|
Post by Ponto Hardbottle on May 16, 2005 3:48:19 GMT -5
Those people are mixed with mostly caucasoid appearance. When Americans use the word caucasian I always think they mean the descendents of NW and Central Europeans like English, German, Swedish, Irish..etc not any other caucasians. Well those Indians do not look like those caucasians but they have a caucasian element from another source which is just as equally caucasian.
|
|
|
Post by kir on May 16, 2005 3:57:52 GMT -5
Here is that citation from that study I was referring to, the author indirectly differentiates Indians from Caucasoids by the way he words his comment: "Haplogroup U has been reported as the second most common haplogroup in Europe22. Kivisild et al.23 have reported its presence in west Eurasian and Indian populations. Hence it may serve as a good marker for identifying Caucasoid admixture in Indian populations." Mitochondrial DNA diversity among five tribal populations of southern IndiaU7 is WE, but U2 is SA. I don’t know when U2 entered Indian, and weather or not it's founders were of Caucasian origin. I believe U7 is Caucasian though, from Iran, in the last 30,000 years. R and M and possibly U2 entered Indian around the same time. Varieties of R, M and U are regionally specific to Indian as they are in many other parts of the world.
|
|
|
Post by topdog on May 16, 2005 4:26:42 GMT -5
U7 is WE, but U2 is SA. I don’t know when U2 entered Indian, and weather or not it's founders were of Caucasian origin. I believe U7 is Caucasian though, from Iran, in the last 30,000 years. R and M and possibly U2 entered Indian around the same time. Varieties of R, M and U are regionally specific to Indian as they are in many other parts of the world. I agree and thanks for the information. The citation I posted alludes to exactly what you're saying. I just posted it for its context in differentiating Indians and Caucasians.
|
|
|
Post by Ponto Hardbottle on May 16, 2005 5:36:56 GMT -5
You mean Indian caucasians and Indian mixes with other caucasians and caucasian mixes. There is an American idiot named Stewart who thinks every dark skinned person in the world, that is everyone who is not pinkish, is negroid. Dark skinned Indians must be negroid. Dark skinned Melanesians must be negroid. Dark skinned Australian Aborigines must be negroid. Non pink skinned Europeans must be negroid. It is a common Afrocentrist position.
|
|
|
Post by topdog on May 16, 2005 6:14:35 GMT -5
You mean Indian caucasians and Indian mixes with other caucasians and caucasian mixes. There is an American idiot named Stewart who thinks every dark skinned person in the world, that is everyone who is not pinkish, is negroid. Dark skinned Indians must be negroid. Dark skinned Melanesians must be negroid. Dark skinned Australian Aborigines must be negroid. Non pink skinned Europeans must be negroid. It is a common Afrocentrist position. What are you shooting your mouth off about?
|
|
|
Post by human2 on May 16, 2005 9:26:50 GMT -5
U7 is WE, but U2 is SA. I don’t know when U2 entered Indian, and weather or not it's founders were of Caucasian origin. I believe U7 is Caucasian though, from Iran, in the last 30,000 years. There were no Caucasians 30,000 years ago, atleast none have been found. Do you know what the fossils found look like? U7 probablt entered into India in the neolithic. It would actually be the Dravidian expansion into India. The deep coalescence time, even according to the researchers themselves, could be due to massive population movement or expansion. All of these you posted are in clines, with various degrees of pre-West Eurasian in them. I don't think they are there own race, in the non-admixture, independent-development sense.
|
|
|
Post by Mimers on May 16, 2005 10:00:40 GMT -5
I think a Caucasian person can have a wide range of skin colour.
I remember somewhere a picture here at Dodona representing skin colour-grades (looked like cement blocks) or something.
I simply cannot believe that anyone would think an Italian is not caucasian if he has dark-olive/tanned skin. He is a southern europeean and TOTALLY caucasian.
I first read about sub-racial groups here at Dodona, I mean, isn't it self-explanatory?
On the other hand, I've only recently learned that "caucasian" as a term can be applied to other people that are not in Europe, such as India. It was simply a new piece of information to me. It didn't for one minute, muddle my understanding of what a caucasian is. It just added value to the definition in my mind.
We try to be scientific and make sense of the world but somewhere along the way, we get confused all over again.
