I'm thinking of the Dinka or Tungusic peoples. They legitimately look like racist caricatures. But which one?
Hear me out…>DinkaOther than the skin, unironically looks Mediterranean. Round skull, big lips, flared nostrils>TungusicSimilar to Siberian Slavic groups
Caucasian as in from the Caucasus Mountains? Or Caucasian as in Anglo-Germanic White?
>>18489341fuck kinda mediterraneans have you seen
>>18489368West eurasians >>18489330What is the Western Eurasian equivalent of these phenotypes? Are they like le happy le merchat people with hyperdolicephaly and heavy browridge?
>>18489330>>18489374Those are both extreme versions of the heat adapted-phenotype and the cold-adapted phenotype. That said, not all Dinka are ultra-prognathic like this guy. Pic related almost looks caucasoid.
>>18489372You are a stupid amerimutt
>>18489388Looks very Mediterranid
>>18489330Right looks like a Skyrim Elf.
>>18489388They are the pure Mongoloid and Negroid groups closest to West Eurasians, but several individuals look extreme. It's also interesting that several Abos have Caucasoid features despite being very genetically distant.
>>18489372mediterraneans are all moor rapebabies with nigger admixture, he has a point
>>18489417 Boers have more direct SSA.
>>18489374>What is the Western Eurasian equivalent of these phenotypes?
>>18489374>Western Eurasian equivalent of these phenotypes?
>>18489420Wrong. And again. Gout Gout does unironically have some facial features that make him look Mediterranean
>>18489427>>18489421What about this man? He looks like a racist caricature a Jap would draw.
>>18489435Mediterraneans have some of the most leptorrhine noses.
>>18489330Dinka since Nilotics can create crakkas babies without crakka dna.
>>18489466Bantu niggas look more progressive than sudo niggas
>>18489447What?
>>18489485There are no Meds with this nose
>>18489482He is a Moor so obviously mixed
>>18489488Wrong.
>>18489491Maybe it's Fulani
>>18489492Alpine beast
>>18489421He looks like a Russian uraloid, like a chuvash.
>>18489509*Udmurt
>>18489495He's Sierra Leone & Ghana. Fulani is restricted only to them they are inbred no other West African/Sahelien has their admixture.
>>18489330In terms of the "Big 3"/"Big 5" or in terms of notable people groups? Because in terms of "Big 5", I'd say Black Africans in general, specifically West Africans and Bantu groups descended from them. Differing skin tones, hair texture, nose and lip shape, with prognathism overlapping with West Eurasian at times but being significantly more developed in that regard, and on the other hand, Black Africans largely don't have the pronounced brow ridges of West Eurasians and aside from prognathism, arguably look more neotenous (less developed brow ridge, very little body hair, etc.) than the latter group.This is not race-baiting, just my take on things. As an aside, it's interesting how West Eurasians and East Asians are both "temperate climate" people and both have light skin and straight-ish hair, but aside from that look quite different. So why don't East Asians have colored eyes or hair? I've read Peter Frost's take on European coloration, but by that logic East Asians should have it too if the trait originated in Northern Asia.Why the fuck are Mediterraneans so goddamn hairy?
>>18489374Death mask of English murderer William Corder, executed in 1828
>>18489519>>18489495>>18489491>>18489482People see non-prognathic Black Africans and assume "admixture", even though that makes no sense and/or the admixture is so ancient (and typically quite small) that it should just be seen as part of that people's genome, especially if the West Eurasian admixed people that they mixed with no longer exist.
>>18489522Nilotics look more different than West Africans do from West Eurasians by far.
>>18489488generalizations, i'm italian and i can post 10 actors with that nose
Some Hadza look like Papuans for some reason.
>>18489585Straight from Papua
>>18489330Autralian Aborigines, I think.>>18489374A racist caricature of an Armenian. Or how the Japanese tend to draw Europeans. A very long time ago I read a comic about a Japanese Businessman's experience in Apartheid South Africa that I think re-created the look perfectly. Basically a slight, sharp faced (perhap even rat-like) individual with a huge nose. Alternatively something like >>18489421 (with the standout cheekbones) or perhap even >>18489427.>>18489435Which ones?>>18489482Bantu is not genetic category. And it's not even applicable to West Africans.
>>18489595>which onesRound skull, flat and wide nose. Thick lips
>>18489595Like this Turkish man who won the Guinness World Record for the biggest nose?
