Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race

Human Biodiversity » Physical Anthropology » Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
http://dodona.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=physanth&action=display&thread=7104

Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by yasuf on Feb 24, 2005, 12:35am

Do Mongoloids have the most Phenotype variation among the main human sub-species? Mongoloids can be found from Europe, Asia, the Pacific Islands, and North and South America, and all have specific look. What are all the Phenotypes and Variations found in the Mongoloid sub-race?

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by josh on Feb 24, 2005, 1:57am

Quote:

Europe

A few Europeans have small Mongoloid admixture, but I greatly doubt that there are pure Mongoloids native to Europe.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by yasuf on Feb 24, 2005, 2:28am

Ummmmm Bjork?
[image]

lol, just kidding, yeah you're right. Europe dosen't have any "Pure" Mongoloids, so nevermind that.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by zemelmete on Feb 24, 2005, 2:52am

Some mongoloid subraces:
1. Arctic (eskimo, chucki)
2. Northern asian
3.Central asian
4. East asian
5. oSutheast asian
6. Amerindian

These are main mongoloid groups

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by yasuf on Feb 24, 2005, 3:15am

Quote:

Some mongoloid subraces:
1. Arctic (eskimo, chucki)
2. Northern asian
3.Central asian
4. East asian
5. oSutheast asian
6. Amerindian

These are main mongoloid groups

But that's inaccurate. That's like Saying Caucasoid Subraces are Europe, Middle East, India, and Northern Africa. Caucasoid is broken down even further into Alpine, Borreby, Mediterranean, Nordic, Dinaric etc. I believe there are subraces within Amerindian (I'm sure the plain Indians are different in appearence from a South American tribe). Also the same goes for East, Northern and Southeast Asian.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by faelcind on Feb 24, 2005, 3:24am

Saying Caucasoid comes from those regions is not innacurate, and dividing them into grouping of regions like that is much more consistent with fact then the arbitrary sub racial groupings of authors like coon, Borreby for instance is clearly nothing but description of a phenotype seen in nothern european ie nordic populations it is not valid phylogenetic unit.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by yasuf on Feb 24, 2005, 3:34am

Quote:

Saying Caucasoid comes from those regions is not innacurate, and dividing them into grouping of regions like that is much more consistent with fact then the arbitrary sub racial groupings of authors like coon, Borreby for instance is clearly nothing but description of a phenotype seen in nothern european ie nordic populations it is not valid phylogenetic unit.

Hmmm okay, you seem to know more about these stuff then I do, so I guess I'll take your words for it. So what are the differences in appearence from those different Mongoloid subraces?

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by mike2 on Feb 24, 2005, 3:45pm

I empathize but disagree, Faelcind. The Borreby and Nordic types are as distinct from one another as Brunn is to Irano-Afghan. I don't think Coon's types are as inaccurate as you would have them, Fael. Whether or not his types can be called "subraces" is certainly debatable, but they are still relevant as types, whatever the genetic record may be. That's how I feel about it anyway.

The only problem I have with Coon is he put too much focus on the Caucasoids. I would have loved it if he would have given a list of Mongoloid, Congoid, and Australoid types, too. Capoids aren't that important, so I don't mind them so much. But as for the other three, they are very significant and I think they deserve more attention. Without professionals like Coon to lay the groundwork, we can only rely on silly Nordicists like McCollough to give us ideas, which is sad of course. At least we have Baker's classifications to work with, though.

I will concede that some of it is arbitrary and is a matter of opinion. I thought it was especially bold of Coon to espouse that the races obtained sapience at different points in time. And we know now that the Atlanto-Mediterraneans fit more into the Upper Paleolithic branch than Neolithic. Regardless of some of these errors, I am still more inclined to believe in the distinction between Brunns and Borrebies and Cordeds and Danubians than I am in simplifying the white race into Nordic, Alpine, and Mediterranean categories. Nordicists love those categories. It's so simple for them to argue anybody who is blonde-headed and blue-eyes must be Nordic. I don't believe it's that simple. I believe McCollough's Nordish type is fictional and socially-motivated.

I will discuss what I know of Mongoloids types later when I have more time on my hands. Adieu.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by springa on Feb 24, 2005, 4:01pm

I have a bit of a problem with calling Amerindians "Mongoloid". I think they're a separate, but related group.
Also, there's plenty of variation between them.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by mike2 on Feb 24, 2005, 4:04pm

I have often too wondered what makes the Amerindians Mongoloid. I believe it is the shape of the skull. Facial features can be superficial and misleading but the skeleton never lies.

And it's true that the Amerindians have much great variation in and of themselves but I still think a common origin can be traced for them. Remember also that Australoids may have played a small part in the formation of the Amerindians.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by mike2 on Feb 24, 2005, 9:07pm

That's a very good explanation, human2. I think the hawk nose and reddish brown complexion of many Amerindians throws people off, too. I wish more research would be done on variation between the Amerindians themselves. For instance, why can the Californian Indians grow facial hair? Do the snub-nosed and hawk-nosed Amerinds have a common ancestry in Asia or did those traits arise comparatively recently in history?

I think the same type of logic can be applied to the Aethiopids, who although they superficially have some marked Congoid features on the outside and Cavalli-Sforza has lead us to believe Ethiopians have more sub-Saharan blood than Caucasoid, the obvious Caucasoid cast in the Aethiopid skull speaks for itself. It is a definite hybrid type in my opinion.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by faelcind on Feb 24, 2005, 10:00pm

Quote:

I empathize but disagree, Faelcind. The Borreby and Nordic types are as distinct from one another as Brunn is to Irano-Afghan. I don't think Coon's types are as inaccurate as you would have them, Fael. Whether or not his types can be called "subraces" is certainly debatable, but they are still relevant as types, whatever the genetic record may be. That's how I feel about it anyway.

