Average CWC skull metrics

[Dinarid]

Is there any haplogroup data?

 

[Tomenable]

^^^ Nope, AFAIK.

 

[Dinarid]

Unfortunate. One would wonder why some who were so intent on studying archaic human remains would do so little to ensure their survival, so that in a future with more advanced technology we could do so much more with them.

I must also thank you, as an 'R-man', for not getting offended over how people looked 30,000 years ago. Some silly Nordicists still persist with their insistence that Haplogroup R men were a six-foot-tall master race that founded all of European civilization as we know it today. I have reconsidered my old view that Q and R were Mongoloid and now believe that they were most likely an ancestral race before these two split, and then absorbed characteristics from both groups. Even then, sometimes debates over this get nowhere, like classifying Haplogroup R as a "Caucasoid" lineage among Central Asian men and then doing nothing to refute my arguments to the contrary.

I found on online anthropology discussion boards these two polls relating to Y-DNA haplogroups and male height:

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?91500-Haplogroup-I-Only-Height-Poll
http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/archive/index.php/t-1021.html

Maybe we should do our own?

 

[Tomenable]

He is right. Haplogroup K2 split into NO and K2b. Mongoloids are predominantly NO (mostly O).

On the other hand, from K2b are descended Australoids (haplogroup K2b1 - or MS) and haplogroup P. Australoids are closer to Caucasoids than to Mongoloids, so logically we should assume that P wasn't Mongoloid. From P descended Q and R and neither of them was Mongoloid (Paleo-Americans such as Kennewick Man weren't Mongoloid, despite having Q).

Mongoloid traits evolved in the Americas later - compare this Paleo-American with a recent Native American:

https://physicalanthropologymzi.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/sin-tc3adtulo1.jpg

 

[Tomenable]

Only haplogroups O and N are most strongly correlated with Mongoloid peoples:

 

[Tomenable]

Haplogroup Q was found among Afontova Gora peoples, who were autosomally ANE.

ANE admixture cannot be found among East Asian Mongoloids today - see the map:

Highest levels of ANE admixture are observed in Native Americans and in Europeans:

East Asian Mongoloids have no ANE admixture (dark blue colour) or very low levels:

 

[Tomenable]

BTW - here a large collection of old photos of Native Americans:

http://www.firstpeople.us/FP-Html-Pictures/American-Indians-00.html

 

[Dinarid]

Then how did Haplogroup I become Caucasoid?

 

[Angela]

Well, certain traits, like the EDAR complex, labeled as "Mongoloid" by a lot of anthropologists, were found in the SHG, the Swedish hunter-gatherers, who were part WHG and part EHG by the latest modeling, and since WHG didn't have them, they must have been in EHG, who are a mix of WHG and ANE, and again, WHG doesn't have them, so they must have been in certain ANE tribes. That makes sense because they may have been far northern adaptations, and these people inhabited the far north of Eurasia.
http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2015/03/natural-selection-and-ancient-european.html

Let's not forget too that Mal'ta was described as having "Mongoloid" traits, and even some of the reconstructions of one of the EHG shows that.

In fact, some of the speculation from knowledgeable people on the blogger sites indicates that some ANE did go into East Asians, and that may be where these EDAR traits entered their gene pool. Admixture has its place, but the formal statistical methods that have been developed in the last year or two are our best option for figuring these things out.

The problem comes in when we try to apply terms like "Mongoloid" or "Caucasoid" to populations that existed so long ago that the "package" of "phenotypes" by which certain "breeding groups" could be described, didn't yet exist.

 

[bicicleur 2]

He is right. Haplogroup K2 split into NO and K2b. Mongoloids are predominantly NO (mostly O).

On the other hand, from K2b are descended Australoids (haplogroup K2b1 - or MS) and haplogroup P. Australoids are closer to Caucasoids than to Mongoloids, so logically we should assume that P wasn't Mongoloid. From P descended Q and R and neither of them was Mongoloid (Paleo-Americans such as Kennewick Man weren't Mongoloid, despite having Q).

Mongoloid traits evolved in the Americas later - compare this Paleo-American with a recent Native American:

https://physicalanthropologymzi.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/sin-tc3adtulo1.jpg

so the Mongoloid father would be K2 (45 ka) or NO (42 ka)
what about Usht-Ishim? he was pré-K2
and what about C2b? did they become Mongoloid through admixture?

 

[Dinarid]

If you are arguing that P, Q and R were Australoid rather than Mongoloid that still doesn't make them Caucasoid. I agree with the arguments that Angela has made about race but I do think that in some cases "breeding groups" as you've called them were, in fact, already established. There are still a lot of isolated populations throughout the world, albeit maybe less so in Eurasia.

