Northern and Southern Mongoloids

It is best to split the Mongoloid race into two branches – Northern and Southern Mongoloids.

Northern Mongoloids include the North Chinese, Koreans, Japanese, Xibe, Oroquens, Mongolians and various Siberians.

North Mongoloid – South Korean girl.

Southern Mongoloids include a large grouping including many of the peoples of South China – Tibetans, Dai, Burmese, Thai, Hmong, Khmer, Lao, Vietnamese, Malay, Filipinos, and most Indonesians.

Southern Chinese – Northern and Southern Mongoloid mix.

Below is a pure Southern Mongoloid.

Southern Mongoloid – Kinaray-a Filipina.

For comparison purposes, see a Japanese (N. Mongoloid) and Filipino (S. Mongoloid) mix below.

Japanese – Filipina mix. A mixture of N. Mongoloid and S. Mongoloid in this case results in a phenotype that is mostly N. Mongoloid.

There is a lot of controversy on the boards about this issue. Some say that Southeast Asians are not pure Mongoloids – that instead they are Mongoloid-Australoids. Most of this critique comes from Chinese racists. Many of these Chinese are overseas Chinese who live in the Philippines and Indonesia. Chinese people are unbelievably racist as it is, but the overseas Chinese are some of the most insanely racist of all the Chinese, far more racist than the mainland Chinese.

This is all based on something called Han Supremacism. Han Supremacism is the underlying racist ideology behind almost all Chinese racism. Han Supremacism generally says that Northern Chinese are superior to Southern Chinese. The Southern Chinese were originally the Yue people, but they got conquered by the Han and become Hanized.

According to Han racism, only the Han are Chinese people. All of the other ethnic groups in China – and there are over 80 of them – are all “non-Chinese.” Hence the Taiwan aborigines, the Dai, the Tibetans, the Uighurs, the Mongolians, the Hmong, and some would say even the Cantonese, are all “non-Chinese.”

This is the most vicious Nazi-like ethnic nationalism, whereby only the majority ethnic group is defined as part of the nation and the rest of the residents of the land are said to be “foreigners.” This was precisely the fascist ethnic nationalism that overtook Europe in the 1930′s and 1940′s and it is essential to all fascist movements all over the globe. It was also a part of the ideology of the fascist Young Turks of Turkey when they murdered 2.5 million “non-Turks.” This same fascist ideology resurfaced again in the Balkans in the 1990′s.

The Han want to believe that Southeast Asians are inferior to Northeast Asians. This way of thinking is also prevalent among Japanese, but most Japanese don’t even bother to think about Southeast Asians. They are more concerned with Koreans. The reason for the inferiority of Southeast Asians, according to Han racists, is that they are part Australoid. Strictly speaking, this is not really true.

What is true is that the transition from Australoid to Mongoloid took place much later in Southeast Asia than it did in Northeast Asia. The NE Asian transition took place 9,000 years ago, and the SE Asian transition, at least in Vietnam, took place ~2,200 years ago. Nevertheless, actual Australoid genes in SE Asians are few in number. The Malay and the South Vietnamese have a few Papuan genes, but the numbers are very small. Filipinos only have a sprinkling of genes from the Negritos, similar to the Amerindian genes in many White Americans.

Southeast Asians do tend to have darker skin than Northeast Asians. The fact that they have lighter skin is one of the reasons why North Chinese look down on South Chinese so much.

Even Southern Chinese can have fairly dark skin – see the group below.

Southern Chinese. Note that some Southern Chinese can have fairly dark skin.

Some Filipinas have skin that is so dark that they could well be Blasians – Black-Asian mixes. However, the woman below is a pure Filipina.

Some Filipinas look very dark. This Filipina could even be a Blasian, but she is 100% Filipina.

While most Filipinos have no observable Negrito blood, in the urban slums, you can sometimes see Filipinos with Negrito elements. The girls below seem to be mostly Southern Mongoloid (Filipino) but they seem to have a small Negrito element.

Slum dwelling children in the Philippines. These kids appear to have some Negrito in them. Some Filipinos have observable Negrito elements, but most do not.

Below are Filipino Negritos. They would be regarded as an Australoid people.

Pure Ati from the Philippines. These Negrito people have very low population numbers and may even be going extinct.

The Negrito woman and her child below have quite a bit of Mongoloid genes in them.

The true Australoid-Mongoloid types would be the Eastern Indonesians, the Melanesians, the Micronesians and the Polynesians. The Polynesians are ~50% Austronesian and ~50% Melanesian. Micronesians have more Melanesian in them. Melanesians are a mix primarily of Austronesian and Papuan.

A Timorese woman, a true Mongoloid-Australoid mix. Timorese are about 80% Melanesian and 20% Southern Mongoloid (Austronesian)

NE Asians Closer to SE Asians Than They Are to Caucasians

Click to enlarge.This chart clearly shows that NE Asians are closer to SE Asians than they are to Caucasians.

