The Origin of the Amerindians

The latest death toll figures from Hurricane Katrina can be seen on this website here. The famous Russian neo-Nazi video is on this blog here.

Updated November 27. I am republishing this post because I added a lot of new photos and text. Enjoy.

As we noted in an earlier post, the view is converging that Amerindians can be traced back to the Altai Mountains in Southwest Siberia where China, Mongolia and Russia all come together.

Yet another study found that of all Asians, the Turkic-speaking tribes of the Sayan Mountains (west of the Altai Mountains and north of northwestern Mongolia) are the closest to the Amerindians. This group includes the Shor, the Tofalar, the Altai, the Khakass , the Soyots and the Tuva. The Mongolic-speaking Buryats are also included.

The Altai live in the Sayan Uplands. The Soyots and the Buryats are from the Eastern Sayan Mountains. The Shor and the Khakass are from the northwest slopes of the Sayans. The Tofalar are from the northern slopes of the Eastern Sayans. The Tuva are also from the Sayans.

This is an ensemble of Khakass singers called the Sume-r Ensemble. They sure look like Amerindians, don't they. The Khakass, Turkic speakers of the Sayan Mountains, are related to Amerindians. The Khakass language is in good shape, with 60,000 speakers. The Khakass belong to the Central Asian Mongoloid group. They have wide faces and cheekbones are not very prominent. They are short, with dark skin, and are able to grow beards.


This is a traditional shaman woman of the Altai-Kizhi group of the Altai. Of all of the groups listed above, the Altai are one of the closest of all to the Amerindians. As you can see, this woman looks very Amerindian, all the way down to the face paint. She's even beating on a drum. I can't believe that there is something like a tepee in the background.

Another powerful connection is that all of these groups practiced Shamanism very prominently. And we know what the aboriginal religions of the Amerindians were - forget all that "Great Creator" crap - most of that was lobbed on recently after they became Christians. The aboriginal religions of the Amerindians were animism and shamanism, combined.


Bama Kanda, a famous Buryat. I believe she is a singer. Although the Buryat look a lot more like typical Asians (note the resemblance to a Mongolian or a Korean here) several studies have now related them to the Amerindians. Strangely enough, the Buryats have an oral tradition that says that a group of them went to the Americas long ago.


From a book called The Last of the Shor Shamans. He looks quite Amerindian. It showcases a few remaining Shor elders who still practice Shamanism and looks into their worldview. The Shor language is doing ok, but it is on the decline all right. Quite a few kids are still speaking it.

The Shor are Uralics, but they have Mongoloid features. They are short, with broad, flat faces. They have light skin and light eyes and can grow a thick beard. The Shors have not done well, and alcoholism and VD are devastating them.


Galina Innokentievna Adamova, a member of the Fast Reindeer folksinging group. She looks like an Amerindian, and her costume even looks Amerindian. The Tofalar language is not doing well. It's not being spoken by kids. About 30% of the Tofalar speak the language, almost all elderly.

It's being taught for 1 hour a week in some elementary schools, and the teacher is not even fluent in Tofalar. She conducts the class in Russian. Other villages do not even have schools, and the kids are shipped away to boarding schools.

We have to conclude that once a language is no longer spoken in the home and is reduced to a subject in school, it's probably on its way out.

The Tofalar are also members of the Mongoloid Central Asian race. They are short, with high, flat faces, without prominent cheekbones.


Nikolay Sergeevich Bakanaev, an expert in Tofalar fairy tales. I can't believe how much this guy looks like an Amerindian.

The Ket and Selkup are also related to Amerindians, though they are now to the north of the Altai. However, a long time ago, the Ket and Selkup lived in the Altai, and they only moved north later on.

Katun River in the Altai Mountains, origin of the vast majority of the Amerindians. The ancestors of the Amerinds probably left this region to come to the Americas about 16-30,000 years ago.

Another paper has found that there were two waves to the Americas - the first wave, mentioned above, traced back to the Tuva of the Altai, occurred 20-30,000 years ago, not 16,000 years ago as suggested in the paper above. This group moved first to the Chukotka Peninsula, and then into the Americas. They constitute the Amerind speakers of North, Central and South America.

A Tuvan family, ancestors of the vast majority of Amerindians. Tuvans, who live in the Altai Mountains where Russia, China and Mongolia all come together, have one of highest rates of syphilis in the world, attributed to an old shamanistic tradition that encouraged promiscuity among females. The more sex partners a woman had before marriage, the more fertile she would be. It's obviously not scientifically based.


A Selkup woman. Galina Vladimirovna Kusamina (nee Tamelkina), age 47. Photographed at the Farkovo settlement. The Selkups are not doing well. There is high unemployment, an extremely high rate of alcoholism, and they are victims of racial discrimination. The Selkup are members of the Uralic Race. The origins of the Uralics are pretty obscure. Their language is Samoyedic. Samoyedic is very distantly related to Finnish, Estonian and Hungarian.

Some say that this race is neither Mongoloid nor Caucasoid. Genetically, they do seem to fall in with the Asians. They are short and have short skulls. Asian traits are diminished, and their skin is fairer than in surrounding groups. These people, along with the Ket, are also ancestors of the Amerindians.

This paper also found evidence for a second wave of Siberians to the Americas. This wave came out of the Lower Amur River region near Sakhalin Island, where Russia, China and Korea all together. This wave gave rise to the Na-Dene speakers and the surrounding populations of Amerinds.

The Lower Amur River region, where the ancestors of the Na-Dene came from. The Amur is said to be one of the world's 10 great rivers.

The Na-Dene migration occurred about 6-7,000 years ago. Some peoples who live in the Lower Amur region include the Negidal, the Ulchi , and Orok and the Udeghe. This paper found that the Negidal and the Ulchi were the progenitors of the Na-Dene.

Click to enlarge. The Lower Amur region of Russia can be seen to the left of Sakhalin Island. On this map, tribes residing in the Lower Amur region include the Negidal, the Ulchi, the Nivkhi, the Oroch, the Udeghe and the Nanai.


D. I. Nadeina, a Negidal elder who has been working with linguists in Vladimirovka village, north of Japan near Sakhalin Island. The Negidal language was devastated by the post-Stalin USSR which sent the kids off to boarding schools.

