Shorter types live longer

[nockwasright]

admin said:

nockwasright said:

Wrong, the USA are the product of Americans, initially English Americans, and later European Americans, and today Americans of many different backgrounds.

I won't go on on this here as it's off topic, but Americans is a senseless term ethnically.
All the USA are now is mostly due to the so called WASP, their ruling class. The pragmatic, as opposed to ideologic (enlightment), approach to reality, is the biggest divide among westerners (reflected by the different legal systems).

[Dienekes]

According to this study of Indian medical students, the mean cephalic index is 80.81

medind.nic.in/jae/t04/i1/jaet04i1p25.pdf

[Educate Me]

Nock, What do you mean by upper classes?

the politicians, actors, sportmen, writers, scientists, CEOS ?

or the historic nobility?

[nockwasright]

Historic nobility and people from well off families.

[Dienekes]

xcalator1 said:

I'm also sure one could draw analogies with other colonial powers throughout the ages, such as the Greek colonies. Even if the success of a particular Greek colony in say, Africa, had little to do with mainland Hellas, history attributes the glory to the source nonetheless.

Greek colonies around the Mediterranean considered themselves Greek and belonged to the same commonwealth of independent Greek city states as other Greeks. Americans stopped calling themselves English a long time before they became a superpower; moreover, by the time they were a superpower they were of multi-ethnic origins. Moreover, the success of the United States is not due to their English-ness, but rather to their possession of a large territory and a stable political system. The English were never as successful as the Americans, except against pre-industrial colonial subjects. In WWII for example, they would have been liquidated by continental Europeans if they were not supported by the United States.

[Educate Me]

You are assuming that the continental europeans would have managed to cross the channel, the spanish and Napoleon could not do it, it didnt matter if the spanish Tercios, or the army of Napoleon were better than the british army.

[Mike the Jedi]

admin said:

Greek colonies around the Mediterranean considered themselves Greek and belonged to the same commonwealth of independent Greek city states as other Greeks. Americans stopped calling themselves English a long time before they became a superpower; moreover, by the time they were a superpower they were of multi-ethnic origins. Moreover, the success of the United States is not due to their English-ness, but rather to their possession of a large territory and a stable political system. The English were never as successful as the Americans, except against pre-industrial colonial subjects. In WWII for example, they would have been liquidated by continental Europeans if they were not supported by the United States.

You win this round, Dienekes!

And God bless America!

[Matthew]

Educate Me, the Normans crossed it, and I believe that the Germans would come in from Scotland, and East Anglia rather than just cross the channel, and take terrible losses because the English would obvious put many troops in that of the nation. They would most likely have sent a smaller across the channel, and then sent another wave of Wehrmacht, SS auxillaries, and Kriegsmarine from the North, and East.

As enjoying as this is, shouldn't we get back on topic?

[Dienekes]

ienjoylurking said:

You are assuming that the continental europeans would have managed to cross the channel, the spanish and Napoleon could not do it, it didnt matter if the spanish Tercios, or the army of Napoleon were better than the british army.

The Spanish and Napoleon did not have an air force. The RAF managed to hold off the Germans, but without US support they would eventually lose air superiority. Unfortunately for Hitler, and fortunately for the world, this did not happen, and the Brits managed to hold off German invasion long enough for the US to go into full warfighting mode and Hitler to be occupied in a two-front war.

[Drooperdoo]

Dienekes is right. In both world wars, Germany won--before the British managed to cheat and pull in America [and Russia].
America was an industrial titan--and Russia provided the human fodder.
I was astonished to read that the English actually were negotiating terms of surrender in World War I before they managed to get the Americans to fight for them. (Their victory was pyrrhic, as it turns out, because the war bankrupted the Empire and America walked away with the mantel of power.]

I am sympathetic to the Irish, who said that the British never fought fairly--and it's true. They're the inventors of the "coalition of nations" concept. In a fair fight, they never did well. It was only after they got a gang of a dozen nations together that they managed to take down Napoleon. Same thing in World War I and World War II. They were consistently beaten down by the Germans--until they cheated and brought in America and Russia.
On a one-on-one fight Britain was bested by Germany in military expertise and technology. I mean, my God: The Germans invented the jet, the helicopter, the rocket, etc.
The greatest British labor-saving device was the slave: "Er . . uh . . . just send a division of Hindus in to fight for us."
Classy guys.