It was commonly quoted on Internet sites and forums that the distance between NE Asians and SE Asians is so great that NE Asians are closer to Caucasians than they are to their SE Asian brethren. Hence I quoted that in a few of my articles on race.

However, some Asians stopped by in the comments to set me straight, and continue to do so. Some linked to good evidence showing that what I said was wrong. Sure, there is quite a bit of difference between NE Asians and SE Asians, but NE Asians are closer to SE Asians than they are to Caucasians. This stands to reason of course and seems commonsensical.

In general, with a few exceptions, all NE and SE Asians are members of the Mongoloid race. A common NE Asian slander against SE Asians is that SE Asians are Australoids. Not that there’s anything wrong with being an Australoid, but it’s just not true. All SE Asians with the exception of Negritos, the Senoi of Thailand and some Melanesians in eastern Indonesia are members of the Mongoloid race. All NE Asians with the exception of the Ainu are members of the Mongoloid race also.

The truth is that both NE and SE Asians underwent a transition from Australoid to Mongoloid. Before 9,000 YBP, all Asians were Australoids. Around 9,000 YBP, the transition from Australoid to Mongoloid took place in NE Asia. The same transition occurred much later in SE Asia. It was not complete until ~2,200 YBP in Vietnam. Some SE Asians, notably Indonesians, although members of the Mongoloid race, retain some Australoid features from an earlier era.

Black Pathology and IQ – Is There a Connection?

A commenter at Jewamongyou’s site says that Blacks abuse animals (to the extent that they do – I’m not completely sure that Blacks abuse animals a lot) because they are stupid. He says that the few Whites he knew who used to beat their dogs were dumb as rocks to add weight to his theory.

I have written many posts about Black IQ. I no longer think that Black IQ accounts for much of anything at all in and of itself, although I believe, paradoxically, that if we could move Black IQ up, we could probably reduce Black pathology.

Set Black IQ at 100 and see how much crime 100 IQ Blacks commit. Now what if we could do that for the whole group? Wouldn’t that be cool?

The problem comes when we get into comparisons with other groups with the same IQ. The IQ of US Blacks – 87 – is simply not sufficient in and of itself to account for much, if any, crime. There are groups the world over with that IQ or lower than run orderly societies with little or no crime.

For instance, there are groups all over the world which have IQ’s that are actually lower than US Blacks. They generally act very good, and some of their societies have almost zero crime. I think of Arabs as a shining example. The lowest crime societies on Earth are run by Arabs.

East Indians such as Bangladeshis, Indians, Nepalis and Pakistanis also do not show anything like the wild chaotic and horrific behavior of Blacks. In some of those societies, there is probably not even a lot of crime. A friend of mine told me that despite their poverty, Indian Hindus don’t commit a lot of crime or even thievery because they are afraid of coming back as a cockroach.

The Stans have IQ’s around the same of US Blacks. They are smooth-running Islamic societies with little crime and excellent health figures.

Iran has an IQ a couple of points lower than US Blacks, and the crime rate is almost nil.

American Indians and US Polynesians have the same IQ as US Blacks, but Blacks commit 4.5 times as much crime. Traditional Polynesian society works very well. There is almost zero crime. Finding any Black society anywhere that works well or has zero crime is quite an undertaking.

Indonesians and Filipinos have IQ’s exactly the same as US Blacks. Indonesia is a smooth society with little crime. I don’t know much about the Philippines, but village society has little crime, and in general Filipino cities are nothing like Lagos or Detroit.

In China, Uighurs and Tibetans have IQ’s lower than Blacks. Their societies run smoothly with almost no crime or dysfunction.

Further, Black IQ is rising. Black children have IQ’s as high as 95, which gradually drop to 87 in adulthood. Most Black youth have IQ’s about 90-95. That’s perfectly high to act decently, yet Black kids act like monsters. I know, I taught them in school for years.

To me, it’s obvious that there is something badly wrong with Black people as a group. But I think little of it has to do with being stupid. There’s something else going on. Part of the project of this site is to figure out what that something is, and then maybe suggest what we can do about it, if anything. Blacks don’t seem to want to assist in the quest; all they do is come around and yell and scream abuse at me. But I’m a liberal, and part of our project is to “help the poor Blacks.” Because they need it, and because it’s the right thing to do.

A North-South Chinese Mix Cline in SE Asia?

Repost from the old site.

A question from the comments about the Are SE Asians Australoids? article:

Aren’t Khmer a little more Australoid than people in Vietnam (at least Northern Vietnamese), most Thai, and Laotians? There seems to be a clear cline in Southeast Asia, the areas bordering China seem to have more NE Mongoloid Admixture than those of the Malay archipelago and the Khmer. I’m basing this on appearance and not genes, which you pointed out, rightly so, as being misleading.

This question keeps popping up because so many folks are convinced, based primarily on appearance, that many SE Asians are part-Australoid.

