If you believe in the the theory of evolution, how are there so many differences in nationality's?

Question

Ex: asians slanted eyes african americans as oposed to caucasians etc......

F*** Leo C 1st of all, and it was an honest question, and i was just giving examples of differences between people not saying black and white people are nationalities, don't be A**holes

Answer 1

The differences result from evolution. Evolution involves, among other things, a species or group adapting to be more fit to survive. From the geography I've studied, I noticed the the lands that are closer to the equator tend to have human inhabitants with darker skin. It's not all-inclusive, of course, but more of a generalization. And darker skin protects from the sun's rays which are stronger along the equator. As for the oriental slanted eyes, maybe it serves some purpose for survival or did when the trait became 'standard'.

Answer 2

They actually prove the theory of evolution- they are called adaptive traits. The warmer the climate, the darker the skin. The less shade there is (think and tundras and the large open areas in Asia), the more slanted the eyes.
Now people travel a lot more, so you can see Germans in South Africa, Koreans in Ohio, and Nigerians in Sweden, but initially, our bodies adapted to our living environment. Give it 500 years, and they will readapt to the new living environment.
Simple proof- the head to body ratio has gotten way larger (from 1:8-1:7 to 1:7-1:6 on average) in the past 300 years.

Answer 3

A group of people settle in a region and what may be a minor difference in a world population becomes 'concentrated' so so the difference is predominant.

Just wanted to add that changes are not necessarily improvements. We are all one species. Changes are adaptations to local conditions. For instance Caucasions are pretty much the only group who are not lactose intolerant. Is this an improvement because white people can drink milk or is it 'de-evolution' because they are not efficient at making Vitamin D by sunshine. The answer is it's not good or bad, it's only a response to local conditions. (this gene appeared about 3,000 years ago)

Answer 4

Evolution has nothing to do with nationalities. Actually, evolution has nothing to do with anything, other than trying to explain creation without a Creator.

All of the different types of people, black, white, oriental & c are off shoots of the original pair. Just as all dogs, from Mexican rat dogs to Mastiffs and Great Danes. If you could interbreed all of them together, you would come up with something that looked like their common source.

Farmers have known this for centuries. They have bread horses, cattle and sheep to develope favorable characteristics. Humans developed differences by isolation and interbreeding naturally. Certain genetic traits became dominant. The trait might be extreme tallness, or maybe corpulence. It might be straight black hair, or frizzy red hair.

Evolution has been used to justify the idea that certain "races" are more evolved than others. This is nonsense. Nobody evolved. We are all human, and that's all we have ever been.

Evolution is the cornerstone of Nazi ideology: racial superiority, as well as Communism: class struggle. Like phrenology, it's time for evolution to join the other pseudo-sciences on the junk pile of history.

Answer 5

Simple. Variation in a population under time.

Congratulations, you discovered more evidence for the theory of evolution, which, if correct, would include the hypothesis that people from different areas would have different phenotypic standards!

Evolution is defined as a change in allelle frequency in a population over time. In other words, the theory of evolution is proven by the fact that different populations of people show different allelle frequencies!

Answer 6

1. Races and nationalities is not the same
2. Various races resulted from from adaptation to different types of environment.
3. Nationalities originated from cultural differences (populations which were isolated or had special ways of life, resulting in special tools, language...), which is not (directly) matter of evolution.

Answer 7

It only proves micro evolution. The idea that there can be differences in one species. It does not prove macro evolution. The idea that one species can evolve into another.

You cannot deny micro evolution, it's obvious. What is easy to deny is macro evolution. There just isn't the fossil evidence to support the idea.

Answer 8

People, like animals, adapt to their surroundings. The strongest survived and had children.

Answer 9

well i do not believe in evolution, but have gone to many discussions about it.
1) that everyone adapted differently
2) the way they revolutionized stops or goes a different direction in some people

Answer 10

Ethnic features are merely the result of the preponderance of certain genes in certain geographies. If you're surprised by this, I don't understand why. Please explain your confusion in more detail.