Edit:
I am now considering that C may have been the original Australoid lineage. We can find very old examples of Haplogroup C in Europe associated with some of the oldest populations, who often had slight Australoid features.

 

[MOESAN]

I'm not sure it's reasonable and useful coming to put my word here but?
1- brachycephally occurred in several times and places, among previously dolichocephalic pops.
2- 'cromagnoids' were not 'brünnoids/capelloids: this last group of types seems come from East (Ukraina?) later, less through South at first sight, compared to "older" 'cromagnoids'
3- It's true it seems brachycephally developped easier among 'cromagnoids' beginning around 6000 BC, seemingly. But it's uneasy to be too affirmative. My personal opinion is that the Mesolithic various mix of 'cromagnoids'+'brünnoids' in Europe knew a progressive brachycephalization, for unkown causes: proposed: iodin (far from sea, moutainous regions) plus/or neolithization (including food, physcial activities changes and more small circles of mating, all acting for differentes causes. I want not go into details here, there is no accord. Neolithization seems a bit too late for the first sub-brachyphalsobserved in Western Europe: but it could have acted upon 'alpine' perhpas derived from brachycephalized dominantly 'cromagnoids' pops, separating them partly from 'borreby' types. That said, 'borreby' types seems appearing in Scandinavia North-Germany relatively lately (3000 BC), maybe coming from East (S-E Baltic regions?); we know eastern HGs were larger than western HGs
4- brachycephalization occurred too among 'mongoloids' or 'east-asians' - seemingly in an independant way. And the result Partial brachycephalization occurred too among forest SSA ('negroids') and some others: ancient Congo and around and some other places of Black Africa without visible link between them at first sight
5- the most of our today features separating us in a striking way, were not present 100000 years ago, or very less marked
6- the way modern groups separated them from older branches is neither linear nor simple, nor shared by all new branches: some features are almost exclusives to 'negroids', 'europoids' and 'mongoloids', other features are not exclusive, or innovations are not shared by all members of these big rough groupings: but some groups of Humans did not participate in this rough global typification (english?): old South-East Asians (Papoos, Australoids, Veddoids) or some elements among Amerindians; their look evolved, but no so far as others; Australoids seem the closer to "primitive" forms (but look at their long legs), North Amerindians seem not having choosen between 'europoid' and 'mongoloid'; here I simplify a bit - look at Jomon people, and today Aïnous!
7- old pops of BA in Central Asia until Siberia were strikingly 'europoid': they were at the opposite of 'mongoloids', even compared to the geographically closer ones - some proto-Finns could be a bit closer to this BA people, but it's difficult to tell if they are crossings or old undifferentiated forms. So, no! the supposed I-Eans of eastern Steppes were not something close to Kets or whoever you could will.
&! stature: Poles are definitely NOT among high statured Europeans,as a mean, and they never were; some regions it's true were a bit up the average, but some eastern Poland regions were very far under this average stature; Nothing to be compared to Scandinavians or West-Balkans pops of today or of past;
typical Corded were tall, dolichocephalic, leptoprosope, very long but bonny rugged enough faced (zugomatics), long bodied; something evocating for me 'nordic' + remnants of eastern 'brünnoid', these last ones not so far from some protosomething present in the 'indo-afghan' type, what push to caution: 'bünnoidlike' into 'indo-afghan' or already some imput of less rugged 'indo-afghan' types in Steppes modifying the mean? here again: no 'mongoloid' - according to specialists, the first Scythians close to Siberia men were without 'mongoloid' imput concerning body, the 'mongoloid' element increased as time passed

 

[Tomenable]

If you are arguing that P, Q and R were Australoid rather than Mongoloid that still doesn't make them Caucasoid.

Figure 4.1. from this book (published in 2015) seems to indicate, that Caucasoids are ancestral to other Non-African races:

Link to book (PDF): http://openpsych.net/OBG/wp-content...-Constructs-Contemporaneous-Utility-Final.pdf

Abstract: http://openpsych.net/OBG/2015/06/the-nature-of-race/

Maybe both Mongoloids, Australoids and Amerinds all evolved from Caucasoids, who are the oldest of Non-African races?:

Or maybe 50,000 - 40,000 years ago humans simply did not yet look like modern race groups, which emerged only later?

 

[MOESAN]

Unstable ground. But I still think australoids are the closest to the ancient forms of out-of-Africa people. Maybe the presence of not-noise %s of some poolings 'oceanian' component among all humans could be a kind of confirmation of this. By the way this component is everytime growing higher in %s as you go back in time, as do 'south-asian'. A part of this 'southasian' could be associated with a part of 'oceanian' to mark the trail of this humanity from Africa to Austrasia?