the original state of affairs) are equally as 'evolved' as those who have 'evolved' the light skin adaptation, because they too have evolved to their cirumstances; evolution is the non random selection of random variations. If dark skin has not been selected out, for example by the absence of sunshine to make vitamin D(I think), that doesn't mean there's been less evolution, but that different variations have been selected by nature.

[vetran]

No, you still can't say that one or the other is 'more eveolved'. Those people who live near the equator and still have dark skin (seeing as dark skin is thought to be the original state of affairs) are equally as 'evolved' as those who have 'evolved' the light skin adaptation, because they too have evolved to their cirumstances; evolution is the non random selection of random variations. If dark skin has not been selected out, for example by the absence of sunshine to make vitamin D(I think), that doesn't mean there's been less evolution, but that different variations have been selected by nature.

If you read the article the point was that the original state is now believed to be pink, the change to the darker skin is a reaction to the sun and loss of hair. In that case the 'pink skins' are less evolved (in this particular case) ok it was a little tongue in cheek but the idea that a BNP supporter realising the 'darkies' were more evolved amused me.

To me its just cosmic dice and I'm lucky to be alive & healthy in a safe country.

[MyUserName]

If the original state was white / pink skin and in reaction to their environment they develop darker skin then yes they are 'more evolved' just as version 2 of software which includes features requested by customers having seen version 1 is more evolved.

No, everything adapts to it's local environment. There is no universal benchmark which you measure things from.

In this case customers are happy with version 1 and you make version 2 for different customers. However if you supplied version 2 to the original customers it would not work as well for them as version 1 - eventually you would have to release version 3 which undoes all of the extra features in version 2.

[BrilloPad]

No, everything adapts to it's local environment.

I am certainly adapting to my local workplace.

[MyUserName]

I am certainly adapting to my local workplace.

IR35 alert!!!

[vetran]

No, everything adapts to it's local environment. There is no universal benchmark which you measure things from.

In this case customers are happy with version 1 and you make version 2 for different customers. However if you supplied version 2 to the original customers it would not work as well for them as version 1 - eventually you would have to release version 3 which undoes all of the extra features in version 2.

Agree they adapt when forced which was the point I was making to Mich and they do it by breeding with successful outcomes. A whole group don't suddenly sprout an extra arm, one does and gets evolutionary advantage so it gets laid more, it has more babies that make the old version redundant.

What you describe would be 'intelligent design' the software analogy was probably not the best.

But following your route there would be version 2 and new product x that was based on version 1 and catered for the niche version 1 discovered. Version 1 & 2 could coexist until people stopped buying version 1 but in software we don't do that due to support costs. Nature doesn't do customer support.

[Mich the Tester]

Agree they adapt when forced which was the point I was making to Mich and they do it by breeding with successful outcomes.

Well, the thing is in evolution that no change is just as much adaptation as a change to suit environment; if dark skin works well in a particular environment then it will remain and lighter variants will be selected out, so you really can't say that the absence of change is an absence of adaptation, because the current state is the result of many generations of selection. I don't think the software version analogy can help us here.