The only problem I have with Coon is he put too much focus on the Caucasoids. I would have loved it if he would have given a list of Mongoloid, Congoid, and Australoid types, too. Capoids aren't that important, so I don't mind them so much. But as for the other three, they are very significant and I think they deserve more attention. Without professionals like Coon to lay the groundwork, we can only rely on silly Nordicists like McCollough to give us ideas, which is sad of course. At least we have Baker's classifications to work with, though.

I will concede that some of it is arbitrary and is a matter of opinion. I thought it was especially bold of Coon to espouse that the races obtained sapience at different points in time. And we know now that the Atlanto-Mediterraneans fit more into the Upper Paleolithic branch than Neolithic. Regardless of some of these errors, I am still more inclined to believe in the distinction between Brunns and Borrebies and Cordeds and Danubians than I am in simplifying the white race into Nordic, Alpine, and Mediterranean categories. Nordicists love those categories. It's so simple for them to argue anybody who is blonde-headed and blue-eyes must be Nordic. I don't believe it's that simple. I believe McCollough's Nordish type is fictional and socially-motivated.

I will discuss what I know of Mongoloids types later when I have more time on my hands. Adieu.

MikeTH you have got to get your brain unwrapped of Coon, check the coon is outdated thread he is exactly that his theory that humans passed into a human phase at different times wasn't brave it was ridicilous. As are his huge number of classifications, Bruenn Borreby and Nordic are just idealized phenotypes, they have not been shown by any subsequent analysis to have any validity. He was took natural phenotype variations and in single monoplytic population and called them seperate races, biological he could hardly be more ridicilous. Have you ever heard of multiple sub species living together and interbreeding yet maintaining themselves in any other species?

I think the classification of Amerindians as mongloids is questionable they are clearly derived in the main part from mongloid ancestors but have for the most part been devoloping seperately for 10,000 years. Their facial architecture is more pronounced then mongloids clear its not just the fat deposits. I tend to think that Southeast mongloids often look very similar to amerindians, probably because the share a less derived mongloid phenotype with austroloid admixture.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by mike2 on Feb 24, 2005, 10:13pm

Okay and touché.

Coon wasn't the only one to recognize the Brunn and Borreby types as distinct from Nordics and such. Angel and Hooton, very respected anthropologists that Dienekes likes to bring into the foray a lot on his site, agreed with Coon about many of the Caucasoid types, though they of course decided to include Atlanto-Med as a UP type instead of a Neolithic one and a couple other minor variations. Yeah, maybe the genetic age will completely invalidate many of the types as having any real racial significance. But until that day comes, I still like 'em just for their descriptive value.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by faelcind on Feb 24, 2005, 10:17pm

You realize all those guys wrote 50 years ago right. There were 34 subspecies of wolves recognized in north america at that time now theres seven, that level of division of descriptive division of populations has simply not stood up to large multivariate analyses not to mention being crushed by genetics. There fine as descriptive types, I definetly look like bruenn/atlantidish, its not biological significant.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by mike2 on Feb 24, 2005, 11:45pm

Meh, I know very little about genetics so I won't bother arguing with you about it. I would be just wasting my energy.

Instead, I want to get back to talking about the various Mongoloid types. I think they deserve some attention.

These are the most recognizable types, or at least the ones in widest circulation that I have access to:

Scheele's Mongoloid Types:
I found a book by this guy at my school library and thought it was interesting to see the opinions of an apparently little-known anthropologist.
1.) Indonesian-Malay
-includes Malays and Indonesians (duh)
-partially hybridized with Australoids (no surprise there)
2.) Arctic Mongoloid
-includes Siberians and Eskimos
-is this essentially the same as the Tungid type? I ask because Baker also included some Mongol tribes.
3.) Classic Mongoloid
-includes all the stereotypical East Asian folk: the Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, etc.
-I assumed it also included the Altaic Mongoloids, like the Mongols, Turks, and Manchus but I believe Baker says something about Tungid Mongols. I also know full well that many Central Asians are by no means full-blooded Mongoloids.
4.) North American Indian
-I think Scheele separated these two not on basis of geography so much but on which continent showed the most of a certain facial feature, in this case the hawk-nose for North Amerinds even though he knows not all North American Indians are hawk-nosed.
-he attributes the hawk nose to Irano-Afghan admixture, but I don't believe this anymore than I believe the Ainu or Polynesians are Caucasoid...

5.) South American Indian
-this is basically his way of saying "snub-nosed Amerinds" even though he knows not all South American Indians are snub-nosed

I should note that Scheele, like Coon, is quite an outdated source when it comes to peoples we commonly consider Mongoloid now for obvious reasons. He believed like many during the time he wrote the book that the Ainu, Polynesians, Australian aborigines, and so on were Caucasoid and included them in his Caucasoid classification. He wrote the book before Coon's advent of the Capoid, Congoid, and Australoid so naturally he was using the Big Three classification (Caucasoid, Mongoloid, Negroid). Instead of giving the Khoisan their own race, he grouped them with Negroids. He did the same with the Melanesians. I think if he knew that Ainu were Mongoloids he would have given them their own type and if he knew the Polynesians were Mongoloid he probably would included them in his Indonesian-Malay group.

