and whether some alleles are dominant over others

tanning is very low status behavior

ew

for skin

Billions of lost souls on the planet, ripe for being brought into the abrahamic fold and given a purpose: serving the chosen people

@Nerthulas exactly. I just want to know if when people say “white skin is recessive” if they’re right, bc in my experience most mixed race people I see are pretty evenly split

he's just asking a scientific question

well

josh

skin color is not coded for by one gene

thousands

its not a mendelian trait

just but say you mix the numbers 0 and 1..... you're not going to get 0 or 1 back

@Nerthulas I’ve read that. Pls keep elaborating. We are getting somewhere

youll get 0.4-0.6

Is it not a clear thing such as blue eyes being recessive?

beyond that, I can't tell you whether any of the genes which code for light skin are dominant or recessive over those which code for dark skin

tho maybe there is research on this

but

blue eyes are the exception, not the rule

its not as clear as youd think

it is coded for by way more alleles than eye color is

theres still lots of genes for eye color

yeah

that's true Fugue

23andme think i should have dark eyes

@Nerthulas so people who say dark skin is dominant can’t be sure of that?

the dominant/recessive thing for eyes was really based on observation of reproduction before it was based on knowledge of the genes

White and black are rather pure colors

so Fugue is right

when your're dealing with thousands of genes, we're talking about degrees of dominance and in which direction

its not strictly Mendelian

Deviating from them is easy

but

Mendelian

.... MANDOLORIAN

I think a new one is out?

I do think that skin color has more identified related genes than eye color does

which would indicate to me that there is a greater tendency for a 'median' between parental traits

Ok that’s what I was thinking

since its averaged out over more gene locations