10-30% of the Negidal have a command of the language, but only 10% are speakers, all older adults. Younger adults can understand Negidal but not speak it. Kids speak only Russian. There are only 500 of them left. The language is not written and there is no instruction in it. You can see that she looks Japanese, but anthropologically, thees people are called Paleo-Siberians, members of a group called Baikals. These people are the ancestors of the Na-Dene and surrounding tribes of Amerindians.


Ulchi children in native dress. They look pretty Japanese to me, but the picture does not have good resolution. The Ulchi are ancestors of the Na-Dene Amerindians.


Ulchi women being baptized into Christianity. At first glance I thought that they looked Japanese, but now I am going to say Korean. Anthropologically, they are just said to be Mongoloids of no pure type. Part of them belong to a type called Sakhalin-Amur . These types are short, with a broad, flat face and relatively dark skin. The men may have thick beards.

The Ulchi live, like the Negidal, in the Khabarovsk Krai District of Russia along the lower Amur River north of Japan and northeast of Manchuria, west of Sakhalin Island. The capital of the area is Bogorodskove, about 470 miles north of Japan.

30-40% of the Ulchi have command of the language. Older speakers know it well, the middle-aged less well, adolescents and young adults understand it passively. People under age 20 are not able to speak the language. There is a script and it is taught in schools. The language is used in the home. They are known to hunt seals.

Researching classic genetic markers reveals an interesting story. M130 goes out of Africa, to India and SE Asia (these are the Negritos), then up the coast to North America and the Na-Dene. Originally, M130 is obviously Australoid-Negrito but they go to NE Asian at some point (probably about 9,000 years ago).

Theirs must have been a coastal migration. The remains are in Northwest Canada, Oregon and the Northern California coast, but most of them are probably underwater. They must have gone inland at some point to become the Navajo - Apache. This is the same Lower Amur line that went to the Na-Dene in the paper above.

We know that the original lines in the Lower Amur region came from SE Asia. This mirrors the theories about the Ainu Jomon culture originating in Thailand 16,000 years ago. This correlation is based on a comparison of skulls from Thailand 16,000 years ago with the Jomonese who showed up in Japan shortly after and with the present day Ainu. All three seem to line up.

The tribes of the Lower Amur seem to have a similar provenance to the Ainu.

Ainu men with full beards. As you can see, they do look somewhat Caucasian. However, analysis of their skulls shows that they are Australoid. Their genes are Asian, showing relations to the Andaman Islanders (!) and Tibetans. The Andaman Islanders are the remains of the very first men out of Africa. If the Ainu are related to them, this shows that the Ainu are very ancient indeed.

The tribes of the lower Amur region probably derive from the Ainu. Genetics shows that this line came from SE Asia. A good theory is that the Jomon Culture, which showed up in Japan 16,000 years, is derived from a culture that existed in Thailand at the same time. The archaic Thai left Thailand and came up to Japan, possibly by boats. The skulls of the archaic Thai, the Jomonese and the Ainu all line up.

So the ancestors of the Ainu lived in Thailand 16,000 years ago and earlier and left to come up to Japan to become the Jomonese. It seems that the Ainu were on the move at this time. The Ainu also seem to be connected to the Murrayans, who arrived in Australia, possibly from either Thailand or Japan between 15-20,000 years ago. There is also evidence that they stopped by the Philippines on their way to Australia from wherever.

This is probably the same group as the proto-Australoids, the second group to come to the Philippines. So the Ainu are probably the ancient Thai from 16,000 years ago, the Jomonese from the same time, the Murrayans who arrived in Australia 15-20,000 years ago, the proto-Australoids who came to the Philippines around the same time and the proto-SE Siberians, who probably showed up there around 16,000 years ago.

The earliest Amerindians from 9,000-12,5000 years ago also look like Ainu. It seems that from 9,000-16,000 years ago in Asia, the proto-Ainu were really on the move.

Traditional, older anthropology has held that when the Ainu came to Japan, possibly 16,000 years ago, Japan was already inhabited. It is thought that Japan was inhabited by Negrito types prior to 16,000 years ago.

The Ainu replaced these Japanese Negritos, probably by killing them off. These people were called by the Ainu the pit-dwellers or koro-pok-guru (men with sunken places). These koro-pok-guru were said to be so small as to be considered dwarfs. The only logical interpretation is that these people were Negritos.

An Ainu man with full beard. The Ainu came to Japan from the Kuril Islands to the north, possibly 16,000 years ago. They were hunter-gatherers and liked to eat meat. They were deerskin leggings and salmon skin boots. Their religion was animism. They were said to be very dirty people who seldom washed for some reason. A man who lived with them 100 years ago for six weeks said they never bathed in that time and never washed any utensils.

They worshiped the bear. Every year they had a Bear Festival and their highest compliment was to compare a man to a bear. The Ainu are pretty unique in this regard, as worship of bears is not common. On the other hand, the Ainu hunted bears, wore their skins and ate their meet. They were said to be a peaceful, kind people and did not practice capital punishment - although someone guilty of murder was mutilated, they were allowed to live.

Along the same lines, another paper found that Amerindians trace back to Mongolia, Manchuria and far southeastern Siberia (the Lower Amur River). The Altai and Buryat populations (just north of Mongolia) were included in the founders. This paper said that Amerindians came 22-29,000 years ago. There are very early sites in Beringia dating back 30,000 years, but they are controversial.

Beringia is now inhabited by Eskimos or Inuit. They are quite close genetically to Asians and they are not really Amerindians. They came quite late. Notice the resemblance to, say, Japanese.

This study found a single 30,000 year old gene in Amerindians. Based on this gene and an earlier study of classic genetic markers that suggested a time of entry at 32,000 years, this study postulated that Amerindians arrived in the Americas 30,000 years ago.

This study (broken link) found a single wave of entry 23-27,000 years ago populating the Americas.

It is now commonly agreed that the first Amerindians were Australoids. These are the Paleo-Indians. They are represented today in the Fuegians.

The Ona of Argentina are thought to be a remaining example of the Paleoindians whose skulls most resemble Australoids.