>>18489602I do not quite associate mediterraneans with any of those traits, to be honest with you. Why do you think so?>>18489604I guess.
>>18489585>>18489589I've heard it be claimed that they are the most representative of the OOA population, but I'm not sure what the evidence for that is.
>>18489612What do you associate them with, then?
>>18489612He's probably think of Arabs/Muslims who are African-admixed from the Islamic slave-trade. And maybe some Iberians like Alcaraz also look negroid, but it's also because of African admixture.
>>18489374>>18489421>>18489427God damn every race is ugly as shit. Why would God create humans?
>>18489595I see they portray white characters as attractive, similar to picrelated, or like those who look like a racial caricatures.
>>18489612Well I guess I can somewhat see the thick lips argument.>>18489616Pronounced noses, tall skulls.
>>18489635
>>18489622Racialist associated this phenotype with the prime example of white race purity, not those examples.
s it true that from a Japs point of view, the woman on the right looks more Caucasoid than the woman on the left?
>>18489621North Africans actually have fairly tall skulls too, iirc.>>18489639That's one guy though.
>>18489662Yeah? And that’s exactly what we’re doing in this thread. Posting pictures of random people
>>18489653the woman on the left is more caucasoid, armenoid phenotypes are actually mongoloid shifted according to studies due to sharing tall eye sockets and brachichephaly with mongoloids
>>18489640Kek. No wonder even the Medfags were painting their Christing cult Angels like these beautiful Nordic angels instead of hairy grease Meds. But then why didn't these Nordic trannies angels have a civilization? It's truly a divine comedy.
>>18489665In reality, Nordics are more West Eurasian, but I guess if you want to draw a caricature, it would look like her.
>>18489665Nordgoloid cope
>>18489665You're right. For example, Lithuanians and Latvians are much further away from Mongoloids than Jews are.
>>18489628I mean, where. It obviously depends. But I guess if you want to see a 'candid' depiction of Europeans from Japanese eyes defaulting to Edo Period depictions of the Dutch never fails. Here is a dutch Family and their two slaves. >>18489653I actually think they wouldn't really be able to tell difference. 'Arr rook same' goes both ways. You can't tell chinamen apart, they can't tell you apart from a Jew.
>>18489692nope, forget these memes and go look up actual studies, armenians are more mongoloid shifted than any european craniometrically, armenoid phenotypes are euryprosopyc (short faced) and brachychephalic (short headed), they have short sloped foreheads and tall eyesockets, all characteristics of mongoloidsthe least mongoloids shifted west eurasians are the sardinians that very very rarely exhibit armenoid phenotypes, and yes nordis are less mongoloid shifted than armenians craniometrically
>>18489694It's pretty easy to tell East Asians apart from Southeast Asians. Telling East Asians apart from each other is harder, but since I'm autistic, I know that Koreans and Northern Han Chinese look more robust and chinky-like Amur, while the Japanese are more gracile and also have a Caucasiform look due to the Jomon component.
>>18489421>HERO OF THE IMPERIUM!
>>18489692These mutts are not True Nordic. Wtf noooo they cannot be Angels.
>>18489703>
>>18489714we're talking about craniometry
>>18489703The Alpine type is very common among Sardinians and Corsicans. Also, Scandinavians and Balto-Slavs are much further away from Mongoloids than West Asians are, so the Armenoid type is not a good representation of peak West Eurasian
>>18489714Amerindians are not purely Mongoloid, Iranians are much closer to Mongoloids than Northern Europeans are.
>>18489694And also their Dutch maid. I forgot to mention that the woman in the spotted blouse was their maid.>>18489705It was a rhetorical remark. not a specific assumption about (you).
>>18489719Wow. Now I like sardine woman too. They really kept that beautiful ancient West Eurasian gene. Kek
>>18489719>The Alpine type is very common among Sardinians and Corsicans.it's absolutely not, sardinians are the least alpinized italians and some of the least alpinized europeans, this is obvious even just by looking at the cephalix index, as brachycephaly is foundamental to alpinids and armenids>so the Armenoid type is not a good representation of peak West Eurasianit never was
>>18489715>>18489724Oh no no no it's over. They found our Siberian shift where they can score almost 5% of it in qpadm models.
>>18489742irrelevant to everything i'm saying, don't reply to me ever again
Is the Armenian woman on the left less Caucasian than the Gypsy-looking woman on the right?
>>18489738I confused a small, straight nose with Alpine.