The quip of World War I which sticks is: "The British are brave. They'll fight till the last Frenchman."

[One Humanity]

admin said:

According to this study of Indian medical students, the mean cephalic index is 80.81

medind.nic.in/jae/t04/i1/jaet04i1p25.pdf

That's a brachycephalic region in NW India. The other parts of India are dolichocephalic.

Have a look at map 6:
dodona.proboards35.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=informative&thread=1116023468&page=1

The average cranial capacities for the three major races:

Europid 1.347 cc
Mongolid 1.364 cc
Negrid 1.267 cc

Source: www.charlesdarwinresearch.org/Race_Evolution_Behavior.pdf

Nilotids have the smallest head-proportion, Pygmids and Paleonegrids the biggest. Coon about Pygmids:

We can suppose that these archaic, proto-Negro, proto-Pygmy comparable to those of East and South Africa continued to live in West Africa well into the post-Pleistocene (<10,000 years ago) away from Capsians and Capoid migrations -- that this population mixed with Pygmies. By this mixture, they acquired the bulbous forehead, protruding eyes and other infantile features characteristic of living Negroes -- that distinguish them from Caucasoids whom their ancestors more closely resemble. (...) North Africa is not the kind of environment in which Pygmies could have evolved. It is not and has never been a tropical rain forest. The Pygmies current home is in the rain forest of the Congo and other sections of West Africa. Pygmies are related to Negroes. The Negro's natural environment must have been the savannah at the edge of the forest. They could not have evolved their ability to withstand damp heat during the last 12,000 years in which the Caucasoids pushed their predecessors out of North Africa. The South American Indians of the Amazon have not evolved heat-adaption in an equal amount of time. The African forest and its peripheral are therefore the Congoid home, West Africa.

Example of a Minoan that had a small volume (530 cc) due to long term isolation and endogamy:
www.aee.gr/english/8other_research/a_minoan_microcephalic.html

Coon about modern Crete:

The living inhabitants of Crete differ considerably from the mainland Greeks. [131] They are taller, with a mean stature of 169 cm., and mesocephalic, with a mean cephalic index of 79. In some districts, as at Pedhiádha, the mean is actually on the upper border of dolichocephaly, at 77. The heads of the mesocephalic Cretans are as large as those of Nordics or Atlanto-Mediterraneans; a mean length of 193 mm., and a breadth of 149 mm., characterizes the group with an index mean of 77.

agrippa said:

I'm not sure if we are speaking about a major European element anyway after going what you sais, because it seems to me that this description of "Mediterranoid" just fails to recognise what it should, Mediterranids in general. And the main difference in the metrical system of Dienekes to Irano-Nordoids seems to be mainly the size. Usually I would say that small Gracilmediterranids fall into this category, but if its size is even below them, I fail to see it as a major element in Europe at all but just an gracialised extreme of Mediterranid tendencies.

@ Agrippa:
No offence but never met a highly intelligent "small Gracilmediterranid"? I did: An older friend in the internet and first 'mentor' of mine was one and we are still in contact since 1998. He leads a whole group (which I happened to have invented partly by coincidence back then), girl friend, Abitur etc.

There is also an optimal level of IQ at the age 41-45.

I never viewed intelligence as identical with IQ.

[Dienekes]

Biasutti gives the following indices for India

Northern Indian race (Brahmin and Kshatriya caste): 78.6
Dolichocephalic northern race: medium castes: 77.8, low castes: 75.6

Brokpa 75.9
Balti 75
Cashmiri 76.2
Sikh 73.8
Rajput 72.4
Bengal Brahmins 78.2
Curg 80.6
Toda 73.1
Singhalese 78.8

Most of these are mesocephalic. THe Sikh are not Hindu. The Toda are tribals. I list only the "Europidi" types.