The skulls of the extinct tribe the Pericu also show similar affinities, as do very old skulls from the Americas about 12-13,000 years ago such as "Luiza" from Brazil and another from Mexico City. These skulls, and the Fuegians, line up with Melanesians, Negritos, Papuans and the Ainu.

Probably around 9,000 years ago there is yet another transition, this time to a more Polynesian type, though affinities with the Ainu remain. The famous Kennewick Man is illustrative of this type. White nationalists love to claim Kennewick man in order to prove that Whites beat Indians to the Americas and therefore this is our land and the Indians are trespassers (I kid you not!).

It is true that Kennewick does look somewhat Caucasian, but so do the Ainus. Kennewick man was not White or Caucasian. This paper definitively measures Kennewick Man's skull and shows his nearest relations. One thing we should point out here is the Kennewick Man is a member of a race that no longer exists.

He had 64% affinity to Polynesians and 24% affinity to Ainu. There are also affinities to Southern Japan (Okinawans), the Moriori (a Maori Polynesian split-off from the Chatham Islands off the coast of New Guinea) and Easter Island (Polynesians). The Ainu are thought to have originated in the South Asia - South Pacific region.

Kennewick Man is also somewhat close to Papua New Guinea (Australoids), the Marquesas Islands (Polynesians) and the Society Islands (Polynesians). He has no affinities to Caucasians at all, unless you consider Ainus White, which they are not.

It is mysterious why the Ainus appear Caucasoid, but one theory is that when you mix an Australoid with a Mongoloid, you end up with a phenotype that can appear somewhat Caucasoid.

Kem Sokha, a Cambodian politician. If you look at him closely, you can see he looks almost Caucasian. This is probably due to a Mongoloid-Australoid mix, in my opinion.


Another photo of Kem Sokha. Forgetting about his eyes for a moment, he looks even more Caucasian in this pic.

The more modern Amerindian types, who resemble Mongoloids and not Australoids, seem to appear about 6-7,000 years ago.

This paper indicates that there were possibly many survivors of the Paleo-Indians into more modern times, and that they did not all transition over around 6,000 years ago. They found "Archaic Colombian" skulls until 3,000 years ago that line up with Australoids.

A Shoshone woman, typical of the southwestern Amerindian. Their skins can be quite dark.


A Yanonami child from the Amazon. This type typically has a very Mongoloid or Asian appearance. They could easily pass for, say, Filipinos.


This is an Inca. This type is distributed up and down the western part of South America from Chile through Peru to Ecuador and Colombia. A different phenotype.


An Apache warrior, Chief Victorio or Apache Wolf. Though these are Na-Dene speakers, this phenotype is common in the West. Prognathism may be present, along with sharply defined, angular features. Can be quite tall.


A Mexican Indian. Short and often has fairly dark skin. This is the phenotype from which many of the Hispanics in the US of Mexican origin are derived.


Floyd Red Crow Westerman, a well-known Sioux Indian from the Plains. This is a typical Plains Indian phenotype. Strangely enough, they can have a Caucasian appearance. Skin can be quite light also. Can be quite large and well-built.

References

Lell, JT, Sukernik, RI, Starikovskaya, YB, Su, B, Jin, L, et al. 2002. The Dual Origin and Siberian Affinities of Native American Y Chromosomes. American Journal of Human Genetics, 70(1), 192-206.

Neel, J.V., Biggar, R.J., Sukernik, R.I. 1994. Virologic And Genetic Studies Relate Amerind Origins To The Indigenous People Of The Mongolia/Manchuria/Southeastern Siberia Region Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA (PNAC), Genetics, Vol 91: pp. 10737-10741.

Underhill, Peter A., Jin, Li, Zemans, Rachel, Oefner, Peter J. and Cavalli-Sforza, L. Luca. 1996. A Pre-Columbian Y Chromosome-Specific Transition And Its Implications For Human Evolutionary History Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA (PNAC), Genetics, Vol 93, pp. 196-200.

Powell, Joseph F. and Rose, Jerome C. 2004. Chapter 2, Report on the Osteological Assessment of the "Kennewick Man" Skeleton (CENWW.97.Kennewick), in McManamon, F.P. Kennewick Man. Washington, DC: US Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Archeology Program.

Neves, Walter A., Hubbe, Mark, Correal, Gonzalo. 2007. Human Skeletal Remains From Sabana De Bogotá, Colombia: A Case Of Paleoamerican Morphology Late Survival In South America? American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Vol 133:4:1080-1098.

Zakharov, Ilia A. et al. 2004. Mitochondrial DNA Variation In The Aboriginal Populations Of The Altai-Baikal Region: Implications For The Genetic History Of North Asia And America. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1011:21-35

Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.

The Fallacy of Hereditarian Racial IQ Gap Theory

The latest death toll figures from Hurricane Katrina can be seen on this website here. The famous Russian neo-Nazi video is on this blog here.

Updated September 2. I am republishing this piece which I published earlier. I am including some links and some more data making the case for a 6-10 Flynn Effect gain for US NE Asians from the 1970's to today. They went from about 97.5 IQ to 103.5 IQ (or 100.5 IQ to 106.5 IQ renormed) over 30 years, meeting and then surpassing US Whites, a gain of approximately 6 full points, purely by the environment.

In the comments section, Alan Weiss, a very smart guy, says it is either intellectually lazy or racist to assume that the B-W IQ gap, now at 13.5 points, not 15 points, as is frequently reported, is genetic. I don't agree that it's automatically racist or lazy to assume that the B-W gap is genetic. The hereditarians have done some excellent work in proving their case.

I guess my argument is that the hereditarian case is not necessarily relevant. Saying that "the gap is genetic" doesn't really mean much.

The hereditarians say that 70% of the B-W IQ gap is genetic?

Ok, look.

James Flynn points out that in the 1940's in the US, the IQ gap between NE Asians and Whites in the US was 3.5 points. The scores were US White = 100, US NE Asian = 97.5. Now, the hereditarians say that 70% of that racial gap is genetic, and it's insurmountable. US NE Asians could never come within 1.5 pts of US Whites, no matter what happened in their environment.

But look what happened.

