Why European phenotypes are all over the place?

What are European racial origins?

  1. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    WHG+EEF+Steppe

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      This is actually a simpler genetic layout than most peoples of the world.

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        Mongoloids are much less mixed. Majority of negroids and Melanesians as well.

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          >negroids
          literally mixed with some jungle ape

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            That "jungle ape" was an archaic human around the same level as the Neanderthal your ancestors interbred with. They were probably closer to us than we are to Neanderthals.

            • 3 months ago
              Anonymous

              >negroids have a lower skull volume
              uhuh im sure that bad boy was really advanced. pls post evidence that we know fuck all about the negroid jungle ape admixture. hell ill probably look it up myself im genuinely curious

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                That "jungle ape" was an archaic human around the same level as the Neanderthal your ancestors interbred with. They were probably closer to us than we are to Neanderthals.

                Cranial capacity has no relation to intelligence intelligence. Neanderthals had large brain capcaity but were primitive apemen with much more archaic skulls than modern abbos.

              • 3 months ago
                Anonymous

                neanderthals couldnt speak well which hindered their development in some aspects but for the longest time their tech was more advanced than homo sapiens

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      WSH + EEF + WHG

      aaaand /thread

  2. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    WSH + EEF + WHG

  3. 3 months ago
    Anonymous
  4. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Every racial group has a wide spread of features within the common distinctive set that makes them look like a "race". Only ones that don't are East Asians, and I'm convinced that's due to most of the region having societies that heavily encouraged polygyny on all social status levels.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      There are a lot of phenotypes in Asia. The differences between a Vietnamese, a Korean, and a Siberian are large.

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        he said East Asians

        Every racial group has a wide spread of features within the common distinctive set that makes them look like a "race". Only ones that don't are East Asians, and I'm convinced that's due to most of the region having societies that heavily encouraged polygyny on all social status levels.

        but yes, East Asians belong to a race that includes Turkic people, aseans, Polynesians and all Native American groups

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          Native americans are not east asians, they're a hybrid race of ancient west and east eurasians.

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            i didn't say they were east asians, i said both of those are the same race

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            >ancient west
            ancient north eurasians. Not west.

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          >and all Native American groups

          Native Americans split from East Asian somewhere between 25,000-36,000 years ago. For comparison, it's thought that West and East Eurasians diverged around 45,000 years ago, with Peninsular Arabs splitting a little later, and the rest of MENA and Europeans diverging around 30,000-35,000 years. Native Americans might be in the East Eurasian branch, but they split quite early on.

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          Turkics are hapas you retard
          Natives arent asian

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            Genetically Natives pretty much are

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah because Asia is the Far East for some reason

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        >. The differences between a Vietnamese, a Korean, and a Siberian are large.
        Siberians have ANE and Slavic/Finno-Ugric admixtures and Vietnamese are mostly Taiwanese Aborigines and have slight veddoid. East Asians proper have pretty uniform phenotypes.

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Vietnamese
          100% wrong which makes sense considering you actually believe in phenotype nonsense.

        • 3 months ago
          Anonymous

          Viets are not from taiwanese aborigines except the ones mixed with previously austronesian-speaking people, or assimilated groups. They are mainland south east asian for the most part, with more "han" than their neighbors. Even the ethnicities that were austronesian-speaking came from present day malaysia, so probably already mostly austroasiatic in lineage, since malaysians despite speaking austronesian language are mostly austroasiatic in ancestry.

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Viets are not from taiwanese aborigines
            They are but have large Han admixture.

            • 3 months ago
              Anonymous

              Most of the ancestors of the viets, austroasiatics, split from the ancestors of the australian aborigines, somewhere in south china. Their ancestors did not set foot in taiwan.
              The austronesians (descendants of taiwanese aboriginals) such as the chams who went to present day vietnam, which at time was already populated by people more related to viets, spoke malayo-polynesian languages, so they were not directly from taiwan. After losing against viets who had larger armies, they either assimilated, remained as minorities, formed resistance groups against the viets, were killed, or fled to other regions. The viets were absolutely genocidal.

          • 3 months ago
            Anonymous

            Taiwanese Abbos are purest south sinids.

            • 3 months ago
              Anonymous

              What do they look like?

            • 3 months ago
              Anonymous

              not anymore. they are like ainu larping as a basal type but are mostly mixed by now.

