Who is more evolved?

Question

Who is more evolved according to evolution white or black people?

Answer 1

There is no such thing as "more evolved" or "less evolved." Evolution has no goal. We can talk about "simpler" or "more complex," perhaps, but for your question, neither is more evolved, they are just suited to fit their environments. Black people have darker skin because they live in sunnier environments - it has to do with a payoff between Vitamin D absorption and low folate levels, as I recall.

More information is available, just read the wikipedia article for "Melanin."

And to the poster above, if you're really taking Anthropology in college, you should know that evolution is both a fact AND a theory!

Answer 2

Blacks have less characteristics in common with chimpanzees, our nearest relatives than have whites.

Blacks have less body hair than whites.

Beneath the hair chimps are white skinned.

Black hair is far more curly, chimps and whites have straight hair.

Blacks have tend to have strongly everted lips, chimps and whites lips are much less everted.

All these traits are trivial, though.  Whites and blacks differ from chimps by less then 2 % of their DNA, in fact chimps are closer to humans in DNA content than they are to any other of the great apes.

SInce blacks and white can and do breed with fertile offspring as a result it is silly to ask who is more evolved.  They have evolved the same amount in slightly different directions.

Answer 3

Since evolution is only a theory and not a fact, the question is biased in this way, it attempts to be racist. Blacks are adapted to the climate and terrain in their homeland as are whites and other types of people around the world. we all have different attributes. We can all adapt to another's climate and living style. If you are asking about intellect, look up George washington Carver and listen to Bill Cosby when he speaks at colleges, Mr. Cosby has a high order intellect. These and many others prove conclusivly that race has no bearing on intelligence.

Answer 4

You think of evolution as a ladder I guess with some sort of judment of better and worse involved.

Too bad it does not work like that.

To bad you are just being a little racist troll, and it is no wonder you have religious types who don't understand evolution supporting you.

------

#1 Top Contributer should review what the words *fact* and *theory* mean and then review his text books. Matbe even go visit a museum.

The fact that species change over time is very well demonstrated.

It amazes me that all these Christian fundies denounce the theory of evolution yet believe God created the world as it is in 6 days just because some ancient desert dwellers who believed the Earth was flat and covered with a bowl said so.

Answer 5

Ignoring the first part, as evolution has no goal...

Eskimos eat a LOT of vitamin D from the fish in their diet, they never needed to lighten up to synthesise vitamin D in their skins.

Answer 6

More evolved?

Chimps are "more evolved" than us, as their current form came later than ours.

Pigs, cows, and whales, too, are all later than human.

There's no significant difference between any groups of people. We're all equally human. The only differences are between individuals, not bogus groups.

Answer 7

Doesn't matter. and for the person who says that evolution is factual. please post the facts only with their source.

Answer 8

Evolutionarily speaking, your question does not make sense.

All organisms extant are all as evolved as another. Branch tip of the bush that is life.

Answer 9

This question makes no scientific sense. Both are part of the same species, so one can't be more evolved than the other. Race itself is an issue that is pretty much regarded as outdated in the scientific community now anyway.

And as for all the evolution comments... gravity is technically a theory as well. Nothing can be 100% proven, as anyone who has taken even an elementary science class should know.

Answer 10

You've received some excellent answers to the "more evolved" part of your question.

As for the Inuit ("Eskimo" is a derogatory term) they are seem as recent arrivals to the far north and the most recent immigrants to North America. Hence, they can be seen as still adapting. They do have certain changes (vascular shunts) that keep their extremities warm.

Answer 11

There is a minute genetic difference between white and black people - We are all in fact brown - the colour is determined by the amount of melanin.

Check this excellent article: http://www.creationontheweb.com/images/p...

The different characteristics (such as skin colour) are not the result of evolution. They are the result of variation and selection. Not the same as alleged microbe-to-man evolution at all.

Man is not evolved, in my opinion.

The evidence does not support the hypothesis that man has evolved from some ape like ancestor. All hominid fossils are clearly human or clearly ape.

Check here for many articles on alleged ape ancestry: http://creationontheweb.com/content/view...

Further, there is no observed mechanism that could account for such evolution. The proposed mechanism is natural selection acting on mutations. However all observed mutations are information neutral at best. Evolution requires a massive net increase in information.

Evolution is bad science.

Answer 12

It  is a myth and a misconception that one Race is superior to another. Colour difference is due to environmental factors and subsequent ADAPTATION.

Answer 13

HELLO Nathan:

The doctrine of the equality of all the men comprises of the cultural legacy of modernity and widely is picked up in the constitutions and the declarations of supranational organisms. However, it is appealed sometimes to the clear physical, psychic and cultural differences that occur between the human beings to individual and collective level to put in prohibition the equality idea (how they are equal if their differences jump at sight).

After any desigualitaria or racist argumentation, several deceits hide: First of them it is the categorial error to confuse the concept of physical identity with the one of ethical or legal equality: the equality before the laws does not rest supposing that all the human beings also are equipped. Second it is an illegal generalization: to give the properties of a type of things (the physical differences) to another type of things with which that one usually appears associate (the cultural differences). During centuries maintained the ambiguity, consequently, to consider the cultural characters like tie innate qualities to the biological characters and like expression of biological aptitudes. To this they respond the racial stereotypes in which physical and cultural characteristics are amalgamated.

From the two previous ones the third deceit comes: to introduce judgments of value in the racial classification and of considering the different races or populations in terms of superiority or inferiority. If to it we added the etnocéntrico prejudice, one reaches the conclusion that the technological and scientific profits of the western civilization are an irrefutable test of the superiority of the caucasoides races on the rest.