McCulloch's Mongoloid Types:
Essentially adapted from Baker, I believe. Or was it Coon? I think it's Baker. Yeah, it's gotta be him. I also know McCulloch and the folk at SNPA are Nordicist morons, but McCulloch's site is the only source I have on Baker's classifications.
1.) Northeast Asian
-various subraces in China, Manchuria, Korea and Japan
2.) Southeast Asian
-various subraces in Indochina, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines, some partly hybridized with Australoids
3.) Micronesian-Polynesian
-hybridized with Australoids
4.) Ainuid
-remnants of aboriginal population in northern Japan
5.) Tungid
-Mongolia and Siberia, Eskimos
6.) Amerindian
-American Indians; various subraces

Not surprisingly, these classifications don't really take into account the presumed Uralian Mongoloid type that only exists today as a hybrid component in the composite make-up of the Lapps and Ladogans.

Baker's Sinid (which McCulloch doesn't mention) and Tungid types are a little confusing to me. I don't have access to Baker's book so I don't know exactly what he had to say about them. I've just heard from people that the Tungid type is primitive looking whereas the Sinid appears more evolved or some such thing.

Whatever the best classification system is, I've got to admit the Mongoloids are a lot less stressful and simpler to discuss than the Caucasoid race, perhaps the most physically variable race on the earth.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by mike2 on Feb 24, 2005, 11:55pm

Looking at them critically, I think I can reconcile the two classifications.

I think Scheele's Indonesian-Malay and Baker's Southeast Asian and Micronesian-Polynesian types can be combined into one subrace. It's so tempting to categorize all the Austric-speaking Mongoloids into one supergroup and blame their diverse make-ups on the Australoids they all hybridized with.

The Arctic and Tungid types are virtually identical. Only difference is Baker mentions that there are Tungid Mongols and this might complicate things. Are most Altaic-speaking people really closer to Siberians and Eskimos than they are to Classic Mongoloids? I don't know.

The Classic Mongoloid and Northeast Asian types are easy to reconcile. They are the East Asian type incarnate. I assume Baker's Sinid is of Classic Mongoloid affinity but again, I don't have access to his book so I don't know.

So sweet and to-the-point are the Amerinds. Not much to talk about there, other than that they can show great regional diversity, which is to be expected of a race that spanned two continents.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by faelcind on Feb 25, 2005, 12:21am

Gbloco once wrote a very interesting classification of Amerindians not sure if it was worth a damn as far as scholarship but interesting nice to get back to topic. I keep meaning to give my observations but keep worrying about how long it would take me to write I am trying to study a bit.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by mike2 on Feb 25, 2005, 12:34am

I wish we had access to some American Indian skulls from all parts of North and South America to compare. Maybe the differences between the various Amerinds are entirely superficial. I would expect to find Australoid traces among many, though, especially in South America where some Australoids were said to have landed and settled before being wiped out or absorbed by the invading Amerindian Mongoloids from the north.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kazakhgirl on Feb 25, 2005, 1:46am

I cannot find in both classification Central Asians Turks. I know that Coon considered them Turanids (mix of European and Mongoloid races), but I think that Turanids are rather mongoloid then mixed sub race.

anyone has any info about Turanids?

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by buddyrydell on Feb 25, 2005, 2:02am

Quote:

I cannot find in both classification Central Asians Turks. I know that Coon considered them Turanids (mix of European and Mongoloid races), but I think that Turanids are rather mongoloid then mixed sub race.

anyone has any info about Turanids?

Central Asians are indeed said to be a mix of Caucasoid and Mongoloid, and I'd say that's pretty accurate, though some Central Asians look more Caucasoid whereas others look more Mongoloid. I think the Turkmen look from half and half to mostly Caucasoid on average, whereas I believe the Kazakhs (correct me if I'm wrong) look predominantly Mongoloid.

"Turanids" are said to be the dominant element among the Turkic peoples. Even in Turkey, some people have this Turanid look, though it's considerably less common than the Armenoid and east Med types since the Turks in Anatolia were largely assimilated into the larger Caucasoid population.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kazakhgirl on Feb 25, 2005, 2:24am

Kazakhs look very Mongoloid, so I really dislike Turanid Eurasian fade which is very popular lately there. It for some reason speaks racial inferiority to me instead of racial awareness. I'd rather consider myself Mongoloid. Indeed many Turkmans look like Afghani people. The only thing which differentiate Kazakhs from other Turanids that there are many Kazakhs with extremely light skin and quite a few light hair and light eyes of course with Mongoloid features. I think Kazakhs are skin/eyes color wise are the lightest among Asians abd other Turanids.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by mike2 on Feb 25, 2005, 2:34am

Turanid is a good term for the Central Asian Caucasoid-Mongoloid type.

The problem is I don't know which subtypes form it. I assume the Caucasoid factor in the Turanids is Irano-Afghan whereas the Mongoloid factor is either Tungid or Classic Mongoloid. That's my question: What is the Mongoloid subrace for the Turks, Mongols, and other Altaic-speakers? Is the Mongoloid element closer to Arctic/Tungid Mongoloid or Classic Mongoloid?

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kazakhgirl on Feb 25, 2005, 2:54am

The problem is that it varies from each separate nation to nation. That's why it is hard to classify Turcik speaking nations. Tungid elements dominant in Kyrgyz nation, when in their neighbor Kazakhs it is non existent. Uzbeks have very obvious Persian thing going, Tartar look very Ladogan and they are practically Many tartars look undistiguishable from Caucassians.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kazakhgirl on Feb 25, 2005, 2:55am

I think that classical Mongoloid is also unapplicable to Turanids.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by joton on Feb 25, 2005, 3:02am

this picture of bjork kinda reminds me of my mother.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kazakhgirl on Feb 25, 2005, 3:07am

Bjork does not look Mongoloid for me. She is so Lappish/Uralic. Very cute childish quality. Such face would never age.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kazakhgirl on Feb 25, 2005, 4:30am

Josh opened topic with picture of Mongolians and I added picture of Turanids for comparison
http://dodona.proboards35.com/index.cgi?....read=1109321029

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by yasuf on Feb 25, 2005, 5:15am

Intresting, are there more specific details that distinctly seperate the various mongoloid sub-groups from one another?