"The medium mesocephals and medium brachycephals constitute the most prominent type among the Brahmins and the Vaidyas. The medium mesocephals predominate among other Hindus and Moslems." (Bengalis)

www.ias.ac.in/j_archive/currsci/17/2/36-36/viewpage.html

"Mean cephalic indices vary from about 75.0 to 80.0 in seven of the eight climate regions."

www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/85008303/PDFSTART

[Crimson Guard]

The Roman's Conquered Britain.

The Germans had a real nasty habit of blundering and botching up battles, even in WWI they squandered themselves like dolts(talkign about the Generals and Leaders). They have a hard time winning Wars despite their keen Brains and advancements.The Nazi High Command could never agree let alone get along. Hitler listened to Goring,who said the Luftwaffe could destroy Britain's ability to wage war by the air,this failed by 1941,as it ended up as a stalemate. The planned "Operation Sea Lion"(Sea and Air Invasion of Britain) could have still been initially successful,But Hitler had already by then set his eyes on the Soviet Union ,and lost his interest in England,which was never really very high in his list to begin with. His real error was failing to desissivly dealing with Britain by giving it the death blow and the opening of the 2 front War...then the declaring of War on the USA after Pearl Harbor.

[Evil Aryan]

admin said:

evil said:

Example#2: Proto-Slavic culture:

This hardly qualifies as "civilization". The Slavs were primitive before they came into contact with Christians. I do agree about the Minoans, however.

Exapmle#3: Proto-Indo-Europeans

The "Proto-Indo-Europeans" never created any civilizations. Civilizations were created in only a few Indo-European speaking lands by Greeks, Iranians, Indians, etc.

Ok! But you know that the pre-Indo-European people of those lands you mentioned,were mosty Dolichocephalic Caucasoids!(Minoans,Elamites,...)

About the Greeks:

_The skeletal record can, in part, supplement the evidence of reconstructed history. Six skulls from Hagias Kosmas near Athens represent the period of amalgamation of Neolithic Mediterranean, Danubian, and Cycladic elements, between 2500 and 2200 B.C.21 Three are dolichocephalic, one mesocephalic, and two brachyceplialic. The faces of all are narrow, the noses leptorrhine, the orbits high. One may conclude that a Cretan type of Mediterranean and the Cypriote Dinaric form were loth present

-Twenty-five Mid-Helladic crania represent the period after the arrival of the Corded or "Kurgan" folk from the north, and during the seizure of power by the Minoan conquerors from Crete.22 Of these, twenty-three come from Asine, and two from Mycenae. Needless to say, the population of this time was very mixed. Only two skulls are brachycephalic; they are both male, and both associated with very short stature. One is of medium size, high-vaulted, and narrow-nosed and narrow-faced; the other extremely broad-faced and chamaerrhine.

-Forty-one Late Helladic skulls, dated between 1500 and 1200 B.C., and coming likewise from Argolis, may include those of some of the "divineborn" invaders. Among these, one-fifth are brachycephalic

-The mean index for Athens in the great period was 75.6, on 30 crania. This mesocephaly probably conceals the presence of a varied racial amalgam, with Mediterranean strains predominant. (And 75.6 is actually a meso-to-dolichocephaly rather than meso-to-brachycephaly!!)


-And now somthing to laugh at Alpines: (how ancient Greeks thout about their Alpine countrymen?)

Villains, comical characters, satyrs, centaurs, giants, and all unpleasant people and those not to be admired, are often shown in sculpture and in vase painting as broad-faced, snub-nosed, and heavily bearded. Socrates, who belonged to this type, was maliciously compared to a satyr. This type may still be found its Greece, and is an ordinary Alpine.

www.snpa.nordish.net/chapter-V4.htm

As you see,in all the Greek (Hellenic) period,it were Dolichocephals that had a great rule in creation of the Greek civilization.

[Evil Aryan]

About the Americans.

These are "Founding fathers" of the USA:



To me,3 out of 4 are Dolichcephalic or at least "narrow-faced" (75%)

Note the pics of those Native Americans,all broad-faced!! ;D