According what you define caucasian to be, and so far there is a definition, it not only corresponds to skin colour, but bone structure and skull size are all important determinants. So maybe the question is, can you accept the fact that a person is caucasian according to skeletal specifications,etc. and have skin tone (up to a ceratin degree) as a variant, i.e. loose canon? (So the sub-race will differ but the main racial classification will be "caucasian"). Or, don't some of you go by order of elimination? It seems to me that this is a science that is still being perfected, so I guess most things are open to debate.
|
|
|
Post by Ponto Hardbottle on May 16, 2005 10:15:25 GMT -5
Weren't the Cro Magnons caucasoids? They were certainly older than 30ky. If Cro Magnons were caucasoids and in Europe, it is reasonable to accept that caucasoids of similar type existed in West Asia and South Asia in places unaffected by glaciation. The lack of fossils do not mean they did not exist.
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on May 16, 2005 10:18:12 GMT -5
Who is that beautiful Indian woman,next to that picture of the old man with the white beard? She is very very pretty!
|
|
|
Post by human2 on May 16, 2005 10:22:48 GMT -5
Weren't the Cro Magnons caucasoids? They were certainly older than 30ky. If Cro Magnons were caucasoids and in Europe, it is reasonable to accept that caucasoids of similar type existed in West Asia and South Asia in places unaffected by glaciation. The lack of fossils do not mean they did not exist. No, the oldest Cro-Magnons were not "Caucasoids". In fact, I'd be hard-pressed to even classify the Neolithic Cromagnons, before the swamping from the ME, as Caucasoid. You can refer to this thread I just posted on: dodona.proboards35.com/index.cgi?board=physanth&action=display&thread=1116127385
|
|
|
Post by Ponto Hardbottle on May 16, 2005 11:11:09 GMT -5
I haven't read that thread. From the representations of Cro Magnons and their descriptions they look and sound caucasian. They certainly do not look like negroids or mongoloids or like Neanderthalers. Those Cro Magnons and other primitives are the ancestors of many Europeans as it is often said that the bulk of European's ancestry stems from the UP folk and not the Neolithics. I do not quite accept the OOA scenario or that the people in Africa were negroids or looked like negroids. They were probably of no discernable modern race with a large range of skin colors and phenotypes but primitive looking with thick skulls, big teeth and prognathism. Why do you think all human life is from African sources or negroid? All the sapien but not modern Humans found in Europe and Asia did not look like primitive Africans of negroid race.
|
|
|
Post by Ponto Hardbottle on May 16, 2005 11:13:15 GMT -5
Who is that beautiful Indian woman,next to that picture of the old man with the white beard? She is very very pretty! That is Aishwarya Rai. She is often posted when Indians are mentioned.
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on May 16, 2005 11:39:27 GMT -5
Thanks...
|
|
|
Post by kir on May 16, 2005 11:46:30 GMT -5
@human 2.
Indians share 10%-15% WE (Caucasian) mtDNA. Now, what does the other 85% represent, under the assumption that the other 85% mtDNA’s were present in India before the emergence of race? Isn’t it reasonable to say that, the population of Indian would have evolved into their own distinct race, as Caucasoid and Mongoloid did.
|
|
|
Post by human2 on May 16, 2005 12:38:22 GMT -5
I haven't read that thread. From the representations of Cro Magnons and their descriptions they look and sound caucasian. They certainly do not look like negroids or mongoloids or like Neanderthalers. Those Cro Magnons and other primitives are the ancestors of many Europeans as it is often said that the bulk of European's ancestry stems from the UP folk and not the Neolithics. I do not quite accept the OOA scenario or that the people in Africa were negroids or looked like negroids. They were probably of no discernable modern race with a large range of skin colors and phenotypes but primitive looking with thick skulls, big teeth and prognathism. Why do you think all human life is from African sources or negroid? All the sapien but not modern Humans found in Europe and Asia did not look like primitive Africans of negroid race. Weren't the Cro Magnons caucasoids? They were certainly older than 30ky. If Cro Magnons were caucasoids and in Europe, it is reasonable to accept that caucasoids of similar type existed in West Asia and South Asia in places unaffected by glaciation. The lack of fossils do not mean they did not exist. 1. The oldest skull discovered are ~30,000 YA but moderns have been in Europe since 40,000. 2. The Cro-Magnons were not one people, as archeology shows, or even one phenotype. 3. The fossils show types with African/Australian aborigine features, except for such as Abri. Those found in India and North Africa are all of this type. Abri has been described as "Eskimo". 4. You mentioned something about primitive Africans with thick prognathism... This is what your countrymen in Italy looked like 30,000 years ago: You can find out more by starting here: dodona.proboards35.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=physanth&thread=1113183563&start=15As for reconstructions of Cro-Magnons, it depends on which reconstruction of Tut you believe in. That is Aishwarya Rai. She is often posted when Indians are mentioned. She's actually south Indian. There is a third stratum of brachycephalic types in south India and their south Indian actors are of this type, a bit different from north Indian ideal types. I'll post some when I have time.
|
|