In the next generation, they not only met Whites, but they surpassed them. They gained anywhere from 5.5 to 6.5 IQ points on Whites. Now, with renorming, Whites are at 103 and US NE Asians are at 106. So an "insurmountable" gap that was "70% genetic" was not only surmounted, but it was actually surpassed.

Flynn says that US Chinese had an IQ no greater than Whites in 1949, (actually their IQ was 97.5) yet got better jobs due to extra-IQ factors such as stronger work ethic and higher motivation. They used these new jobs to provide a better environment for their kids, which raised their kids IQ's to 109 in children, falling to 103 by adolescence as parental influence wore off.

In his book, Asian Americans, Achievement Beyond IQ (The book is available for browsing online, and you are free to look through it). Flynn notes that the average US NE Asian American IQ may have risen 10 points over 30 years. From 1943-1975, average IQ was ~97.5 for Chinese and Japanese.

Flynn also found that Chinese-Americans in earlier decades were working at occupations that suggested IQ's fully 21 points higher than what their actual IQ's were.

This shows right there that IQ is not destiny, and there are extra-IQ factors that figure in occupational success. Now it is 103 according to Flynn (106 renormed), and others pretty much concur. This chart shows a US Asian IQ of 106 (Reynolds and Chastain, 1987, p.330). With an IQ of 106, it appears that US Asian IQ may have risen fully 6 points relative to other scores in 20-30 years.

Flynn also suggested an Asian IQ (Chinese, Japanese and Korean) of 104 in the last few years. With renorming, that should be 107. With renorming, all scores point to a US Asian IQ of 106-107.

There is support for Flynn's data from hardcore hereditarians. Richard Lynn reports that Japanese IQ was significantly higher than average IQ in the United States, and that Japanese IQ scores had risen over the past generation (Lynn 1982).

Herrnstein and Murray 1994, Rushton and Jensen 2005 and Lynn 2006 all find that the average IQ scores of East Asians in Asia, North America and Europe are significantly higher than 100. Lynn has US Asian IQ at 106 and rising in this article.

About the Flynn Effect, Flynn notes that our vocabularies and information are no greater than our ancestors, so we can't do any better at reading an adult novel.

The Dickens-Flynn Model shows that all of so-called pure genetic aspects of IQ can actually be explained by the environment.

Smaller families have had an IQ effect that looks like better nutrition - they can provide a better environment for their kids.

Studies have also shown that Asians enjoy studying more than other groups. This may explain their superior performance even relative to IQ.

This is what I mean when I say that when they say that racial gaps are "70% genetic" or whatever, it doesn't necessarily mean all that much. Now the hereditarians have to look at the 3.5 point gain that US NE Asians have over US Whites (US NE Asians = 106.5, US Whites = 103) and say that gap is 70% genetic. Does that make any sense either? Of course not.

Once these "wholly genetic" gaps are not only overcome but even surpassed by purely environmental actions, the whole hereditarian argument gets a bit silly.

References

Flynn, James R. 1991. Asian Americans: Achievement Beyond IQ. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Herrnstein, RJ and Murray, C. 1994. The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life. New York: Free Press

Lynn, R. 1982. IQ In Japan And The United States Shows A Growing Disparity. Nature, 297:222-3.

Lynn, R. 2006. Race Differences in Intelligence: An Evolutionary Analysis. Augusta, GA: Washington Summit Books.

Reynolds, C. R., Chastain R. L., Kaufman, A. S., & McLean, J. E. 1987. Demographic Characteristics And IQ Among Adults: Analysis Of The WAIS-R Standardization Sample As A Function Of The Stratification Variables. Journal of Social Psychology, 25:323-342.

Rushton, J. P. & Jensen, A. R. 2005. Thirty Years Of Research On Black-White Differences In Cognitive Ability. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law.

Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.

A Little Asian in All of Us

Well not quite, but you get the picture.

Taking a cue from the A Little Black in All of Us post, I am going to write a post about Asian genes in non-Asians. Mostly or fully-Asian groups obviously occupy most of Asia. Even if we subtract Australoids from Asians, many Melanesians have some Asian in them, especially those in the east end of Indonesia and along the coast of New Guinea. In this case, the Asian is Austronesian from Taiwan.

Papuans and Aborigines have little to no Asian mix. Polynesians are a highly controversial people who have usually been thought of as being 50% Melanesian and 50% Austronesian from Taiwan. However, there is a new paper out suggesting that they are a mostly-Austronesian people.

Micronesians are said to be the same. Previously, they were thought to be Polynesians mixed with Melanesians. Polynesia is thought to have been populated from Eastern Indonesia. Micronesia is thought to have been populated from around Fiji. Fijians are Melanesians with considerable Polynesian genes.

Obviously, mainland Asia is all Asian. Siberians are mostly Asian. The Yakut, for instance, are mostly Asian, but they do have 6% Caucasian in them.

A beautiful Yakut woman from the Sakha Republic competing for the Miss Russia 2007 contest. That's basically the Yakut Republic. She should have only 6% Caucasian genes, but it seems like she has more than that.

The Caucasian comes from a group called the Sakas who conquered Siberia 1,500 years ago. The Mongolians are 86% Asian and 14% Caucasian.

A beautiful Buryat woman competing in the Miss Russia 2007 contest. Buryats are said to be quite close to Mongolians genetically, so she probably has about 14% Caucasian genes. Note the classic high Mongolian cheekbones. Korean women have this same feature, and they are recent immigrants from Mongolia in the past 4-5,000 years.

The Hui are in interesting group inside China, south of Mongolia, who are 93% Asian and 7% Caucasian. The Han have no Caucasian in them, though NE Chinese are quite close to Caucasians genetically.

Going west of Burma, we run into trouble. In NE India, the people are mostly Asian. Going north to Nepal, you get an odd mix of all sorts of people, some mostly Asian but others more of an East Indian type.

A very interesting, yet unclassifiable, type in Nepal. Clearly there is an Asian component to this phenotype. There are some phenotypes that look something like this in SE Asia, especially hill tribes in Burma and Thailand. Come to think of it, doesn't she look a bit like the Naga below?


Nagas of Northeast India. They cluster genetically with Tibetans. Some think that they are the leftovers of the original people of the region.