>>18489749both look quite armenoid influenced to be fair, but soft tissue aside they're both more mongoloid shifted than a random irish or spaniard or french
>>18489754Also, than a Latvian or Icelander. That circle is whiter because they're genetically distant from both blacks and Mongoloids.
>>18489754>the people with giant noses and huge eyes are more mong than the IrishWrong and try again. The only Armenians/Iranians that look mong are the ones mixed with Turks. I assume whatever trash research you read didn't account for that. They have a completely different type of brachycephaly, where their heads are tall instead of being round and wide.
>>18489779>the people with giant noses and huge eyes are more mong than the Irishcraniometrically yes, brits scots and irish are some of the most craniometrically caucasoid people in the world, way more than greeks or italians>giant eyesmongoloids have giant eyes craniometrically, since they have big eye sockets, their apparent small eyes are a result of soft tissue, so that's actually something that mongoloids and armenoids have in common>They have a completely different type of brachycephaly, where their heads are tall instead of being round and wide.nope, armenoids are both short faced and short headed like mongoloids, as the armenoid is a middle eastern variant of the alpinid. you're confusing armenoids with dinarids, an european subtype of the armenoid mixed with mediterranids that is brachy but long faced instead of short facedi told you already that we're not talking about genomics
>>18489797So there's not even any Armenians in there? What are we even arguing about again? Zero proof they look more mong than Nords.Also, this is fairly old and outdated. And soft tissue matters too, because many Nords have epicanthic folds like mongs, Irish EHGoloids included.
>>18489814>So there's not even any Armenians in there? What are we even arguing about again? Zero proof they look more mong than Nords.the greeks are extremely armenized, the most armenized europeans in fact, and they're as mongoloid shifted as russians and finns that have literal siberian ancestry>Also, this is fairly old and outdated.thankfully that doesn't matter because skull measurements don't change> And soft tissue matters toounfortunately we're not talking about soft tissue, the people of the british isles are extremely caucasoid craniometrically, they form the terminal end of the caucasoid cline in both PCA1vsPCA2 and PCA2vsPCA3, the two pcas that explain the most variation as seen in parenthesiscaucasoid small eyes and mongoloid small eyes are completely different on a cranial level, mongoloids have large tall eye sockets, while small eyes in caucasoid is caused by short eye sockets
>>18489826>unfortunately we're not talking about soft tissue, the people of the british isles are extremely caucasoid craniometricallyBut are the Irish? Also, I just read this study and it uses extremely low sample sizes, par for the era. Outdated and useless. They tried to argue that it mirrored DNA though, so pointing out the fact that Nords are Siberian-shifted is a valid argument in the discussion.
>>18489863>But are the Irish? yes, they're craniometrically identical to the scottish, that irish-iberian vs anglo-teutons vs negro is a literal joke post btw>Also, I just read this study and it uses extremely low sample sizes, par for the era. it does not, it has a high sample size actually, you're outright lying nowhttps://sci-hub.sidesgame.com/10.1002/ajpa.10233all sets of skulls have between 50 and 200 skulls>Outdated and useless.it's not outdated, cranial measurements are not outdated, they're the same used today>They tried to argue that it mirrored DNA thoughit's a craniometrical study that doesn't touch on genomicsirish and brits are some of the most craniometrically caucasoid populations in the world, unlike armenized greeks
>>18489887are white americans very caucasoids?
>>18489896yes, white americans largely descend from the people of the british isles, the average white american is more caucasoid craniometrically than a random greek or italian
>>18489887>t does not, it has a high sample size actually, you're outright lying nowGreece has only 24, Finland has only 37, Scandinavia has only 33, etc. No reason to believe Greeks would be that different from Italians.
>>18489814were south africa and madagascar outside of the scope of whoever made that map? they're the chinkiest africans
>>18489902greeks have 46 to 54 + 12 to 16finns have over 70the study says it, the sample size are quite big for a craniometric study>Seventy samples with a relatively large sample size were used in the multivariate statistical analysis. Table 1 provides the sample names, sample sizes, and brief information on each sample. All samples were made up of adult specimens without cranial deformations. The principal criteria used to determine adult status were complete fusion of the sphenooccipital synchondrosis and fully erupted third molars, if available. Twenty discrete cranial traits (Table 2) were analyzed with respect to sex and side differences>No reason to believe Greeks would be that different from Italians.greeks are more armenizedarmenoid phenotype =/= peak caucasoid
>>18489814this is a fake map>>18489906i can't find any source for that map, it's like amateurish/fake
>>18489913>range of N in samples (since each of traits observed has a different N) and numbers of mandibles inparentheses for males and femalesThe parentheses is the only useful number. Without the mandible you can't do this properly.
