|
Post by oubit on Nov 3, 2005 2:21:23 GMT -5
the categories are wrong anyway as the greatest thinkers of Ancient Greece looked more alpine than med.
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Nov 3, 2005 2:33:08 GMT -5
Trog!
I believe those Gold items are Scythian in origin,correct?
Soap was first developed in Babylon,then Egyptians. Roman's also developed it further on a more mass market(factories) .
Pliny' account of the Gauls,was that supposedly that the Gaulish men would use it more than the females. Their men where something of effeminate from many sources,as they overly enjoyed combing their hair.
The Blond Hair of the Gauls,was known even in ancient sources to have been the result of lime(artificial)..Which archeology supports with evidence.So this should not be overly played on.
The so-called Celts also liked the males,as they lusted after them aswel.
Diodorus
"Although their wives are comely,they have very little to do with them, but rage with lust, in outlandish fashion, for the embraces of males. And the most astonishing thing of all is that they feel no concern for their proper dignity, but prostitute to others without a qualm the flower of their bodies; nor do they consider this a disgraceful thing to do, but rather when anyone of them is thus approached and refuses the favor offered him, this they consider an act of dishonor."
Diodorus, also mentions something on their Beards:
" the nobles among them customarily let their moustache grow until it covered their mouth. Consequently, when they are eating, their moustache becomes entangled in the food, and when they are drinking, the beverage passes, as it were, through a kind of a strainer".
|
|
|
Post by nockwasright on Nov 3, 2005 5:10:06 GMT -5
the categories are wrong anyway as the greatest thinkers of Ancient Greece looked more alpine than med. The categories are wrong because alpine is just a type of phenotype, and has no racial or subracial connotation at all. Alpine looking greeks have much more ancestry in common with med looking greeks than with alpine looking Poles.
|
|
|
Post by asdf on Nov 3, 2005 21:29:36 GMT -5
And yet, both alpines are the same specialization. What I have a problem with, and correct me if I'm wrong, but Greece is a majority Mediterranid country. Or at least its influence in is in the majority, but you still can't attribute a whole country to one subtype... Lumping Alpine and Nordid really makes no sense at all. "Arabs" is a useless generalization of too many peoples to count. Iran should not be lumped with all of India. Almost none of this makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by nockwasright on Nov 4, 2005 3:56:47 GMT -5
And yet, both alpines are the same specialization. What I have a problem with, and correct me if I'm wrong, but Greece is a majority Mediterranid country. Or at least its influence in is in the majority, but you still can't attribute a whole country to one subtype... Lumping Alpine and Nordid really makes no sense at all. "Arabs" is a useless generalization of too many peoples to count. Iran should not be lumped with all of India. Almost none of this makes sense. I meant that Alpine is a category devoid of any meaning but to design a kind of face. It may be a "specialization" as some anthropologist of the past says, but this is just speculation, and still nobody gave a reasonable explanation of why some social environment would have favored selection of that type. It's like designing a group as "tall" or "big nosed" and then ask, are more intelligent the greeks the englishmen, the tall or the big nosed? It just doesn't make sense as groups should be identified for common ancestry, not closeness to a phenotypic type.
|
|
|
Post by Batrus on Nov 4, 2005 17:46:06 GMT -5
But if cephalic index does affect intelligence and inventive, then you could associate different people with similar ones in order to seek for origins of knowledge. It's true that brachilocephalization refers to shape and not to size, but alpinids usually have higher cephalic index than mediterraneans.
|
|
mmmkay
Full Member
Internet Philosophiser, Leftist Hero
Posts: 127
|
Post by mmmkay on Nov 5, 2005 16:25:36 GMT -5
Your case is basically just one site and its a dirt mound compared to nubian, ethiopian and swahili architecture. Most contemporary black africans live in something like this: They are increasingly living in cities, the picture you posted was rural and not the best example of what black africans can or have accomplished. Hi Batrus, And so you are going to counter my observations with critical ones of your own I presume right? I surely hope so for the sake of a real argument, otherwise this a just a waste of time and typing practice. I'm just waiting for you to totally blow my socks off in the next few lines..... hmmmmm, not exactly what I was looking for. You have'nt provided evidence to the contrary at all, just vague quotations. Next time perhaps.
|
|
|
Post by asdf on Nov 5, 2005 17:26:16 GMT -5
mmmkay, ... Urban is codeword for "horrible black neighborhood". Everyone knows this.
|
|
|
Post by MC anunnaki on Nov 6, 2005 4:28:52 GMT -5
Not in Sweden. The most attractive places to live in in Swedish cities is the inner city. Poorer people live in the suburbs.
|
|
|
Post by nockwasright on Nov 6, 2005 15:51:42 GMT -5
But if cephalic index does affect intelligence and inventive, then you could associate different people with similar ones in order to seek for origins of knowledge. It's true that brachilocephalization refers to shape and not to size, but alpinids usually have higher cephalic index than mediterraneans. But race means common ancestry and the thread question is about race, common ancestry. Alpinid is just a shape of the body that is more common in certain population but exists in all populations.
|
|
|
Post by asdf on Nov 7, 2005 4:24:34 GMT -5
Not in Sweden. The most attractive places to live in in Swedish cities is the inner city. Poorer people live in the suburbs. Sweden doesn't have an "African" population of 12% though. He's talking about America, and here, inner-city is Politician code talk for horrible black neighborhood. It gets almost cruel sometimes. Give me one "Martin Luther King Blv" or "Martin Luther King Ave" in the entire country that isn't 70% black and poor.
|
|
|
Post by silverman on Dec 3, 2005 23:58:29 GMT -5
I think calling Britians "Nordic" is a misnomer now that I think of it. Many Britians are in fact more Mediterranean as said in the Racial Reality website.
|
|
|
Post by Soomaal on Dec 4, 2005 0:05:49 GMT -5
LMAO blacks as a whole arent even listed, at least you guys show your true feelings; its good to know.
|
|
|
Post by tonynatuzzi on Dec 4, 2005 0:22:42 GMT -5
Blacks weren't listed in the poll because the starter of this thread most likely has seen a list that shows the average I.Q of Sub Saharian African countries.
|
|
|
Post by Kalashnikov on Dec 4, 2005 0:28:20 GMT -5
you prefer not being listed or not being voted at all???
|
|