The mother of this Nepalese family looks pretty Caucasian, but I have a hard time classifying that phenotype. Something resembling that phenotype can be seen in some of the Kalash. There is also some of a North Indian-Punjabi component. The two daughters clearly have a strong Asian element, thought it does not much resemble other Asian types. The girl on the right looks a bit like a Filipina.


A very Asian type in, believe it or not, Nepal. Yes. This phenotype looks very Chinese and could be related to Tibetans. Nepalese are very difficult to classify genetically due to the divergence of types. Further, the peopling of Nepal is very poorly understood.

All East Indians are considered to be on the border between Caucasians and Asians (though they are Caucasians), yet most East Indians do not have Asian genes. An exception is in the northwest around Punjab.

North Indians, possibly Punjabis. Many Punjabis look something like this. They have 10% Asian genes and it is often apparent, especially in the eyes.

Punjabis have about 10% Asian genes. You can sometimes see it in their eyes.

These beautiful young women are from Ladakh, on the border of China and India. As you can see, the Indians here are heavily Asian. The girl on the right looks very Korean. The other two are very difficult to classify, but the girl on the right left could almost be Mediterranean - Italian or Iberian, other than the eyes. Genetically probably close to Tibetans.

Heading into Pakistan, some Pakistanis appear somewhat Asian. The Kalash, whom we discussed in a previous post, often appear somewhat Asian.

A very interesting Kalash woman. The Kalash are so divergent that they form one of two splits in the Caucasian Race - Kalash and non-Kalash. No one quite knows much about them, but they seem to have come from the Caucasus. Their genes are radically divergent. Either they have experienced tremendous genetic drift or they are some of the most ancient Caucasians of all.

The very early proto-Caucasians may have looked something like this - they had heavy Asian admixture. This mixing of Black and Asian was taking place in the Caucasus region.


More Kalash. There are some very interesting types in this fascinating group. Both the woman and her daughter look Asian, the daughter more so. The woman seems to have an East Indian component.

Some Pashtuns look a little Asian, but many others just look pure Caucasian.

When we head north from this area, we start running into some heavy Asian-Caucasian mixes. This is the zone where these two great major races have seriously mixed. Heading East to Western China, we find the Uighurs, a group that is 61% Asian and 39% White. This Muslim group is heavily repressed by China and some have taken up arms against the state. I do support this secessionist movement.

Uighurs. A most interesting group of people from West China. This area has clearly seen a tremendous amount of Caucasian-Asian mixing for a long time now. It is in this region that burial tombs have been unearthed that revealed Caucasian mummies, some with red hair.

Of course, this drove White nationalist insane people even more insane. China was an ancient White homeland! Except the "Whites" were probably some Iranian or Caucasus types that these idiots have excised from their precious White race. At any rate, a few Caucasian bodies here and there does not a homeland make. There were and are plenty of Asians running around this region too. Truth is that Iranian types from the steppes have been invading this region for ages.

Tocharian, perhaps one of the earliest forms of Indo-European, may have been spoken on these windy steppes 8,000 years ago. The Uighurs are 61% Asian and 39% Caucasian. Their movement for liberation has been heavily repressed by the Chinese. Some have been radicalized and have moved down into Afghanistan and the Pakistan tribal areas to work with the local Taliban, but in general, Islam in this region is quite moderate and reasonable.

It's questionable whether or not China even has much of a claim to this land. The girl on the right has a very interesting phenotype. She looks quite Caucasian, but that Caucasian look is actually specific to the Caucasus. I look at her and think "Dagestani". White-Chinese hapas in the US often look something like this also.

Heading West, Uzbeks in Uzbekistan are clearly a very mixed race people - they are 59% Asian and 41% Caucasian.

An Uzbek man with a turban. A syncretic form of Islam was popular here, but due to religious repression, some Uzbeks have turned to radical Islam. The group is called the IMU. They were defeated in Uzbekistan and the remnants moved to Afghanistan to link up with the Taliban. After the Taliban were defeated, many moved into the tribal areas where many IMU fighters married local women. They form a significant component of the Pakistani Taliban who are fighting in the tribal areas right now.

A young Uzbek man. This man looks very Caucasian, other than the slight Asian eyes. The outfit would not be out of place in Afghanistan.

An Uzbek woman. As you can see, at 41%, the Caucasian element is very high in Uzbeks. The phenotype is difficult to place, but the Caucasian element could resemble a Greek, a Georgian or possibly an Iranian.

Heading further West, the Kazakhs are strangely even more Asian: they are 70% Asian and 30% Caucasian.

Heading back towards China, we come to the Altai, a region where Mongolia, China and Russia all come together. This is thought to be the region from which the Amerindians came from. These people are best categorized as Northern Turkics and they all speak a Turkic language.

Some people here are very mixed (figures here): The Shor are 51% Caucasian and 49% Asian, the Altai themselves are 53% Asian and 47% Caucasian, the Khakass are 72% Asian and 28% Caucasian, the Sojots are 81% Asian and 19% Caucasian and the famous throat-singers, the Tuvans, are 89% Asian and 11% Caucasian.

These people are best thought of as members of a subrace known as the Uralic Race, even though they speak Turkic tongues. The Uralics generally speak languages related to Finnish.

Anthropologically, the Uralics are mysterious. We do not really know much about them or where they came from, but they are the subject of endless speculation, especially by Finnish researchers, who are fascinated by the question. For instance, the proto-Uralics were said to be neither Asians nor Caucasians. Ok, fine, so what were they?

Moving into Europe, we continue to encounter Asian genes. The Turks have a very large component of Asian genes, such that it is difficult to characterize them as Asian or Caucasian. I put them into Caucasian more on appearance than on anything else.

A Turkish Cypriot woman who seems to have a bit of an Asian phenotype. She also looks somewhat Slavic. Slavic phenotypes are very common in Turkey but most Turks do not wish to admit it due to age-old hostility between the Muslim Ottomans and the Christian Slavic regions around it.

Heading north into Russia, it has long been known that Russians are part Asian. One can often note an Asiatic component in Russians. I had a Russian girlfriend once named Natasha who lived in the Bay Area. She had some slight Asiatic phenotypical traits.

