|
Post by Planet Asia on Dec 18, 2005 13:49:47 GMT -5
Why do khoisans have their own categorie yet they look more negroid then aethiopies. The eyefolds, the hair plus they're Africans. And what is more Negroid?
|
|
|
Post by Dagaalyahan on Dec 18, 2005 13:52:26 GMT -5
Why do khoisans have their own categorie yet they look more negroid then aethiopies. The eyefolds, the hair plus they're Africans. And what is more Negroid? The khoisan should be labelled as Negro's.. if Aethepoids who differ from the majority in certain features (just like the khoi) are.. I agree with "haqiqa" on this point.
|
|
|
Post by Planet Asia on Dec 18, 2005 13:53:42 GMT -5
The eyefolds, the hair plus they're Africans. And what is more Negroid? The khoisan should be labelled as Negro's.. if Aethepoids who differ from the majority in certain features (just like the khoi) are.. I agree with "haqiqa" on this point. Well as a subtype, yes, I agree too.
|
|
|
Post by Haqiqa on Dec 18, 2005 13:55:38 GMT -5
Why do khoisans have their own categorie yet they look more negroid then aethiopies. The eyefolds, the hair plus they're Africans. And what is more Negroid? They've flatter noses, they look more primitive, flatter face. And what about hair? There are loads of horners who dont have have nappy hair.
|
|
|
Post by Dagaalyahan on Dec 18, 2005 13:57:58 GMT -5
LOL.. shouf at work.
|
|
|
Post by Planet Asia on Dec 18, 2005 14:04:50 GMT -5
The eyefolds, the hair plus they're Africans. And what is more Negroid? They've flatter noses, they look more primitive, flatter face. And what about hair? There are loads of horners who dont have have nappy hair. Horners have nappy true, but its rare, at least comapred to Khoisan who have the most extreme form of nappy hair, peppercorn type. They have flat faces with those eyefolds, so in a sense they do stand out amongst other Africans, but as a Negroid subtype yes. Then again, I would say they're just a variant of tropical Africans, nix the Negroid label.
|
|
|
Post by Mike the Jedi on Dec 18, 2005 14:07:17 GMT -5
If not Negroid then what? Own thing, why does everybody (6 billion people) need to be in those 3 STUPID categories. There's a helluva lot more than three categories. There's Capoid, Veddoid, Australoid, Negritoid, ad nauseum. Of all the categories, Mongoloids probably span the most territory but that expansive type is the least questioned. I wonder why that is.
|
|
|
Post by wadad on Dec 18, 2005 14:13:31 GMT -5
Own thing, why does everybody (6 billion people) need to be in those 3 STUPID categories. There's a helluva lot more than three categories. There's Capoid, Veddoid, Australoid, Negritoid, ad nauseum. Of all the categories, Mongoloids probably span the most territory but that expansive type is the least questioned. I wonder why that is. Yeah true...but Caucasians as awhole are the most numerous group right?
|
|
|
Post by tonynatuzzi on Dec 18, 2005 14:17:31 GMT -5
Pure numbers wise how many people fall into the Caucasoid group,Mongoloid group,Negroid group,and the leftovers.
|
|
|
Post by Haqiqa on Dec 18, 2005 14:23:16 GMT -5
Own thing, why does everybody (6 billion people) need to be in those 3 STUPID categories. There's a helluva lot more than three categories. There's Capoid, Veddoid, Australoid, Negritoid, ad nauseum. Of all the categories, Mongoloids probably span the most territory but that expansive type is the least questioned. I wonder why that is. why do Negritoids who look like mini Nigerians got their own categorie but Aethioipis not?
|
|
|
Post by wadad on Dec 18, 2005 14:23:38 GMT -5
lmao
|
|
|
Post by Dagaalyahan on Dec 18, 2005 14:24:21 GMT -5
LOL.
wtf?
|
|
|
Post by Mike the Jedi on Dec 18, 2005 14:32:55 GMT -5
Yeah true...but Caucasians as awhole are the most numerous group right? Maybe in modern times... I don't really know. I'm thinking in the pre-1492 timeframe.
|
|
|
Post by magneto on Dec 18, 2005 19:47:17 GMT -5
why do Negritoids who look like mini Nigerians got their own categorie but Aethioipis not? LOL..you're right atleast kinda facially but with negritos,melanesians etc alot look like what people would call "negroid" but they actually have no sub-saharan ancestry which Horners do(pred actaully). Aeta----Papuan The khoisan should be labelled as Negro's.. if Aethepoids who differ from the majority in certain features (just like the khoi) are.. I agree with "haqiqa" on this point. My stance on the difference between the two groups is that you can find Aethiopid types outside of the Horn according to some IMO making them less unique and deserving of their own grouping like the Khoi.The Khoi IMO are the weirdest/most unique looking in all of Africa.You see all of the pictures I posted and asked Mike The jedi to classify?If I stuck these Khoi in there they would have been easy to spot LOL 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Even using new world blacks I cant find people that look like them
|
|
|
Post by nwknights on Dec 28, 2005 11:28:03 GMT -5
Own thing, why does everybody (6 billion people) need to be in those 3 STUPID categories. There's a helluva lot more than three categories. There's Capoid, Veddoid, Australoid, Negritoid, ad nauseum. Of all the categories, Mongoloids probably span the most territory but that expansive type is the least questioned. I wonder why that is. Ainus are probably more studied than the entire Southeast Asian mainland (often trying to prove their "Caucasianess")
|
|