First of all, the Vietnamese, Filipinos, Thai and Khmer are all quite close to the Southern Chinese genetically. Of these, believe it or not, the Filipinos are possibly the closest of all. The Vietnamese are also very close, but I don’t have any figures. Both the Filipinos and the Vietnamese are very close to the coastal Southern Chinese of Fujian and Guangdong Province bordering the Taiwan Strait.

Next come the Thai, Lao and the Khmer. These groups are much closer to the Southern Chinese than Malays or Indonesians. All of them are about the equidistant from the Southern Chinese. Filipinos are much closer to the Southern Chinese than these three groups.

The Thai and Lao are primarily a Southern Chinese group called the Tai that came down into that area in a massive wave about 800 years ago. To some extent they bred in with whatever people were already there. This Tai group came from Yunnan.

The Vietnamese are very closely related to the Southern Chinese. A huge wave of Southern Chinese poured into Vietnam 2,200 years and bred in with existing people. This group came from the Taiwan Strait – the area north of Vietnam along the coast.

The Khmer came down into the area possibly 5,000 years ago with the first wave of Austroasiatics. They also came from Southern China, probably Yunnan once again, but longer ago than their neighbors the Thai, Lao and Vietnamese. The Austroasiatics are considered to be some of the original people of the SE Asia.

The Zhuang of South China are probably the purest relatives of the original Austroasiatics. They came from Central China (possibly originally as the Dai) to Yunnan about 5,000 years ago. One line went to the Zhuang in Guangxi in Southwest China and another line went to the modern Tai-Dai in Yunnan.

Also, the Khmer bred in much more than their neighbors with people from India who came about 1,500 years ago. So, the Khmer contain more of the original Austroasiatic group and less of recent Southern Chinese mixture than the Thai, Lao and Vietnamese. This accounts for their appearance.

Filipinos are closer to Southern Chinese (Guangdong) than any of the groups above except maybe Vietnamese. They are also very close to Taiwan aborigines. Most people have a hard time understanding this because they look so different from most Southern Chinese. But there are Chinese from around Fujian and Hong Kong who look quite dark and, to my mind, SE Asian-looking.

Malays are Taiwan aborigines in large part (Austronesians), and are also are made up of Southern Chinese who came down 4,000 years ago as Austroasiatics.

The Austronesians came through the Philippines, down into Borneo and Sumatra and then up into Malaysia about 2,000 years ago. The Malay do have some Papuan genes, but so do the Southern Chinese and the coastal Vietnamese. Once again, the Malays have less recent Southern Chinese admixture and more archaic Southern Chinese admixture (Austronesian and Austroasiatic).

Malays also definitely have Australoid ancestors in the Semang, the proto-Malay and the Senoi, although we can’t see it in their skulls or much of it in their genes.

The Indonesians in the Center and East of the country have quite a few Melanesian Australoid genes, but the ones in the West have almost none. The ones in the West appear to be Taiwanese aborigines similar to Filipinos.

It’s really a common fallacy that there is such a cline in SE Asia, with folks becoming more Australoid and less Chinese as you go south. What there is is that in some places, you find more recent Southern Chinese mixture and towards the South, you get more archaic Taiwanese and archaic Southern Chinese mixture.

A modern Southern Chinese woman from Chengdu Province. Isn’t she beautiful? God I love this kind of woman. It’s possible she may use some sort of skin whitener to make her skin look more white, or she may just stay out of the sun. White skin has been highly valued for a long time, and my blogging colleague Dragon Horse (feel free to check him out – he’s smart as Hell) notes that it had been highly valued long before Chinese even knew much about Europeans.

In other words, Chinese were not trying to look like White Europeans – they hardly even knew who they were. A preference for lighter skin was simply an independent development in China based on their own considerations and values. Many will look at this woman and say she has a NE Asian facial type. Well, that may be so, but Caucasians are closer to NE Asians than she is as a Southern Chinese. The genetic distance between Southern Chinese and Northern Chinese is vast.

We only find a few Australoid genes in SE Asians and even then only in Southern Chinese, coastal Vietnamese and Malays. Skull-wise, nothing exists, except that the Senoi of Malaysia do have Australoid skulls.

I guess people say this based on appearance. There is a SE Asian native type characterized most prominently by Malays, Khmer, Filipino, Western Indonesians, etc. that people think looks a bit primitive, and they associate that with Australoids.

Really it’s just a native indigenous development, although it does seem to represent a more archaic type – either archaic Taiwanese or archaic South Chinese – and has nothing to do per se with Australoids.

Recall however that the whole region slowly transitioned from Australoid types to modern SE Asian types about 5000 years ago, and that’s later than most groups. Maybe that is what people are seeing. But there’s nothing we can measure in genes or skulls.

Thai, Lao and Vietnamese don’t have any NE Asian mixture that we can see. There is a Southern Chinese look that can resemble Northern Chinese, but the two groups are very far apart. Even Southern Chinese don’t have much northern mixture, but there are some groups that are more northern than others.

