Pemalite said:
Of course modern influences have muddied the water which I have alluded to. Did you miss that part or something?
And I acknowledged that people who have a mixed heritage is a common occurrence because of modern influences. |
Again, I'm not disagreeing with the science you're presenting. It's just that it's not really that scientific. What you've presented arbitrarily draws a line in the sand and said "we're going to say that the people from this area and this date are going to be considered the indigenous people of that area, and this is their skin tone." Does that map look the same if you go back 500 years? or ahead 500 years? How about 1000 years in either direction?
For example. The predominant genetic traits of the average person living in modern day Egypt has changed dramatically in the past 2000 years. It's been invaded and controlled by multiple empires. So when we look at the "indigenous people of Egypt" are we looking at the skin tone of people before or after Egypt was invaded by Genghis Khan's Mongolian Empire? Or before or after Egypt was invaded by the Persians? Italians? Ottomans? Arabs? French? Because all of those invasions affected what a modern day "indigenous Egyptian" looks like today.
So again, everyone is of mixed heritage if you trace their family tree back. Let's not pretend otherwise.