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kazakhgirl on Feb 25, 2005, 5:46am

I have the same question Yahhh. I would like to know more about Mongoloid sub groups.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by melnorme on Feb 25, 2005, 10:30am

Hey human2.
You've spent a lot of time on this subject - you should make a webpage about it.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kazakhgirl on Feb 25, 2005, 10:36am

Very informative human2.

I had a discussion with one guy lately, who attributed Central Asians to Turanids, which he did not classify as Mongoloids. I, myself consider some Central Asians (Kazakhs, Kyrgyz) Mongoloid, not sub race or mixed race. What is your opinion? What kind of materials could you suggest?

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kazakhgirl on Feb 25, 2005, 10:56am

thank You for taking time and responding to me. I really appreciate. I guess there is no easy way and no stright answer.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by nusapiens on Feb 25, 2005, 11:17am

The picture for Central Asia is rather complex. There is genetic influence flowing from many directions: from the Middle East, from NW Europe, from India, from China/East Asia, and also very ancient local influence from the first humans who entered continental Eurasia.

Genetic studies suggest that Turks in Turkey are mostly Anatolian, with minor influence from Central Asia (less than 25%, and often less than 5-10% in most cases).

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kazakhgirl on Feb 25, 2005, 1:25pm

hi, I got a it. I'm relatively new here so I did not see it at first.

Yep, those poeple on photos look Asian, but more ancient. I'm not strong in SE Asian classification at all. i'm more into Scytheans/kypchaks/etc. all this stuff. But i'm really curious about different cultures and ethnicities.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kazakhgirl on Feb 25, 2005, 1:30pm

I went to facial analyzer website and it is so bogus!!! It classifies most Asians as chinese/Japanese /koreans. Some are classified as SE Asians. My grandmother who is turanid was classified as 100% SE Asian. I do not know, but she does not look SE for me.

http://www.eva.ru/pictures/album_photos/325778.jpg?1106707551609

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by melnorme on Feb 25, 2005, 1:31pm

Better than Face Analyzer :

http://www.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~morph/Transformer/

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kazakhgirl on Feb 25, 2005, 1:48pm

it looks fun, but it did not work on my computer. I don't have some Java plug ins >:(

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by melnorme on Feb 25, 2005, 1:51pm

Quote:

This is so cool.. I'm gonna go see what I look like as a black man.

Feel free to post your results :

http://www.photobucket.com/

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by mike2 on Feb 25, 2005, 8:58pm

Great info and I'll take it piece by piece, starting with "Qiangic." Qiangic type, eh? Never heard of it. Are most Tibetans and Burmese of this type or is it a minority like the Ainu is in Japan?

I searched google for "Tibetan" and here's what I've garnered:
[image]

Is it just me or do these people slightly resemble Amerindians? Moreso than any other Mongoloids I've seen.

I'm assuming most of these people are hybridized with Australoids. It seems like EVERY Mongoloid type south of China is hybridized with Australoids.

This one looks especially hybridized. For such a little-talked about and unassuming race the Australoids seem to be very important.

Could you explain the Sinid/Tungid types to me in detail, human2? I mainly want to know who's Tungid and who's not and who's Sinid and who's not. Are they actual types corresponding to Arctic for Tungid and Classic Mongoloid for Sinid or are they just generalizations of Mongoloid appearance?

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by gambler32 on Feb 25, 2005, 11:18pm

some of the tibetians look amerindian

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by mike2 on Feb 26, 2005, 12:02am

Woah, I just totally had an epiphany. Scheele's Classic Mongoloid type doesn't have anything to do with the Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, stereotypical East Asians at all! It's his way of saying Tungid! I went back to the library earlier today and got some more info on his types. I took one look at the range of his Classic Mongoloid type instead of just looking at the stupid picture (which is what made me think Chinese/Korean/Japanese but then I realized my mistake). Consider this stuff he says about the types:

1.) Indonesian-Malay
-carries blood of Mongoloid, Ainu, Negrito, & Mediterranean Types (don't look at me, I don't know where he's getting Ainu or Mediterranean from)
-Range: South China, Burma, Thailand, Indochina, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Phillipines, Taiwan, Madagascar (basically represents the forebearer of the Mongoloid element in all of southeast Asia)

2.) Arctic
-range: Arctic North America, northeastern Siberia (basically where the Eskimos and Paleosiberians live)

3.) Classic Mongoloid
-range: Siberia, north China, Mongolia, Tibet (basically the Tungid types)

4.) American Indian
-carries blood of Mongoloid, Iranian Plateau, Australoid, & minor parts of Negrito types (we know of course now that the Irano-Afghan had nothing to do with the formation of the hawk-nose but he is on the right track mentioning the Australoid)
1.) Broad-Headed Amerindian Type
a.) Hawk-Nosed Broad-Headed Amerindian
b.) Snub-Nosed Broad-Headed Amerindian
2.) Long-Headed Amerindian Type
a.) Hawk-Nosed Long-Headed Amerindian
b.) Snub-Nosed Long-Headed Amerindian
-range: North, Central, and South America

Even though Scheele mentions the Tungids in the form of Classic Mongoloid, he doesn't say anything about Sinids. Maybe he thought that Classic Mongoloid embraced both groups. He also apparently felt the Arctic type was separate from the Tungid type, though for our purposes it can probably be combined.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by nusapiens on Feb 26, 2005, 12:31am

Maybe the "hawk noses" of many Amerinds originated from early peoples of South Asia. Note the nose shape typically associated with India. Genetic admixture analysis also finds an unexplained link between India and the Americas.

http://nusapiens.blogspot.com/2005/02/map-world-biogeographic-diversity-as.html

I also wouldn't rule out influence from West Eurasians via the Iranian plateau.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by gambler32 on Feb 26, 2005, 12:54am

what do the malays of MADAGASCAR look like?