The Wa (Va) of Yunnan and Burma are about 50-50 Northern and Southern Chinese, and the Hmong have more Northern Chinese than other Southern Chinese groups.

A Hmong woman. We have a huge Hmong population here in the Central Valley. By and large, they are good people and I like them a lot. The Hmong are interesting among Southern Chinese in that they have more Northern Chinese than most of the rest of the Southern Chinese. They also have a unique genetic line going back up to 42,000 years (!). It’s pretty incredible that some sort of proto-Hmong have been evolving for that long.

The website I got this off described Hmong as partly Australoid, but I think that’s silly. They are saying this by looking at the faces and saying that the face looks somewhat Australoid. The Hmong are probably less Australoid than that Chengdu woman above.

I find some of these Hmong women, like this one, to be really beautiful. They definitely look different. They have round, moon-shaped faces, and short, stocky, bodies. Character-wise, they are very Chinese-like.

Their IQ in the US is only 82.5 (lower than US Blacks) but that must be due to language difficulties. Their verbal IQ was insanely low, while their performance IQ was quite high. The Hmong have also been living like hillbillies for centuries, so there is probably a lot of potential for Flynn Effects in the US. That’s a traditional costume she is wearing.

Caucasians are closer to Northern Chinese than Southern Chinese are.

A classic NE Asian, in this case a Manchu woman. The Caucasians that they most resemble are Northern Turkics such as some of the people in the Altai and the residents of the Stans.

I can’t see much difference in phenotype between her and the Southern Chinese beauty above, but maybe folks who understand Asian phenotypes better can see these things. These people are also quite close genetically to Amerindians. Koreans, Japanese and NE Chinese are all quite genetically close, although I guess they mostly hate each other and would not want to believe that.

A Tajik man. Boy, does he look Jewish or what? These people are quite closely related to NE Asians and also to Northern Indians. They are closest to Iranians. A very interesting people, they are thought to be the original Aryans. Funny how Aryans White Power types go back to Aryan dudes who look like nice Jewish boys. Wonders never cease.

People base so much popular anthropology on superficial appearances, but that’s not really scientific.

Is There An Australoid Race?

New commenter Nikephoros, from Colombia, an antiracist type who I suspect is also a race-denier, comments:

NP: Then SE Asians are “Australoid” right to this day. SE Asians don’t differ craniometrically too much from Papuans or the more gracile Australian types.

RL: I am not sure I agree with that. Studies of Vietnamese skulls clearly show that there are different types, with the ancient Melanesian skulls slowly changing and becoming more Oriental, eventually trending over the last 2,300 years towards the true SE Asian type. The Melanesian type seems completely phased out 2,3000 YBP.

And there is a set of skulls that pools together as Australoid – Tamils, Indian tribals, Negritos, Senoi, Melanesians, Ainu, Papuans, Aborigines and some Amerindians.

My understanding is that SE Asians proper are definitely not a part of this group. They are more progressive and less archaic.

NP: Do you have any link to those studies? SE Asians skulls seem to cover all the range from “Mongoloid” to “Australoid”, with most falling somewhere in between. Also so-called Australoids are a quite diverse group when it comes to cranial morphology.

If you go to George Weber’s site, you will see that Fuegians, the Pericu and the ancient skulls of the Americas plot with Aborigines, Melanesians, Papuans, Ainu and Negritos. I would call that group something like Australoids.

A traditional Ainu couple.

A Vietnamese paleoanthropologist characterized Vietnamese fossils. To him, there was a clear progression from Australoid or Melanesian (20,000 YBP) to SE Asian of today, with a lot of classic Oriental type input from China to the north.

A Melanesian man with blond hair. This was the dominant type in Vietnam until 2,200 YBP.

A classic Vietnamese type. What a cutie!

I don’t think many SE Asians look Australoid, unless you include Negritos, Senoi, and some East Indonesians, but those Indonesians are really Melanesians.

This paper shows that the Semang Negritos and Senoi of Thailand cluster with the Tamils, coastal New Guinea (Melanesians) and the Andaman Island Negritos. That looks like an “Australoid” type grouping to me.

A Dravidian from India with Australoid features. Before 10,000 YBP, Indians looked like Aborigines.

An Andaman Islands Negrito from the Jarawa group.

Melanesian teeth are very different from SE Asian teeth. SE Asian teeth are halfway between Melanesian teeth (Australoid) and NE Asian Sinodont teeth. This implies that SE Asians are halfway between Australoids and classic Mongoloids (NE Asians).

The ancient skulls from Thailand – Tabon, Niah, Gua Gunung – all look like Aborigines or Melanesians. Notice it says Aborigines or Melanesians. So there are similarities between the groups.

Australoid race: Aborigines, Papuans, Melanesians, Negritos, Ainu, Fuegians, Pericu, Tamils other Vedda and tribal types and ancient Amerindians.