  5. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Europeans are mutts like Indians. Instead of Iranian farmer, it’s Anatolian farmer. Instead of Abo hunter gatherers, it’s WHG. Both got Steppe’d

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      This. There are definitely some parallels but also some major differences. Like you said, there are 3 main components
      1. Hunter gatherer (WHG or AASI)
      2. Farmer (EEF or Iran_N)
      3. Steppe
      But unlike in India, European farmers/HGs experienced a near extinction of the male lines. Today Indo European yDNA is well over 80% of the total in every European country. Neolithic mtDNA lineages are very common too, but there are significant minorities of steppe maternal lineages in some areas. But in terms of autosomal ancestry, even the most steppe loaded Europeans are only 50% steppe max. The rest is EEF, around 40% even in northern europeans and baltics, and some low/moderate levels of WHG, around 10% in baltics.

      India shows a different pattern. Neolithic yDNA in India is very common and in many states outnumbers steppe paternal lineages. Hunter gatherer lineages are also quite common across South asia and even social strata. mtDNA seems to be relatively unchanged since the paleolithic/neolithic other than in some parts of pakistan and afghanistan, where steppe mtDNA reaches high frequencies. And as for autosomal, most Indians are primarily descended from the IVC people, with varying amounts of steppe and AASI. On average Indians are at least 50% Iranian farmer. Steppe reaches as high as 30% in some Indians, and hunter gatherer can reach up to 80% in some isolated tribes. But in terms of yDNA, R1a and its subclades make up only 40% in Brahmins who tend to have the highest steppe admixture which matches up with R1a frequencies. Unsurprisingly, there are a lot of IVC or pre IE lineages in India that correspond with the higher levels of IVC or AASI ancestry

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Today Indo European yDNA is well over 80% of the total in every European country
        just to clarify, this statement only applies to northern and western europe. These countries have around 40-50% steppe ancestry but at times over 90% R1a/R1b/I2 from Indo European invasions.
        Southern Europeans like Greeks and others tend to have fewer IE lineages but also less steppe ancestry. Still, the disparity between actual % of steppe ancestry and paternal steppe lineages is pretty huge.

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        I wonder why WHG were wiped out much more than AASI were? Any ideas? The WHG y dna comeback is interesting though. I1 and I2 are somewhat common

      • 3 months ago
        Anonymous

        Greece, Scandinavian countries, the Dutch and others are closer to 50-70% IE Y-DNA. WHG and likely EEF in NW Europe just never had much population density. So WSH moving herds into that region on the rich land and by all means becoming common there makes perfect sense.

        I wonder why WHG were wiped out much more than AASI were? Any ideas? The WHG y dna comeback is interesting though. I1 and I2 are somewhat common

        It depends on the region. Given the MRCA of many common clades of I2 (which are also likely Steppe in origin) and all of I1 does imply strong selection. It seems that most I2 now is possibly also Steppe in origin.

  6. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Thousands of years of mixing with North Africans, Inner Asians, Levantines, and Anatolians.

  7. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    europe is a huge continent.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      >europe is a huge continent

      It's quite a small continent, only larger than Australia.

  8. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why is it accepted that other races can have varying phenotypes but Europeans according to dumb white Americans and various European racists can't deviate from the "norm" without being a different race entirely?

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      its due to the very recent belief that there is one "stock" of europeans who is the inventor of everything and they wuz kangz blah blah blah aka the nordics
      If you aren't nordic, you are not white or you are less white. with other races it doesnt even matter because nobody is white to begin with.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      English settlers thought that only people within 50km of their borders who were part of their linguistic group were White.

  9. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Why European phenotypes are all over the place?
    That's the reason why.

    [...]

  10. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Space

  11. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    b

  12. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    It isn't about origins but how much "diversity" is valued among individuals. Of course they're still lizard minded at the end.

  13. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Better than american ones

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      >people with native blood are taking over the americas again
      kino

  14. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Because, to the contrary you're being led to believe by the powers that be, there's no such thing as a "white" race as a cohesive unit. Europe have numerous ethnic groups, even more numerous than other recognizable races like black or indian, and the only reason there's a push for people to consider such a thing as 'white people' is to push civil unrest on varied places on earth, normally metro areas from first world countries.

  15. 3 months ago
    Anonymous

    Europe is a tiny continent with lots of rivers and few mountains, so moving around is easy. People tend to have sex with people who live near them so if a man from Denmark moves to Italy he will probably have children with an Italian woman instead of going back to Denmark to spawn like some sort of fish.

    • 3 months ago
      Anonymous

      Europe is a peninsula. Not a continent.

Your email address will not be published.