(June 22, 2018 at 1:31 pm)paulpablo Wrote:(June 22, 2018 at 1:16 pm)Clueless Morgan Wrote: Except that there's more genetic diversity among dark-skinned Africans than there is among lighter-skinned people. So while it's true to say that we differ in skin color, it could also be argued, per the logic of the OP, that dark-skinned Africans are more evolved because they have more genetic diversity overall.
But genetic diversity doesn't mean more change it just means more numerous different types of change. They're all different to one another but haven't necessarily changed more than non Africans have relative to an original ancestor.
If you were to look at dogs and wanted to find out which one changed the most since evolving from wolves you'd measure that based on which is the most different from the wolf rather than which comes from a more genetically diverse breed.
Hypothetically if you have 100 different types of Husky dogs but only one type of pug dog it doesn't mean that the pug dog has changed less because the Husky dogs are more genetically diverse.
At least that's how I understand it.
I wasn't trying to make the point that more genetic diversity = more evolved, the point I was trying to make was that using the simplified logic of the OP (ancient ancestors were dark-skinned; current Africans are dark-skinned .:. light-skinned people are "more evolved") could just as easily lead one to conclude that modern-day Africans are "more evolved" due to their greater genetic diversity.
My opinion falls into the category of modern-day humans are all evolved to the same degree from our ancestors 200,000 years ago, and that amount of evolution is 200,000 years. It's not "more evolved" or "less evolved" or "better evolved" or "worse evolved," it's just evolved.
We have undergone evolutionary change due to the selection pressures we, as a species, have experienced over the last 200,000 years. That's it.
Teenaged X-Files obsession + Bermuda Triangle episode + Self-led school research project = Atheist.