A Papuan dude with some funky bones in his nose. This man looks almost Polynesian, but then Polynesians have a Papuan component via Melanesians.

Sure, it’s kind of a messy group, but it’s good enough for me and it seems to have some basis.

I also don’t have any problem with a Mongoloid race that includes SE Asians and NE Asians, with exceptions for Ainu, Negritos, Senoi and East Indonesians.

More Lies of the Hindus

I’m really starting to despise Hindus. They seem like they are some of the worst people on Earth. Once they quit telling so many damned lies, I might start liking them more.

Here is an excerpt from a recent appalling academic “conference” held at the University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth. Incredibly, this pseudoscience conference was sponsored by the Indic Studies Department at U Mass Dartmouth.

This is getting frightening. Anti-scientific Hindu fascists now hold great power over Indian culture. Increasingly, their views are widely accepted among overseas Hindus.

In the next 20-30 years, we will increasingly have to deal with the effects of Hindu fascism in India and among the diaspora. Indian “scholarship” in many academic realms, will decline to pitiful levels. And Indian academics outside will be increasingly infected with fascist and anti-scientific views, which means we must more and more look dubiously on Hindu academics in the West, denying them degrees, jobs and tenure when we uncover evidence of their fascist and anti-scientific beliefs.

The following is an excerpt from the conference:

Comprehensive population genetics data along with archeological and astronomical evidence presented at June 23-25, 2006 conference in Dartmouth, MA, overwhelmingly concluded that Indian civilization and its human population is indigenous.

In fact, the original people and culture within the Indian Subcontinent may even be a likely pool for the genetic, linguistic, and cultural origin of the most rest of the world, particularly Europe and Asia.

Leading evidences come from population genetics, which were presented by two leading researchers in the field, Dr. V. K. Kashyap, National Institute of Biologicals, India, and Dr. Peter Underhill of Stanford University in California. Their results generally contradict the notion Aryan invasion/migration theory for the origin of Indian civilization.

Underhill concluded “the spatial frequency distributions of both L1 frequency and variance levels show a spreading pattern emanating from India”, referring to a Y chromosome marker. He, however, put several caveats before interpreting genetic data, including “Y-ancestry may not always reflect the ancestry of the rest of the genome”

Dr. Kashyap, on the other hand, with the most comprehensive set of genetic data was quite emphatic in his assertion that there is “no clear genetic evidence for an intrusion of Indo-Aryan people into India, [and] establishment of caste system and gene flow.”

Michael Witzel, a Harvard linguist, who is known to lead the idea of Aryan invasion/migration/influx theory in more recent times, continued to question genetic evidence on the basis that it does not provide the time resolution to explain events that may have been involved in Aryan presence in India.

Dr. Kashyap’s reply was that even though the time resolution needs further work, the fact that there are clear and distinct differences in the gene pools of Indian population and those of Central Asian and European groups, the evidence nevertheless negates any Aryan invasion or migration into Indian Subcontinent.

Witzel though refused to present his own data and evidence for his theories despite being invited to do so was nevertheless present in the conference and raised many questions. Some of his commentaries questioning the credibility of scholars evoked sharp responses from other participants.

Rig Veda has been dated to 1,500 BC by those who use linguistics to claim its origin Aryans coming out of Central Asia and Europe. Archaeologist B.B. Lal and scientist and historian N.S. Rajaram disagreed with the position of linguists, in particular Witzel who claimed literary and linguistic evidence for the non-Indian origin of the Vedic civilization.

Dr. Narahari Achar, a physicist from University of Memphis clearly showed with astronomical analysis that the Mahabharata war in 3,067 BC, thus poking a major hole in the outside Aryan origin of Vedic people.

Interestingly, Witzel stated, for the first time to many in the audience, that he and his colleagues no longer subscribe to Aryan invasion theory.

Dr. Bal Ram Singh, Director, Center for Indic Studies at UMass Dartmouth, which organized the conference was appalled at the level of visceral feelings Witzel holds against some of the scholars in the field, but felt satisfied with the overall outcome of the conference.

“I am glad to see people who have been scholarly shooting at each other for about a decade are finally in one room, this is a progress”, said Singh.

The conference was able to bring together in one room for the first time experts from genetics, archeology, physics, linguistics, anthropology, history, and philosophy. A proceedings of the conference is expected to come out soon, detailing various arguments on the origin of Indian civilization.

The conference was sponsored by the Center for Indic Studies at UMass Dartmouth (www.umassd.edu/indic) with co-sponsorship from Educator’s Society for the Heritage of India (www.eshiusa.org).

That “India” was a pool for the genetics of the world outside of Africa is quite dubious, as is the claim that humans moved outside of Africa to settle in India, where they developed culturally. Yes, Negritos moved out of Africa along the coast of the India Ocean. India was one of the stops along the way. The Negritos did not stop in India and develop culturally and then spread across the world. Negrito types only spread throughout Asia, not Europe or the Americas, and there is no evidence for a Negrito homeland in India.