A beautiful Russian woman. Unless I am hallucinating, I think I see some Asian eyes on her. She may also have the sparse and straighter body hair that some Russian women have. This is a classic Russian Slavic phenotype.

In the part of Russia called Novgorod Oblast, the Russians are 3% Asian and 7% Finn. The Oblast is in the western part of Russia near Latvia, Estonia, St Petersburg and Leningrad. Heading into Europe now, we are surprised to find that Czechs are 3% Asian.

Although Yugoslavians are Slavs just like Czechs, I am not aware of the amount of Asian genes in them, if any. Some say that Yugoslavs, especially Serbs, look very Mediterranean, but I am not so sure. I am not sure which part of Yugoslavia these young women are from, but they are wearing traditional costumes.

What amazed me was how similar these women looked in phenotype. Granted, they've all curled up their hair the same way and they are wearing the same costumes, but if you look closely at the first five women from the left, tell me I'm hallucinating when I see a common phenotype in their facial appearance. Anyone else see it?

That the Hungarians are part-Asian has long been noted. I am not sure about the exact numbers though.

Hungarians dressed in traditional costumes. Their Asian component is not large, but may be on the order of 7% or so. The Asian element comes from the Magyars, a Mongol group that raided into Europe long ago and settled in the region of Hungary.

Both the Finns and Estonians are thought to have Asian genes and the Lapps surely do, but I believe they only have 7% Asian genes.

It often doesn't take much Asian genes to affect the phenotype. One of the first things you notice is a sparseness of body hair and tendency of body hair to be more straight than kinky. Also, even at low gene levels, you often start seeing a bit of an epicathal fold in the eyes.

Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.

R-K Scale or Introversion-Extroverion Scale?

There are clearly some differences between the races, at least between Northeast Asians, European Caucasians and Blacks. Those differences are obvious to me and to many others, and show up in many statistics on a variety of societal variables.

Whether or not there are global personality differences between the races is very controversial, but it seems obvious to many folks just looking around at the world, and as a former US schoolteacher who taught classes full of Anglo-Americans, Japanese Americans and Afro-Americans for years all over Los Angeles, after a while you have to really lie to yourself to believe that such a thing does not exist.

At Gardena High School, there were many Blacks and many Japanese-Americans, and the contrast simply belts you in the face with a knockout punch. Even those experts who agree that there are differences go on and on about whether they are genetic or cultural, when it's clear that they are both.

Some recent studies have come out (by Jewish psychologists, of course) claiming that there are no significant personality differences between Blacks and Whites. I don't even care to read such a study, as it flies in the face of common sense observation.

Philippe Rushton is a racist who dislikes Blacks and his books are very controversial. He has suggested r-strategy versus k-strategy for the differences between Blacks, Whites and Asians. R-k selection theory is a theory in biology relating different modes of adaptation that animals use to survive in the environment.

I'm going to stay agnostic on the r/k thing and I don't wish to align myself with the oily Mr. Rushton, who, by the way, wishes to do away with all civil rights and anti-discrimination laws, but one thing I think Rushton makes clear is that there is an extroversion-introversion scale that closely mirrors that r/k scale.

As introverts have a vastly lower crime rate and extroverts tend to make up the vast majority of criminals (even among Whites) that makes good sense to me.

Also, extroverts are much more likely to be bored with school, tend to use and manipulate others more, have a "strong prey on the weak and that's ok" mindset, are vastly less moral and mannered, less inclined to repay debts, have much more regard for self than others, are more promiscuous, gamble, drink and take drugs more, take worse care of their health, are less cautious, have more accidents, take way more risks, are much more aggressive, impulsive prone to wild and excessive mood swings (wild emotionality) and are financially irresponsible and have a lowered life expectancy.

It's clear to me that all of these are true even within a race, say, with Whites (that's the race I'm most familiar with).

It's obvious to me that Blacks are the most extroverted race, NE Asians the least, and Whites in between.

Honestly, I have no idea what to do with most of the other races. SE Asians psychologically resemble NE Asians, though I think they are somewhat more extroverted. I haven't the faintest idea what to do with Amerindians, Hispanics, Polynesians, Micronesians and Papuans. I suspect that Papuans and Aborigines may be more like Blacks in extroversion.

Polynesians are very odd. They're obviously part-Asian and can be pretty quiet and introverted, yet at the same time, they are collectivist, love parties and are surrounded by people all the time. Filipinos are much the same. East Indians, Arabs, North Africans and South Asians are pretty much like Whites, cultural baggage aside.

Culture seems to intervene a lot here, as with everything else, and it gets real hard to disentangle everything. Sure, there are introverted Blacks (I've known a few of them!) and there are extroverted NE Asians, but we are looking at these groups globally here.

Race, Gender and Masculinity/Femininity

Steve Sailer got pilloried for saying what I will repeat and elaborate on below, but I really do think that he was onto something.

Truth is, men want a woman who is somewhat more feminine and women want a man who is somewhat more masculine.

White men think a lot of White women are bitches (too masculine), so they go for Asian women, who are relatively more feminine. White men avoid Black women, as they are even more masculine that White women.

A lot of White women think White guys are wimps, so they go for Black guys who are more masculine. An Asian guy is even more feminine than a White guy, so forget that.

Black women like Black men, since both are masculine. They think White guys are wimpy, and Asians are out of the question.

Black men want a woman who is more feminine, so they go for White women. Asians would be nice, but they are probably out of reach.

Asian women want a guy who is more masculine, so they go for a White guy. A Black guy is probably so overmasculine that he seems scary.

The losers in this game are Black women and Asian men, at least in the US. The above only applies to the US. In Asia, Asian men seem just fine because there are no White men to compare them too. In societies with few Blacks, White men may seem just fine to most White women. In Black societies, Black men come to appreciate Black women as there is no one to compare to.

There is actually some good evidence that all of the above is occurring. I am involved in a Yahoo group about romance fraud on the web. This group is swarming with White women who are hooking up with Black men. There is also good evidence that large numbers of Asian women are going for White guys.

Asian men are also extremely sexist (as their cultures dictate) so many Asian women think a White guy is going to treat them better.