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by mike2 on Feb 26, 2005, 12:58am

Quote:

what do the malays of MADAGASCAR look like?

Scheele is referring to the Malagasys who settled the island. Now they are much mixed with black Africans.

[image]

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by yasuf on Feb 26, 2005, 1:23am

I've seen pictures of malays on Madagascar before, and some looks more Mongoloid.

[image]

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by faelcind on Feb 26, 2005, 1:57am

Very interesting discussion guys great finds. Good point on the noses Nusapiens see also Melanasians.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by mike2 on Feb 26, 2005, 2:37pm

The hawk nose might be an ancient Australoid trait? Veddoids and Melanesians fit the bill.

I wouldn't rule out the Iranian Plateau either if I didn't feel that everytime the scientists from the days of old surmised that the unusual features among Mongoloids were caused by Caucasoids (the features of the Ainu, Polynesians, and now Amerindians, that is), it often turned out to be Australoids. Whitey always trying to keep the austro down.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by KLI on Feb 26, 2005, 3:01pm

how about the Nepalese people? I saw this article about the Nepalese Gurka who are Himalayan guides, and to me they resembled more than anything else typical Central Americans.

What is their ethnicity based on? Are they just India-Mongoloid hybrids???

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by mike2 on Feb 26, 2005, 3:20pm

Quote:

how about the Nepalese people? I saw this article about the Nepalese Gurka who are Himalayan guides, and to me they resembled more than anything else typical Central Americans.

What is their ethnicity based on? Are they just India-Mongoloid hybrids???

I think the Nepalese are related to the Tibetans for the most part and that they just have more East Indian ancestry. The Mongoloids seem to me an undiscovered country of unclassified types.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by mike2 on Feb 27, 2005, 11:35pm

One question: Would you guys lump the Altaic Mongoloids (Mongols, Mongoloid Turks, Manchus, Siberians), Arctic Mongoloids (Paleosiberians, Eskimos), and Qiangic Mongoloids (Tibetans) in one gigantic Tungid group or would it be better to separate them? I like the idea of including them into a major Tungid group but I know some people have split it up into Artic Mongoloid (Paleosiberians, Eskimos) and Classic Mongoloid (Altaics and Qiangics) but I don't know if there's really much of a difference between the two to separate them when both have been classified as Tungid.

Check out my classification system (a work in progress):
A.) Sinid
1.) Sinic Mongoloid (China)
2.) Chosonic Mongoloid (Korea) [carries some Arctic affinities]
3.) Nipponic Mongoloid (Japan) [carries some Arctic affinities]
B.) Tungid
1.) Arctic Mongoloid (Arctic North America, northeastern Siberia)
2.) Altaic Mongoloid (Mongolia, Manchuria, Turkestan, Western China)
3.) Qiangic Mongoloid (Tibet and some areas of Burma)
C.) Austric Mongoloid
1.) Austroasiatic Mongoloid (Southwestern China, Burma, Thailand, Indochina) [hybridized with Australoids to some extent]
2.) Austronesian Mongoloid (Malaysia, Indonesia, the Phillipines, Taiwan, New Zealand, Polynesia, Madagascar) [most hybridized with Australoids, purest or original form perhaps found among the Formosan/Taiwanese aborigines from which the Austronesian language stemmed)
D.) Amerindian

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kazakhgirl on Feb 27, 2005, 11:40pm

Which ethnicities are Altaic? I know it is language group.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by mike2 on Feb 27, 2005, 11:44pm

Quote:

Which ethnicities do classify as Altaic? I know it is language group.

Sorry about that, I just edited my previous post to elaborate my classification system. When I say Altaic I am referring the Mongoloid Mongols, Turks, and Manchus of Tungid stock. I understand that many Altaic speakers are not Mongoloid due to intermixture but I'm not referring to the Turanians so much as I am the original Mongoloid speakers of the Altaic language group.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kazakhgirl on Feb 27, 2005, 11:48pm

Altaic language group mean Turkish speaking. Mongol speaking group Kalmyks and mongols are Halha. Ther are no mongol speaking in altaic speaking group. It sounds like nonsense.

You also classified Turkestan in one group with classic Mongols. Turkestan are all without exception are Turanids. The whole region.

Altaic is equivalent of Turk language. It isone thing.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kazakhgirl on Feb 27, 2005, 11:51pm

Tungid:

Tuva
Yakut
tungus

Halha:
mongol
Buryat
Kalmyk

turanid:
Kazakh
Uzbek
Kyrgyz
Uigur
Turkman
Nogai

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by mike2 on Feb 27, 2005, 11:59pm

Quote:

Altaic language group mean Turkish speaking. Mongol speaking group Kalmyks and mongols are Halha. Ther are no mongol speaking in altaic speaking group. It sounds like nonsense.

You also classified Turkestan in one group with classic Mongols. Turkestan are all without exception are Turanids. The whole region.

Altaic is equivalent of Turk language. It isone thing.

I'm sorry, but I have to disagree. The Altaic language family is inclusive of more than just the Turkic languages. It includes Mongolian, Turkic, and Tungusic branches. See Ethnologue.

And regardless of linguistic affinities, the Mongoloid element among the Turki, Mongols, and Manchus is without a doubt the same and can be called Altaic for lack of a better word. Sometimes linguistic affinities and racial affinities run hand in hand.