The homeland of the Asians is in northern Vietnam. That homeland goes back 53,000 YBP. The Japanese and northern Chinese people also have very ancient pedigrees, going back similar lengths of time.

Japan was populated out of Thailand originally.

SE Asia was populated most recently out of Southern China.

Indonesians came out of Southern China 15,000 YBP.

Amerindians came out of Siberia 13,000 YBP and sooner.

Iranians came out of Central Asia, not India.

The Dravidians may have come from the Middle East 18,000 YBP, not the other way around.

The Berbers are more or less indigenous to North Africa.

The origin of the Arabs is unknown and may be very ancient.

Europeans came out of Southern Russia. Before that, it is not known where they came from, bu 12,000 YBP, the European population derived from the Middle East. Europeans may also have derived from Berbers.

Afghans have an origin in Central Asia.

The people of the Stans have an origin from Central Asia and then later from China.

Koreans come from Mongolia.

Filipinos come from Southern China as Negritos, then later from Taiwan.

There is little to no evidence that Europeans or most Asians derive from India, at least not in recent times. Going back a very long time, it is hard to say.

In short, it increasingly appears that few, if any, modern populations derive from India. However, in the early history of the Caucasians from 20,000-40,000 YBP, there were movements back and forth between the major Caucasian homelands of North Africa, the Middle East and India. The Aborigines appear to be derived in part from southern Indians. An ancient group of Thais called Senoi appear to be related to Veddas of India, however, the Senoi came from southern China 5,000 YBP.

The notion that India is the center of human language is preposterous. However, the Austroasiatic languages of SE Asia seem to be Indian derived. Dravidian languages came from outside India, as did Indo-Aryan languages.

India as a center of world culture is a rather bizarre claim to make, although there may have been an early agricultural culture there, and many domesticated plants and animals may have spread out from there.

B.B. Lal’s position is fringe in archeology.

N.S. Rajaram is an engineer who is widely regarded as crack and a kook.

It is true that at the moment there is no hard evidence of an Aryan intrusion into India, however, this does not discount the theory, which has long been proven on linguistic grounds.

Astronomical evidence from the Vedas is virtually worthless, especially when it is contradicted by mounds of other evidence.

B-W IQ Differences and B-W Wealth Differences

Race realists like to say that the B-W IQ gap completely explains all of the various discrepanices and lags that Blacks experience. Stated briefly, Blacks lag in many positive things and beat Whites in many negative variables.

It’s intriuging to attribute all of this to IQ, but there are many problems with this.

The Black IQ is only a bit lower than the Polynesian, Amerindian and Hispanic IQ’s in the US, yet Blacks have crime rates 4X higher than Amerindians and Polynesians, and 2.5X higher than Hispanics. Amerindians and Polynesians have IQ’s a few points lower than Hispanics, yet they have crime rates that are actually 70% than lower than Hispanic crime rates. In this case, higher IQ is correlated with more crime and lower IQ with less crime!

Obviously, the IQ-crime-race link has lots of problems, but data in social science tends to be pretty messy anyway, with lots of scatter.

Anyway, let’s just take the race realists’ point as correct for the moment. The White IQ is about 3X the Black IQ. I conclude this because I believe that an increase of 6.5 IQ points makes one about twice as smart. These findings are based on reaction time findings that found that 145 IQ persons were 7 times as smart as 100 IQ persons. Their reaction times were 7 times faster.

Based on this rather hazy variable and leaving aside the notion that races gifted by nature should be rewarded at all, or those punished by nature should be penalized as well, let us grant that Whites have a right to 3X the wealth of Blacks.

However, in 2008, Whites had 10X the wealth of Blacks. So Whites have more than 3X the wealth that they deserve merely based on their IQ’s, which is the way that race realists justify White wealth. Clearly, there is some kind of an injustice going on here even in race realist terms, no?

In the Philippines and Indonesia, things are so much worse. Chinese have IQ’s about 19 points higher than Filipinos and Indonesians. Let us say that they are 3X more intelligent then. Yet Chinese, 2% of the population, have 70% of the wealth of these grotesquely unequal nations. On intelligence grounds alone, we could grant them 6% of the wealth and no more.

Questions about this wealth discrepancy in the US are typically given responses along the lines of “The Chinese are smarter,” and “The Chinese work harder.” Really? They’re 3X smarter, not 35X smarter, as their wealth would suggest. How much harder to they really work. Working class Filipinos and Indonesians slave away all hours a day for a pittance in fields and factories. Chinese really work harder? Do tell.

Chinese in these countries are being rewarded at a rate of ~12X more wealth than they could conceivably deserve, even considering that people should be rewarded based on nature’s gifts.