Black men have told me that Black women think White guys are wimps, and my not-so-great experience dating Black women (Hopefully not to be repeated!) tells me the same thing. Black women are also the most cynical, manipulative and materialistic women I ever dated, but I've only dated a few.

I actually never considered Asian guys wimpy or feminine at all, since they have cultivated a culture of extreme sexism, contempt for homosexuality, and respect for classic masculine and male norms.

However, there is a lot of anecdotal evidence out there that many Asian women in the US are finding many Asian guys to be feminine (they are saying this because they now compare Asian men with White men, whereas in Asia there are only Asian men, so Asian guys seem fine). Asian men do lack body hair, etc. and probably have lower testosterone.

You can go to Asian nationalist sites in the US that are swarming with furious young single Asian men ranting about so many of their women dating White guys. They are also cultivating an image of masculinity, with lots of posts about Asian athletes and famous Asian warriors. They seem to want to date White women as a way to get even, or even get some period, so there are lots of posts about Asian guys and White women.

There also seems to be a tendency that the female goes for the more masculine guy, and then he treats her like crap. For instance, we have tons of stories of White women going for Black guys due to their being more masculine, and then the guy just refuses to work and lives off the woman, cheats on her and treats her like crap. She puts up with it because she wants a masculine man so badly.

We are also hearing of many Asian female - White male relationships where the same thing is going on - the White male refuses to work and just lives off the woman, cheats on her and treats her like crap. She puts up with it once again because she wants to be with a masculine man so much she will tolerate being mistreated.

It even works within races. I'm White, and since high school, I have been hearing nice guys wail about how women and girls won't fuck them and even treat them like crap and how the biggest assholes who treat women like total shit have women coming out their ears. Women say they want a nice guy, but then they get with one, and his niceness seems wimpy to them, so they go for a more masculine guy who treats her poorly.

Obviously, there are a lot of folks for whom this stuff doesn't apply, but I think that Sailer has hit on something here.

Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.

Francis Galton's Insight

Link.

From American Renaissance, a very problematic website due to its racism, but one that I nevertheless check out regularly. Why? It's the only place anywhere you can see frank talk about race. About the Black and Hispanic underclass, about the illegal alien invasion, and about all sorts of un-PC stuff.

I can't say one word against these 12 million Mesoamerican illegals who have ruined my state and are going to run my whole country. I can't say one word against these nightmarish Black and Hispanic Underclasses in our cities.

One of the worst problems with living in a heavily Hispanic area is that you can't say the slightest thing against them, their gangs, graffiti, crime, illegals, massive school failure and dropout rates, out of control illegitimacy rates, wild teenage pregnancy rates - no one can say one word about any of this stuff. If I do, I am immediately shouted down with accusations of racism.

The Hispanics have learned to wield the race card like every other liar and huckster in our society. I'm almost sorry we campaigned against racism 40 years ago because we created this horrible Racism Club that every reactionary ethnic activist and nationalist on Earth is using to beat up anyone critical of their petty little group.

It's almost an honor to be called a racist nowadays in PC America. All too often, it just means anyone speaking frankly about race in any way whatsoever. I assume that the insane PC hate speech laws come next, and I get threatened with jail.

The piece, among other things, quotes Francis Galton as saying that after observing various races for a long time, he concluded that they had the following personality characteristics:

• Amerindians display taciturn reserve


• Blacks have a talkative impulsiveness


• E Asians are placid

That strikes me as just about right, and it's interesting that those personality traits are observable in the youngest babies. I am not trying to draw any conclusions from that, but only to note that on average, Blacks are more extroverted and Asians are more introverted. American Indians are somewhat different, but seem to be more toward the Asians.

It's also interesting to note that Asians are the latest to mature and Blacks are the earliest to mature. How maturation rate fits into introversion/extroversion, I am not sure.

I am convinced that some the pathologies attributed to Blacks are due to their simply being more extroverted. Even in Whites, the more extroverted folks are much more criminal, hate school because it's no fun, are more sexually active and even promiscuous, are more emotionally volatile, have more problems with drugs and alcohol, and in my opinion, tend to be a lot less responsible and more manipulative.

They are less responsible and more manipulative because they just don't care about others' feelings the way that we introverts do, and they are self-centered and feel entitled to use others to get what they want.

Most introverts are horrified by the idea of openly using or manipulating a human being in a grotesque way to get something for yourself and leave the other person high and dry. Extroverts seem to regard this as a normal part of life like eating and sleeping.

That Indians are display a taciturn reserve is well-known to those who spend a lot of time around them, and fits in with the old stereotypes about Amerindians. Indian babies are said to be like rocks. It's not uncommon to wonder if they are alive or dead, and they often don't cry much.

However, they are said to be quite alert. Alert and silent - this is the stereotypical Indian baby. It's interesting how this fits in well with the stereotype of the silent yet alert Indian hunter, waiting in the woods for hours with his bow and arrow for the game to come into view.

Fine, so races have different temperaments, ok.

Now.

What about this?

I'm not sure I'm even going to there for now, but I will say that different ethnicities do seem to have different levels of morality. Comparing poor Hispanics, poor Blacks and poor Whites, the poor Blacks and Hispanics tend to behave vastly worse.

In the Hispanics' case, it's mostly the young males, who are an absolute disaster and a menace to our very nation such that we really need to consider importing fewer Hispanics until we can figure out which ones are going to do all right and which are going to degenerate into this Hispanic Underclass catastrophe.

In this neighborhood, it is the little things that you notice. Poor Blacks and Hispanics do seem much less cultivated and civilized, and you notice it with the little stuff. As soon as I step outside, they will badger me for "loans". You're insane if you ever loan most of them one dime for anything. They never pay back any loans, and then they have the nerve to still come around!

They come into your house and immediately start demanding things like wine, changing the radio station, this or that. They point at nice things in my house and ask me to get the thing to them! Many of them are will just try to openly use you and manipulate you in any way they can do get whatever they can out of you. That boils down to an all take and no give relationship.

They also engage in petty theft if they get into your place as soon as you turn your back on them. They also tend to be rather disrespectful of your property. They just more or less act like animals. Now, I can't see myself as engaging in any behaviors like that. I would never go to someone's place just to see what I can get out of them.