As for the Turanians, well, I'd hardly call all of Turkestan to be of Turanid racial type, which isn't a very set-in-stone type anyway. Lots of different Caucasians are responsible for the vague Turanid. I strongly believe that if it weren't for the Tocharians the Uighurs would look much less Caucasoid than they do today. And I highly doubt Turkestan has always been a zone of Caucasoid-Mongoloid hybridization. By including Turkestan in the Altaic range I'm referring to the pockets of non-Caucasoid types that emerge in individuals of the region. You yourself have claimed that you consider yourself more Mongoloid than Turanid and judging by your features I tend to agree. Well, guess what, girlfriend, by Altaic Mongoloid I'm talking about you!

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kazakhgirl on Feb 28, 2005, 12:05am

I agree with you about Altaic including mongol languages. I did a MISTAKE.

I consider myself Mongoloid, but I never would relate Kazakhs/Uigurs/Uzbeks which are major nations of Turkestan to Mongols. They cannot be in a same group.

It is like classifying Italians and Germans in one group.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kazakhgirl on Feb 28, 2005, 12:07am

I think that Turanids should be in one group as mongoloid, but Mongols, Kalmyks, Buryats should be in different subgroup.

Manchu, Tuva, Yakuts, tungus could be classified as Tungids.

P.s. Just as exmaple i wanna bring my grandma who is turanid and she would go under the same group as Mongols and Kalmyks?

http://www.eva.ru/pictures/album_photos/325778.jpg?1106707551609

She sould be classified as Mongoloid race/Turanid subgroup

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by mike2 on Feb 28, 2005, 12:08am

Quote:

I agree with you about Altaic including mongolo languages. I did a MISTAKE.

I consider myself Mongoloid, but I never would relate Kazakhs/Uigurs/Uzbeks which are major nations of Turkestan to Mongols. They cannot be in a same group.

It is like classifying Italians and Germans in one group.

You're probably right. It would be kind of like me including Ainu as a pure Mongoloid type or Aethiopid as a pure Congoid type. By including Turkestan I was referring to the ancient Mongoloid inhabitants of the region before Caucasoid interference, but it's probably better not to confuse people with prototypes and just stick to classifying living races. I'll update my system tomorrow. I'm gonna go catch some sleep now.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kazakhgirl on Feb 28, 2005, 12:17am

Ancient inhabitant of Turkestan were more Med and Uralic looking according to archeological finding of Turkestan and Kazakhstan. I always learned in school and saw all that reconstructions in Museum (chronological changes in appearences of people). Mongoloid elements came after, first came Siberian elements in 6th century, then Mongols and by 13th century Mongolization of Turkistan was almost complete.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kazakhgirl on Feb 28, 2005, 3:19am

to mike the Hellen:

I found an article about DNA analysis of Kazakhs and Central Asians, which confirms my previous post here about later Mongolization of Central Asia. When you mentioned Ancient population of Turkestan, classifying them in one subgroup as Mongols, I looked for info about DNA of pre mongol Kazakhs. DNA and photype of all ancient Kazakh samples belong to Eurupean leneage, which proves later mongolization from Siberia.

The chronology is important here, not saying that Central Asians are not Mongoloids, (actually vice versa) but for establishing which sub group they should belong.

mitochondrial DNA sequences from ancient Central Asians

http://eebweb.arizona.edu/PostDocs/Gilbert/tom_web/papers/L-Fox2004.pdf

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by gambler32 on Feb 28, 2005, 3:26am

[quote author=Kazakhgirl link=board=physanth&thread=1109223335&start=63#4 date=1109567260]
P.s. Just as exmaple i wanna bring my grandma who is turanid and she would go under the same group as Mongols and Kalmyks?

http://www.eva.ru/pictures/album_photos/325778.jpg?1106707551609

Your grandma looks more caucausion than asian,easy.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by zain on Feb 28, 2005, 9:23pm

Quote:

[quote author=Kazakhgirl link=board=physanth&thread=1109223335&start=63#4 date=1109567260]
P.s. Just as exmaple i wanna bring my grandma who is turanid and she would go under the same group as Mongols and Kalmyks?

http://www.eva.ru/pictures/album_photos/325778.jpg?1106707551609

Your grandma looks more caucausion than asian,easy.

Gracile-med with Mongoloid ,she look more alpine than ,a mongoloid

Quote:

Ancient inhabitant of Turkestan were more Med and Uralic looking according to archeological finding of Turkestan and Kazakhstan.

the region (north of Iran ,and east the Caspian sea)was part of the Gracile-med before the mongoloid arrival , and genetic confirm that ,but for Kazakh they are mostly mongoloid

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kazakhgirl on Feb 28, 2005, 10:16pm

Zain, I never said that Kazakhs are not Mongoloid, I'm totally agree that Kazakhs and some other Turanians belong to Mongoloid race . I do not agree with intermediate Turanid race theory. I'm pro Mongoloid race for Turanids and actively oppose theories and mentality of some Turanids to be classified as intermediate race.

I just disagree with subrace classification of Mike the Hellen posted here. His subraces are too generalized. I think that Kazakhs should be in different subrace than Kalmyks and Khalkha Mongols. Such nations as Kazakhs, Karakalpaks, Altay people, Kyrgyz and Northern Uzbeks should be in their own cluster, when Mongols: Oirats and Khalkha, Buryats, Kalmyks in separate, but both subgroups are MONGOLOID! I posted history of turkestan facts because according to Mike ancient Turkestan was originally Mongoloid and Iranian elements came later when it was opposite.