Here we see how the race realist argument really falls apart. Nature or science really does not ratify vast discrepancies in wealth, which is really what the race realist agenda is all about. The gifted groups receive vastly more than they could possibly deserve even accepting race realist principles and the lower classes are punished much more brutally than they should be allowed to fall behind even buying into race realist lines.

An Interesting NE Asian Phenotype

Repost from the old site.

White Nationalists like to go on and on and on about the glorious color of their skin: white. For some odd reason, this white skin is superior to darker-colored skins of folks who evolved in hotter zones. Truth is, darker skin color is a perfectly rational evolutionary response to high rates of UV radiation in areas where it is very hot.

And in some areas of the globe, people can have fairly light skins if they stay out of the sun, but they get dark quite easily if they go out in the sun. Italians and Greeks come to mind. Here are photos of Italians, Greeks and Spaniards who have stayed out of sun, and then the same folks after they got tanned.

The same page also shows identical phenotypes commonly seen as European-only, like Nordics, Mediterraneans and Alpines, in both their European and extra-European forms from Arabia, North Africa and Central Asia. Often the darker skin you see in a lot of Southern Europeans is nothing but a tan.

On the other hand, Northern Europeans, and possibly other Northern types, don’t tan very well (they often burn) and even when they do, they don’t get all that dark. The very dark skin of Blacks, Papuans, Melanesians, some Aborigines and some South Indians is simply a result of evolving in those parts of the Earth where the sun shines brightest of all.

But Whites ought to give up the fantasy of about their white skin being best of all – because other races have some very white skin too. See the Korean woman in the photo below for example.

A Korean woman. She has a shade of White on her skin that is lacking in almost all Caucasians – it is probably only seen in Ireland and Scotland and it’s probably even lacking in Sweden and Norway. But this very White phenotype seen in some Koreans and Northern Chinese differs from that of European Whites in that it is more glossy. European White skin looks more chalky or powdery.

This phenotype also has skin that looks more like porcelain and is reflective of light. The very light European skin tends to be less light-reflective.

Here’s a pretty cool chart showing degrees of skin lightness versus darkness around the world.

UV radiation chart along with zones of skin color. Zone 1 has the darkest skin of all . Zone 2, which includes Italians and Spaniards, has skin that tans easily. Zone 3 contains light skin that enables residents to absorb as much Vitamin D as possible from the sun due to lack of sunlight at higher latitudes.

Note that there is also pretty high UV radiation in parts of South America (Peru), in the heart of Mexico, in Southwest Arabia (especially Yemen), in Southern India and Sri Lanka and in Indonesia, Malaysia, Southern Philippines and New Guinea. Indonesians and Malaysians are known for being darker than many other SE Asian groups.

According to this chart, the darkest people of all are Blacks from Mozambique and Cameroon in Africa and Aborigines from Darwin in North Australia. A look at the same chart, much expanded, in the original paper, shows that the next darkest are Blacks, the Okavango in Namibia and the Sara in Chad (Table 6, p. 19). The chart shows that the lightest people are in Netherlands, followed by Germany and then the northern parts of the UK.

Note on the map that Tibet and parts of the Amazon should have some very dark-skinned people, but those who live there are lighter than you would expect based on UV. The paper suggests that the Tibetans are lighter because it is so cold there that most of their body is covered up all the time and only the face is uncovered.

The face is lighter to collect what Vitamin D it can as so much of the body cannot collect Vitamin D due to clothing. The Amazonian Indians are known to be shade-seeking and the paper suggests that this may account for their lighter skin.

Most Whites don’t really have White skin anyway. I am looking at my own skin here as I type, and it looks more pink than White.

References

Jablonski, N. and Chaplin, G. (2000) The Evolution of Human Skin Coloration. Journal of Human Evolution. Available on this blog here.

Indonesian Soldiers Torture Papuan Men

The video in question is available on my video site.

This is extremely shocking footage of Indonesian soldiers in West Papua torturing a Papuan man and his father.

Indonesia stole West Papua from the Papuans in 1965, and has waged a genocidal and racist war against the Papuans ever since, a war that has killed 100,000 Papuans. Soldiers are extremely racist and view Papuans as little more than animals.

Papuans try to fight back using very primitive weapons, but they are no match for the modern Indonesian military. US imperialism has backed the Indonesians to the hilt in this war because US corporations want to exploit various raw materials in Papua.

The footage was filmed on a cellphone in May by one of the soldiers taking part in a military operation in the Punkak Jaya region of the Central Highlands of West Papua. The operation was launched against the Free Papua Movement, an armed group seeking freedom from Indonesian colonialism, but the troops are mostly just torturing, raping and murdering civilians like they always do.

It is apparently “trophy footage.” This video is just a small part of a much larger video that shows the two men being tortured. In the bigger video, the older man is stripped naked, has a bag put over his head and has a burning stick applied to his genitals while he screams in agony. The young man has a knife held to his face.

Details of who the victims are hard to come by since the area is a closed military zone, and journalists are banned from the area. However, the older man is missing and probably dead, while the young man has been released.