>>18489920>The parentheses is the only useful number. Without the mandible you can't do this properly.incorrect, most craniometric variants don't use the mandibles, it's the least important number, only a few like 2 variants use them, you're confusing craniometry with morphology, they're not the same thing
>>18489797greeks are truly banana eating bonobos lmao
>>18489923I'm pretty sure having a complete skull gives you more reliable results when it comes to craniometry. They wouldn't have stated this otherwise. It also uses both ancient and modern samples for several regions, so which Greeks are more nigger/mongoloid? The ancient or modern ones?
>>18489930>I'm pretty sure having a complete skull gives you more reliable results when it comes to craniometrynot by much as almost all craniometrical variants don't use the mandible, hence why they mandibleless crania were used, you are again confusing craniometry with morphology (study of teeth and mouth area) instead of accepting that you were wrong: armenoid phenotypes have nothing to do with being peak caucasoid, it's just a soft tissue induced illusion> so which Greeks are more nigger/mongoloid?compared to other europeans, all of them, as such is the effect of armenization
>>18489797the people of ensay, in northwest scotland, are the absolute manifestation of caucasoidness
>>18489944the northwestern european area is, birtish isles, western scandinavia/netherlands are craniometrically similar to the british isles too, the scandi samples likely come from northern sweden and norway and are heavily finnish admixed
>>18489940>not by much as almost all craniometrical variants don't use the mandible, hence why they mandibleless crania were usedThey used the mandible in the study and it's a part of craniometric marks. Without it the measurements are less reliable.>armenoid phenotypes have nothing to do with being peak caucasoid, it's just a soft tissue induced illusionWe can only be sure of that if we study Armenians. Greeks are not the source of the phenotype. The samples on them are also very poor as it mixes both ancient and modern ones and is below 100, which is the minimum required to get a somewhat reliable result. Again, there's no reason to believe they would be that different from Italians. Italians are armenized too and they're less negro/mong than most Euros there.
>>18489963>They used the mandible in the study and it's a part of craniometric marks. Without it the measurements are less reliable.nope, again only a few variants use the mandible, your pic is idiotic as those aren't craniometric variantsoverall it's a high sample size for the vast majority of variants as the study itself says>Seventy samples with a relatively large sample size >We can only be sure of that if we study Armenians. Greeks are not the source of the phenotypeno there's no need of that, greeks are extremely armenized and they're much more mongoloid drifted, britons lack any sort of armenization and they're the most caucasoid european set, we can surely say that the armenoid isn't peak caucasoid, makes complete sense as the armenoid is related to the alpinid that is related to the mongoloid metrically>which is the minimum required to get a somewhat reliable result.source?> Again, there's no reason to believe they would be that different from Italians.there's no reason to believe they would be similar to italians craniometrically, italians are very different from each other, the sample may include sicilians, that are doli as fuck and craniometrically very drifted towards iberians compared to mainland italians, it may include sardinians, it may include north italians with low armenization.... on the other hand greeks may include cypriots and pontics that are even more armenized than the already heavily armenized mainland greeks, this point is to be discarded, greeks and italians are not similar as an overall they have an overlap at best> Italians are armenized too and they're less negro/mong than most Euros there.much less than greeks, especially some italians like the sardinians
>>18489972To be precise, most Italians and Greeks fall into 'Dinarid' rather than 'Armenid', but we know that Dinarid is just a reduced version of Armenid today via genetic data. It's related to CHG/Iran_N, so yeah, I suppose there could be some mong/East Eurasian influence since CHG/Iran_N were both loaded with ANE. But compared to nordoid phenos like East Baltid it's not mongoloid at all.
>>18489983>To be precise, most Italians and Greeks fall into 'Dinarid' rather than 'Armenid'that's not completely correct, italians and even more so greeks, have both, often in an intermediate form called taurid (an armenoid-dinarid mix)>But compared to nordoid phenos like East Baltid it's not mongoloid at all.according to another craniometric study i've seen recently the most mongoloid drifted europeans are the swiss, due to their extreme alpinization, the armenoid, likewise surpasses some siberian influenced phenotypes just do to basic face structure being more akin to mongoloids