I presented photo of my grandma, who had not any recent Slavic or European admixture (maybe some ancient), to demonstrate how different Turanids could be from Khalha to put them in one subgroup.
P.s. Though she is not typical Turanid, but rare phenotype among Turanids, such phenotype is non-existent among Oirat and Khalkha Mongols.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by mike2 on Feb 28, 2005, 11:19pm

What do you mean Turanids aren't an intermediate race? That doesn't make any sense to me. Regardless of the order of which race was in Central Asia first, how comes it the Turanids aren't hybrids? You think yer granny should be classified as a Mongoloid? Maybe we just have different definitions of what a Turanid is.

And believe you me, my system is pretty darn precise compared to most. I just have to work out the pesky details.

I mean, I just don't see too much difference between the Mongoloid element of these two people. One of them just seems to have been subject to more Caucasian admixture, 't'is all.

[image]

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kazakhgirl on Feb 28, 2005, 11:35pm

Right now turanids want to be classifies as separate race, not mongoloid and neighter Caucasoid. I do not think it is right. The frequency of extremely mongoloid looking people are very high and Caucasian people looking low, but overall people look obviously mongoloid, especially Kazakhs. Many people associate mongoloid race with chinese and mongols, but it is very versatile race and if Lappish, which is genetecally slighty over 50% Europeid classify as Caucasians, then why turanids should be classified as intermediate race. They should be classified as Mongoloid. It only would diversify mongoloid race and break stereotype of chinese/mongols.

I do find that your classification of Kazakh Turanids and Khalkha Mongols in a same subgroup is faulty. You seemd to agree about that after all. I tried to explain you why. I do not want to base it only on photos, but genetic , historical and other fact of turkestan, so it would be more clear.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by mike2 on Feb 28, 2005, 11:40pm

I just think if you want to classify the primarily Mongoloid peoples of Turkestan as their own type under Mongoloid, you'll have to find a new name. The word Turanid is too closely associated with Caucasoid hybridization. It wasn't my idea to call the hybrids that. I also would like to make the point that I don't classify Lapps as Caucasians.

Your help has been much appreciated. But I don't understand what the racial difference between Mongoloid Turki and Mongoloid Mongols is. A common Altaic racial origin for all Mongoloid Altaic speakers is very tempting.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kazakhgirl on Feb 28, 2005, 11:46pm

P.S. if you do not see the difference between these two it does not mean you have right to classify them as one group. I see the difference (especially in nasal bridge height, cranium form -elongated long head vs round, eye fold (occurence of double eyelid in Kazakhs over 80% when in Mongols it is much lower), facial tissue thinkness is different). You have to base it on more than your vision. Maybe some cranofacial statistic, some mtDNa and Y chromosome diversity and other things rather than your eyes. I also do not see the difference between Germans and Finns, but i do not put them in one group. You have to read, collect and study before creating your classifications.

I would be glad to help, but when i see something is created on basis "All Asians are alike", it bothers me.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by mike2 on Feb 28, 2005, 11:53pm

Alright, you make a mighty good argument. And you're right, genetic evidence should also be considered.

A.) Sinid
1.) Sinic Mongoloid (China)
2.) Chosonic Mongoloid (Korea) [carries some Arctic affinities]
3.) Nipponic Mongoloid (Japan) [carries some Arctic affinities]
B.) Tungid
1.) Arctic Mongoloid (Arctic North America, northeastern Siberia)
2.) Altaic Mongoloid (Mongolia, Manchuria)
3.) Turkic Mongoloid (Turkestan)
4.) Qiangic Mongoloid (Tibet and some areas of Burma)
C.) Austric Mongoloid
1.) Austroasiatic Mongoloid (Southwestern China, Burma, Thailand, Indochina) [hybridized with Australoids to some extent]
2.) Austronesian Mongoloid (Malaysia, Indonesia, the Phillipines, Taiwan, New Zealand, Polynesia, Madagascar) [most hybridized with Australoids, purest or original form perhaps found among the Formosan/Taiwanese aborigines from which the Austronesian language stemmed]
D.) Amerindian

All better?

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by faelcind on Mar 1, 2005, 12:08am

Interesting system I mostly like it MTH.

This was my genereal break down. That I started to make at the beginning of this thread but abandoned because I didn't have time to research it enough or offer good discriptions.'

Arctic
True artics
siberians, lappoids

Asians
East Asian
South east asian
Himalayan
Central asian(more then one type here don't know enough to break them down more).

Amerindians

Northwest amerindian
California Amerindian
Plains indians
Eastern woodlands
Central americans
Andeans, amazonians, and far south americans.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kazakhgirl on Mar 1, 2005, 12:09am

It is better but Turkic should not be with Altaic from Manchu and mongolia, especially from siberia. MtDNa of Mongoloid Turkic is drastically different from them, also Y chromosome common allels are rare.

Mongoloid turks should be in separate group. it is also a big population wise group which helps

Mongoloid Turanids (phenotype only):

Kazakhs (Kazakhstan, Russia, mongolia, China, Iran, Afghanistan)
Karakalpaks (Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan)
Altays (Russia, Kazakhstan)
Kyrgyz (Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan)
Uzbeks (Jizak region)-not all Uzbeks, but certain regions

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by yasuf on Mar 1, 2005, 12:43am

Quote:

Interesting system I mostly like it MTH.

This was my genereal break down. That I started to make at the beginning of this thread but abandoned because I didn't have time to research it enough or offer good discriptions.'

Arctic
True artics
siberians, lappoids

Asians
East Asian
South east asian
Himalayan
Central asian(more then one type here don't know enough to break them down more).

Amerindians

Northwest amerindian
California Amerindian
Plains indians
Eastern woodlands
Central americans
Andeans, amazonians, and far south americans.

