Pale-skin is no more adapted to cold, dark climates than it is to anywhere else.
Contrary to popular claims, pale skin is not an adaptation to lack of sunlight. If that were so, then the darkest places in West Asia (“Europe”), which have the world’s palest people, wouldn’t have the highest rates of skin cancer. If pale skin “evolved” because people needed to absorb more sunlight rather than be protected from it, then the sparse sunlight of northwest Asia (northern “Europe”) would not harm the pale people there. But this is not so. In fact, that is the place of the highest rates of skin cancer:
It should be noted that, this is an EU map, and Norway is not part of the EU. If it were, it would likely be amongst the other northern countries (Sweden,Denmark & Finland) with the highest skin cancer rates.
Now the following maps does not list country names, but if you have some knowledge of where the previous chart’s leading countries for skin cancer are, you will see that they coincide with paler skin (1st map below) and paler eyes & hair (2nd map below).
So if pale skin were an adaptation to sparse sunlight, then why are pale-skinned people so ill-adapted?
And if you don’t need skin color to be protected from the sun in dark, cold, snowy climates, then how do you explain snowburn?
You’ve heard this “theory” many times, but it’s simply not true. If it were so, Far West Asian (Western “European”) explorers would not have needed winter clothes in South America while brown-skinned natives went naked:
Despite the extremely cold climate in which they lived, early Yahgan wore little to no clothing until after their extended contact with Europeans. They were able to survive the harsh climate because:
They kept warm by huddling around small fires when they could, including in their boats to stay warm. The name of “Tierra del Fuego” (land of fire) was based on the many fires seen by passing European explorers.
They made use of rock formations to shelter from the elements.
They covered themselves in animal grease.
Over time, they had evolved significantly higher metabolisms than average humans, allowing them to generate more internal body heat.
Their natural resting position was a deep squatting position, which reduced their surface area and helped to conserve heat.” (wikipedia)
This is what cold-adapted humans look like:
And if paleness were an adaptation to cold and lack of sunlight, then why aren’t native Siberians and Alaskans pale?
(Photos from Real History Worldwide)
White Skin for a Black Sun?
Pale-skinned people need as much- or more- protection from the cold than everyone else. And even in the darkest of places, their skin is still not protected from the sun. So neither the pale skin, nor the relatively narrower facial features, nor any musculo-skeletal or cranial features of the “white” “race” are an adaptation to cold.
Pale skin is not suited to sunlight, at least not the light of this sun. So why do people keep claiming that it is? Perhaps the reference is not to this sun, but the Black Sun of Theosophy & Esoteric ‘Nazism’/Esoteric Hitlerism, popularized in the Soundgarden hit “Black Hole Sun”?
Could the source of energy and life on earth have once been another sun, to which pale skin was suited? Could the earth have later broken away somehow until being captured by the gravity of our current star? That would certainly make sense out legends of floods and underground civilizations, and the documented Ice Age and need of West Asians (“Europeans”) to live in caves. Here’s an interesting video about life on earth between suns: