Ok, so let's roll back the time to hundreds of thousands of years ago...
We all like to think that man evolved and from one single couple...
Because how else could we all be here right?
But wait a minute!!! Lets think about it for a second, maybe we all didn't evolve from the same couple hundreds of years ago...
Could it be feasible that these "pure" race co-evolved roughly at the same time?
But you know, it all depends on what you want to believe, if you believe in the Pangea thing then well I guess we could see that we all evolved from the same couple but if if you don't believe in that, then we can say we all co-evolved at the same time.
For example, we got worms here in America, and worms in asia... They are both worms but if the continent were never attached to each other, then they given the same circumstance could've evolved at the same time.
So(non-pangean theory), is it possible that these pure races co-evolved at the same time? YEs we're all human's but we're all different?
MoonAngel says she only has East Asian and Polynesian markers in her. So yeah, I guess you can say there are "pure" races out there, she doesn't have any Caucasian markers on her or African markers on her.
So yeah, there's "pure" races out there.
So that means, if we were to test someone who was of pure Asian, you're not going to see European or African markers, etc etc and so forth.
Now! I think what we really want to ask is, is there "pure" ethnicities out there? Sure there are!
And how do we go about proving that or rationalizing that? And is hmong a pure ethnicity?
Well, moonangel was wondering how she got some Polynesian in her...
The explanation is really easy.
But first! Let's talk about "pure ethnicities"...
Allright...
We have three, European, Asian, and African.
Lets just focus on Asian.
So as the population grows and families forms, what happens? Some people will stay together, and some will move and settle to different regions.
As small populations of the same Pure race moves away they become their own little pocket of genes right? They're not going to end up mixing their genes with their original populations anymore because they are not isolated from them. They end up mixing their own genes with their own population in isolation.
That is how we get our ethnicities!
Look, just physically looking at our offsprings we can tell that we look like parents right? So from biology we know that we'll carry those traits and pass it down to our kids, and so forth... So basically if an isolated population only mix genes with it's genes, the result will be a bunch of people that looks the same or share a lot of the same traits and features.... Since that isolated population is not from the original population, they are not going to share much anymore of the orginal's defining features anymore...
Basically, the isolated population is filtering out the original populations traits due to the fact that they are just mixing with their own isolated genes. For example, it's like when people do selective breeding with animals.
Except with us humans, it's not selective breeding, it's more like isolation breeding due to well, that's what is around them.
So after hundreds of thousands of years, that's why we have all these different ethnicities under these 3 races.
So yes, we hmongs might actually be a pure ethnicity that is pure East Asian.
See how that works? I'll draw a picture later. It'll explain it better.
Allright, so moonangel is wondering how she got Polynesian in her. Well the obvious way would be someone from Polynesia gave their genes to someone in her ancestry. HOw? We don't know.
Or!
If we go back to our isolation theory....
It could just be that those markers that are part of Polynesians are really just markers that wasn't bred out. What does this mean? I'll try to explain(the picture will be better I promise!)
So remember we have the Asian race right?
And I see she put a map of genes from here and there... but what is that map really? It's really just a population map of markers found in an area that correspond to the ethnicity there.
For example, if we were to take samples from china... what kind of markers would we mainly see? Chinese right? If we take samples from Thailand, what markers would we see? Thailand right?
If we take markers from Polynesian, what would we see? Mainly Polynesians right?
What does this mean? It just means in that area, there are populations sharing a majority of the same markers. We have to keep that in consideration.
So now that that is backstoried and explained...
So the "Asians" in Polynesian are just a population of Asians that moved and isolated themselves and started breeding with themselves. They pretty much bred in defining features and pretty much genes of what makes them up physically today.
So those Polynesian markers you have in you, it could possibly be markers that when the "Polynesian" Asians moved down there, when they started breeding within their own isolated population, ended up coming out more and appearing more in their genes.
Got it?
Simple right?
I know, the picture will help! I'll be back!
Oh! Also, when you're talking about first and 2nd and 3rd cousins... I can logically explain that too.
Yes you don't know them but think about it.!
If you have this one "pure" ethnic gene pool... (keep in account in the past, Hmong's stuck with hmongs for a good 99 percent of the time, it is just recently that our hmong gene pool is more diversed), all those genes are pretty much coming from the same "parent" genes right? So of course all our genes are going to be similar. And thus, why they would be your second or third cousin that you never knew.
I'll draw a picture of that as well.