That's a good start. But I believe you can break down Southeast Asian, East Asian even further.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by faelcind on Mar 1, 2005, 12:52am

My impression is that most of the variation within those groups is clinal as opposed to sub racial.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kazakhgirl on Mar 1, 2005, 12:58am

I do like your approach!

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by zemelmete on Mar 1, 2005, 3:58am

Quote:

Arctic
True artics
siberians, lappoids

I don't think that lappoids can be counted in mongoloid list.
Yes, they have mongoloid admixture, but european influence is much stronger.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by lycansupreme on Mar 1, 2005, 11:16am

Quote:

That's a good start. But I believe you can break down Southeast Asian, East Asian even further.

http://entomology.ucdavis.edu/courses/hde19/lecture6.html

Here is a good site that breaks down not only East and Southeast Asians but other races as well. For Southeast Asians I would distinguish Northern Vietnamese, Northern Thai and Northern Laos as lighter and more Chinese looking than the Southern Viet/Thai/Laos and Burmese, who are more Southeast Asian looking. Malays like the Indonesians, Filipinos, etc., might be considered another subrace as they tend to have rounder faces and slightly darker skin IMHO. And Cambodians are probably the most unique-looking of all Mongoloids, as they have darkest skin and some people even think they look similar to people from the Indian sub-continent.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by mike2 on Mar 1, 2005, 5:13pm

There is another issue that I would like to address, and that is the placing of the Uralic Mongoloids within me classification system, those slanty-eyed folk who lent their blood to the UP's to form the type core of the Lapps and Ladogans. Because of their general proximity to the other Tungids on that genetic map there, I'm thinking a branch of Tungid though it could just as easily be its own group, as Kazakh girl conjectures the Turkics to be.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kiengi on Mar 27, 2005, 3:58pm

Nice try folks. In my opinion, there really is no such thing as "mongoloid" race.

One can only speak of the subtle differences between the N.E Asians and S.E. Asians, Also N.E. Asians and Central,West Asians.

If One must insist upon uniquness, N.E. Asia is, according to the out of africa migration theory, where all three migration paths converged.

In that sense, Africans are the oldest human kind , then the Caucasians, and N.E. Asians the youngest and newest. N.E. Asians with eyelid folds and smallish nose and flat profile says it all.

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kiengi on Mar 28, 2005, 4:58pm

Human2 ( unimaginative id ? )

Mongol marker:

There was a field study done by group of Japanese population genetisicst. They found a genetic marker found in Mongol people who are living in presentday central Mogolia. Presence of this marker was tested in the most of China proper and neighboring countries, and also in N. and S. America.

Northern Chinese have this marker but it gradually decreases moving to southern China and disapears. Koreans have slightly less than Japanese. Surprising find was, people of Peru in S. America has storng presence of this marker as in Japanese.

Ancient Vietnam:

Chinese historical source states that as late as 16th century, most of the people in vietnam resembled S. indian type of looks, dravidians. That is before Han Chinese expansion into indo-china.

Hindu Kush:

There is mountain valley pass called " D'zungarian gap" (spell ) that might be used by ancient migrator. Marked, M175 in Spencer Well's book, The Journey of man.

The Journey of man:

This whole 275 page book boils down to two things the Author trying to say:

1) Modern European and West Asians are not the descendents of Neanderthal
2) American Indians are genetically closer to European, than E. Asians

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kiengi on Mar 28, 2005, 10:23pm

my statements were very consistent based on my correct knowledge of the subject matter and hypothesis.

I mentioned Mongol marker to dispute generalized "mongoloid." Supposedly 10 -15 % of the world population are considered "black or negroid" and 60 -70% are "white or caucasoid including austroid" and the remainder are bundled into "yellow or mongoloid" ?

I mentioned Austroid influences in Vietnam, from historical perspective, eye witness. And there were 3 migration path to NE Asia, including the Hindu Kush pass. Upto 30% of Korean has M175 marker and Korean also has sporadic Sanskrit vocabulary in their language still today.

Lineage, according to Spencer Wells book,

M45 -> M242 -> M3 (Amerind )

M45 -> M173 -> M17 ( European )

M9 -> M175 -> M122 ( NE Asian )

Re: Physical Variation of the Mongoloid Race
Post by kiengi on Mar 29, 2005, 6:41pm

Quote:

Furthermore, since I read Wells, he makes no distinction between M9-derived M45 and M214/O and N (your M175 ancestor). He calls them the Eurasian steppe people and while postulating a more southerly route through the Altai for M214/M175 and a more northerly turn for M45/Q, they are both the Eurasian steppe hunters to him, and he does mention that no differentiation among moderns can be found beyond 30,000, which is true.

If you are PrismKnight7, my experience with you is that you deliberately distort the facts to fit your agenda. Your sole raison etre seems to be trolling in Asian forums to encourage division and flames, making topics such as 'Who is more primitive" and Chinese: two separate races, one dark and one light" and "Koreans are from India" (Actually Koreans are the most "Mongoloid" in appearance after certain Altaic peoples). It's pathetic. Get a life.

I am just copying verbatum of what Spencer Wells wrote on his book, the Journey of man. If you have found mistakes or outdated information, please contact Wells, if you wish.

http://www.2blowhards.com/archives/001418.html

I had not used any other IDs on this forum. U Got it wrong !

I usualy don't dignify your kind with reply but seems you can be salvagable. lean some polite manners and be a Cybergent rather than Cybernaut.

N.E. Asians are proud to be associated, and share common genetic background with people of Mongolia. Too bad Mongol conquest of Genghis Khan was written by mostly sore losers, tainting the achievements of Mongols. But "Mongoloid" term is/was over generalized.

Well written book about Khan:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/det....=books&n=507846