I would never demand anything on entry to someone's house, much less suggest that they should give me some of their property for free. I don't owe anyone outside my family one nickel, and I'm 50. If I never paid back a loan, I would be ashamed forever. I never ask anyone for money, and I would be humiliated if I did.

Now, the worst actors for all of this are young Hispanics who are enamored of the gangsta thing. Most are not employed or in school, and I am starting to wonder if they will ever work one day ever again. Many spend every nickel they get on marijuana. Most live off their stupid girlfriends, who give these worthless idiots money every day.

Since most of the Hispanics grow out of this a ways into their 20's, one wonders if it's really genetic. We are creating vast armies of sociopaths in our cities, and I am convinced that much of it is due the males being raised by single females. The male children of single Moms all too often are just criminals.

With the Blacks, they don't necessarily grow out of this ghetto mindset at all. I know Blacks in their 50's who still act this way. I am convinced that it is so because many Blacks seem to have a lower level of morality, even on the "little stuff", like throwing trash on the ground or strolling across a crosswalk after the light has already turned, that so many Whites have a problem with Blacks.

Most Whites just have a revulsion to little stuff like that, whereas many Blacks may very well think it's perfectly normal.

Now I know quite a few Blacks who are assimilated to mainstream society and don't act "ghetto" at all.

Blacks are really split into two different groups:

• An Underclass of varying degrees that shows varying degrees of "ghetto" and more or less uncivilized behavior.


• An assimilated group that has left the ghetto behind or never joined it to start with, and whose behavior is in general commendable.

The second group is increasingly washing its hands of the problems of the first group, but the honest to God truth is that nowadays, there is substantial overlap between the two groups. There are Blacks who have crawled halfway out of the ghetto but are not quite assimilated yet. Nevertheless, the distinction should be made, and it's one that almost all racists never make.

I see Hispanics as increasingly splitting into an Underclass and an assimilated group in the future also.

Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.

Head Size = Brains = Bullshit

The latest death toll figures from Hurricane Katrina can be seen on this website here. The famous Russian neo-Nazi video is on this blog here.

Updated May 2:

It is much postulated by hereditarians in the IQ debate that head size has a correlation with IQ. This seems to be true to some extent, but there are also problems with it. For one thing, nutrition increases head size, so head size is not as genetic as the hereditarians say it is. Another problem is that it is only a correlation, and not a very high one either.

What this means is that there will be cases where it does not make sense at all. For instance, Eskimos have the biggest heads, but they have IQ's of around 90, which, though Richard Lynn falsely states that they are the third major race in IQ, behind Northeast Asians and European Whites.

This is because Lynn leaves out very high scoring groups like East Indians in the West (IQ = 96) and Vietnamese (IQ = 99.5), but they don't fit his silly Ice Age Theory of Brains Evolution, so they get left out.

Even more problematic, or much more really, enough to make the case for brain size = brains even more deadly, is the fact that human brains were much larger 10,000 years ago, when most Asians were all still Australoids (the same race as Papuans and Aborigines), when European Whites as we now know them were just beginning to evolve, and white skin was still 1,000 years away in Europe, when American Indians were changing from Australoid to Polynesian type, and the NE Asian type had not even really showed up yet, and would not for a few thousand years more.

People in India still looked like Aborigines too, and would not look like the modern-day Caucasians that they surely are for another 2,000 years. In most of the world, man was simply transforming from Australoid to either Amerindian, Indian Caucasian or Northeast Asian.

To think that these Aborigine types were smarter then than we are today and have today ended up sadly and world's lowest IQ race except for Bushmen simply defies belief. No one was doing much better anywhere on Earth really at that time, as something called Civilization had not even developed.

If you want to think that 10,000 year old Cro-Magnon hulking hunter-gatherers and a bunch of proto-Aborigines, who were probably even lower IQ than they are today, were smarter than the guys who put a man on the moon and created the wonder known as sliced bread, you are entitled to that belief. But I will call you an idiot.

Even Lynn's head size correlations that the hereditarians love so much only account for 12% of all of the IQ variance between races.

That brains were bigger 10,000 years ago than they are today simply means that humans have been getting less robust and more gracile. Robust means big and hulking. Aborigines, Melanesians and Papuans are some of the most robust folks around these days. Blacks are not necessarily as robust as one might think, many are surprisingly gracile.

We have been transforming from robust, hulking like humans = cave men, more or less to our present status as Blackberry-doing New York metrosexuals, and in this transformation our brains have shrunk dramatically as we got sleeker and sleeker and more Upper East Side New York sleek and gym-trained.

Also, we should note that since 1600 to the present day our heads have been getting smaller and smaller. This is occurring in Africa, Europe, the Middle East and North Africa and may have been occurring elsewhere too.

If you really think that folks in the time of Shakespeare, Galileo, Hobbes, Descartes, Cromwell, Fermat, Rembrandt, Cervantes, Pascal, Leibniz, Peter the Great, Bach, Newton, Racine, Locke, Spinoza were smarter than we are, you may.

If you wish to believe that the humans who pulled off the Salem Witch Trials, Galileo's Inquisition, and the idiotic Thirty Years War, the people who caused the Plague by sheer stupidity, the people who invented a famous thing called Pilgrims, who fought endless war in Europe against the Ottomans only halting at Vienna, were smarter than we are in our Teraflop Age, you are welcome to believe that, but I am going to call bull on that.

Still, they did halt the Turk at the gates, Newton did write is mathematical encyclopedic masterpiece and the treaty of Westphalia was all pulled off, so this time did have its potential. Note, though, that all this good stuff occurred late Century when our brains were already shrinking. See where this argument is going? Time to get off a train that's going off the tracks.

As you can see, the Fathead Brain Theory has serious issues, to say the least. There seems to be something there, but there is a lot less there than one might think. When people start talking in general terms of Fathead Brainiacness, it is time to wave the arms and shut the conversation down.

Hereditarians, come on, you can do better than this.

Note: Readers should carefully read the Commenting Rules before commenting to avoid having their comments edited or deleted and to avoid being banned from the site.