Science desk
< October 26	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	Current desk >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Science Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

October 27[edit]

Biggest busts on earth[edit]

Is there any scientific explanation why Scandinavian and Russian women apparently have the largest natural busts on earth?--Hildeoc (talk) 16:20, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Since it's a Daily Mail report probably not.2A00:23C4:5709:A00:858E:FA67:FFF5:1457 (talk) 16:54, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the actual source is supposedly a survey from Targetmap. But confer here for a more profound, scientific study.--Hildeoc (talk) 18:03, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious hoax article is obvious. Abductive (reasoning) 05:39, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Come to Midtown Manhattan on a Friday night in hot weather and see big boobs of all races. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 00:55, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Nordic race" ectomorphic?[edit]

Why exactly was the so called "Nordic race" considered ectomorphic, i. e. tall and slender? How would those be beneficial features in a cold environment (as opposed to being short and stocky)?--Hildeoc (talk) 16:43, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The point about human beings is that they can modify their environment. I've not come across the word "ectomorphic" before, but presumably it is an accurate description of these people's physique. 2A00:23C4:5709:A00:858E:FA67:FFF5:1457 (talk) 16:53, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Ectomorphs" are part of a long-since discredited means of classifying people known as somatotype. It's mostly pseudoscience. You do see the words used occasionally, but its probably best to avoid them given the long association with Somatotype and many of the bullshit racist eugenics of the 20th century. --Jayron 32 17:43, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jayron32: Okay, but regardless of that possibly pseudoscientific terminology, why are most northerners indeed relatively tall and slim – and probably have already been so in ancient times? Wouldn't one consider a more Eskimo- or Inuit-like short and stocky build more beneficial in a cold environment?--Hildeoc (talk) 17:58, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

^{[citation needed]} on "most northerners are tall and slim". --Jayron 32 18:00, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jayron32: See here, for instance.--Hildeoc (talk) 18:06, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there you go. You found your own reference. You don't need us after all. --Jayron 32 18:09, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jayron32: But it doesn't explain why most Nordic people exhibit those features. And that's my actual question: Why would being tall and slim be an evolutionary advantage in northern Europe of all places?--Hildeoc (talk) 18:26, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Human populations migrated. A tall and slender group of people migrating to a colder climate might not lose tallness and slenderness. I don't have the expertise to expound on why apparent genetic traits might seem incorrect. People send in questions to Bret Weinstein's and Heather Heying's DarkHorse Podcast. Check out, on YouTube, Your Questions Answered - Bret and Heather 51st DarkHorse Podcast Livestream. I've never asked a question. But your question seems apt for their Q&A sessions. Bus stop (talk) 18:52, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The link that Hildeoc provides has a summary that states, "genetic variation between countries could explain national differences in height, but environmental factors were the main determinant of a population's BMI" - so it's not all about genes, and therefore not all about evolutionary gene selection. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 19:08, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also of note, the people whom the OP is describing as "Nordic" people are the North Germanic peoples, which is actually from the area north of the Black See as recently as 3000 years ago, see Yamnaya culture. 3000 years is a blink of an eye in terms of evolutionary time scales, especially to expect the differences the OP is looking to find. North Germanic peoples are not going to be significantly different than other Germanic peoples in terms of genetics. If you're looking for the native populations of Scandinavia (i.e. the people who the Germanic peoples displaced) you're probably looking at the Finno-Ugric peoples who are closer related to groups from Northern Siberia and other arctic regions, i.e. the Samoyedic peoples and Yupik peoples. Those are people who lived on the edge of the arctic for much longer, dating back to the ice ages. Those ethnic groups, like the Sami people, are not particularly "tall and thin". See Sámi history, to wit "It is now well believed that Finno-Sámic have been living in what is now Scandinavia since the last ice age supported by recent studies of Y chromosomal polymorphisms." --Jayron 32 19:25, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Hildeoc: It was tall, slim and blonde – just like... Well, see yourself.

https://www.reddit.com/r/PropagandaPosters/comments/53dhjw/the_aryan_type_a_blond_man_like_hitler_slim_like/

--CiaPan (talk) 19:49, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"As in many other countries, Denmark's obesity rate has gone up: 17 % of adults were obese in 2017, slightly higher than the EU average (15 %)". [1] So maybe not so ectomorphic after all. Alansplodge (talk) 09:44, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That is more to do with the change in caloric intake and physical activity levels in modern Western society. --Khajidha (talk) 12:09, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See the point made above by PaleCloudedWhite on 19:08, 27 October 2020 (UTC). --Jayron 32 12:32, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Scott Sherrington also showed that tallness directly correlates with the IQ, perhaps in one racial group like the northerners. AboutFace 22 (talk) 00:11, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably because tallness is promoted by good health and nutrition, which also help to maximalise one's potential IQ, but this is an environmental rather than a straightforward genetic effect (although epigenetics may also be involved). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.129.143 (talk) 10:46, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We have an article height and intelligence. Although it has issues, it does have some sources albeit doesn't mention Charles Scott Sherrington anywhere. Nil Einne (talk) 04:14, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Then there's the whole question of what intelligence actually is and whether IQ is a good measure of it. --Khajidha (talk) 12:52, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing IQ measures is one's ability to take an IQ test. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:26, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]