Indonesian troops have been killing, torturing and raping Papuans with impunity since 1963. Victims have been as young as 3 years old.

For many years, Indonesian troops have been taking trophy photos, now escalating to films, of Papuans being killed and raped. They show this media to Papuans in order to humiliate them.

The footage appeared just recently, on October 20, 2010 and caused a bit of a media stir.

More Comments on the Genetics of Filipinos

The question involves whether or not Filipinos have some Negrito genes. The Negritos are the original Australoid peoples of the Philippines. The Filipinos are the modern, SE Asian Mongoloid types that we all familiar with.

SE Asian Australoids are people like Papuans, Melanesians and Negritos.

It is possible to be part this or that in your background, but it won’t show up in genes or in skulls. I think we are all aware that SE Asians in general are a mix of a Mongoloid type with more primitive Australoid types = Negrito or Melanesian types, that were already living there. But when we look at skulls, we see nothing. SE Asian skulls do not look Australoid, other than Negritos and the Senoi.

Classic SE Asian appearance in a young Filipina with relatively dark skin, an adaptation to the tropical climate. She also somewhat resembles a Taiwanese aborigine.

When we go looking for Australoid genes, we can’t seem to find much of those either. Just a few here and there along the coast of Vietnam, in Malaysia and in Indonesia. Though there are a lot more in Eastern Indonesia.

So, yeah, Filipinos may well be part Melanesian/Negrito going way back when (Heck, all SE Asians are) but there’s little to nothing obvious left of the Australoid presence, other than maybe some vague look in the faces won’t plot on a chart (Filipino skulls won’t plot with Australoid skulls on charts).

Emilio Aguinaldo, a famous Filipino independence fighter. This look, often said to be Australoid, actually shows resemblances to the Taiwanese Ami.

The analogy with Amerindians is a good one. Amerindians in the US have quite a bit of White genes. Most are only part Amerindian anymore. But Whites do not have a lot of Amerindian genes. Sure, we have some (I am 1/3000 Amerindian as I am related to Pocohontas), and perhaps a majority of Americans have Amerindian genes, but they only have small amounts of them.

Vast amounts of White genes went into the Amerindian population. Few Amerindian genes went into the White population. Both via genocide and genetic swamping effects.

A similar situation may have existed in the Philippines. Aeta genes now look Filipino, but Filipinos seem to have few Negrito genes that I am aware of.

Wilma, a Filipina girl from Siteo Pader, Angeles City. This Filipina girl has a classic Filipina look to her. She is much closer to a Taiwanese Ami than to a Negrito, as you can see.

The Negritos were simply genetically swamped out. Vast amounts of Filipino genes went into the Negritos, but few Negrito genes went into the Filipinos.

A Negrito woman from the Philippines. Do Filipinos look like this? No. Hence, don't have many Negrito genes.

All of this is complicated by the fact that the original Austronesians may well have been Australoid types. At 5000 YBP, the Taiwanese aborigine Ami, the source of the Filipino population, are Australoid.

An Ami girl from Taiwan. The Ami, Taiwanese aborigines, are the source population of most of the Philippines and the closest relatives of Filipinos.

They transition to Mongoloid over the next 3000 years. Probably a similar transition occurred in the Philippines, as the Ami in the Philippines slowly turned into Mongoloids along with the rest of SE Asia.

A chart showing the near-perfect relationship between the Taiwanese Ami and the Filipinos. The relationship is clear and unmistakable. Note that other Taiwanese populations could not have been the source.

It is true that there are Bornean genes from Borneo in the South of the Philippines, that is, the South Filipinos of Mindanao are part Bornean.

The heavily-Austronesian (Ami) people of Sabah. People from Sabah went up into the Southern Philippines (Mindanao) at some point in the past. P.S. The lady in the middle is a cutie. Same with 3rd one on the top and 3rd one on the left.

The proto-Daic genes from 15,000 YBP that make up 80% of the Indonesians were from an Australoid people. Proto-Daics (the ancestors of the present day Dai people of Yunnan in South China) 15,000 YBP were Australoids. I am not sure what they looked like. Maybe something like an Aborigine or a Melanesian. The Indonesians then transitioned to Mongoloid types over the next 13,000 years or so.

An Indonesian with a strong Australoid appearance. Quite a few Indonesians retain some Australoid features.

The Anuids or Ainu types probably passed through the Philippines two times.

An Ainu woman with quite a bit of Japanese in her. Most Ainus are now heavily Japanese. By the way, she's a hottie.

The first time, going from Thailand as the Ainuid Jomonese to Japan on boats to form the Japanese Jomonese 16,000 YBP.

An Ainu chief showing the typical Ainu appearance before Japanese gene flow.

Possibly the same migration brought the Jomonese to Australia as the Ainuid Murrayans, a formative element in the Aborigines.

Typical Aboriginal women.