PDA

View Full Version : Most attractive in looks



another
Tuesday, April 13th, 2004, 07:33 PM
Nords or Meds

you can support your arguments with pics of attractive Nords or Meds if necessary..

Sigrun Christianson
Tuesday, April 13th, 2004, 07:42 PM
Well, Nords, obviously. Duh.

another
Tuesday, April 13th, 2004, 07:47 PM
Sigrun, do you have any pics of Nords you find attractive?

Allenson
Tuesday, April 13th, 2004, 07:52 PM
Nords or Meds

you can support your arguments with pics of attractive Nords or Meds if necessary..


It's really in the proverbial eyes of the beholder. There are attractive Mediterraneans and there are attractive folk of more northerly and depigmented types. It's all personal preference. As for 'absolute beauty', that is a difficult thing to define and measure. Most studies indicate that those with symetrical faces are considered more attractive than those with asymetrical faces.

My personal preference is for lighter types-Anglo-Saxons, Nordics, Bruenns, Troenders, Aistins....

What do you prefer?

another
Tuesday, April 13th, 2004, 07:54 PM
Med women from Southern European to Slavic Dinariced Meds to Eastern Meds..

Scoob
Tuesday, April 13th, 2004, 08:31 PM
I think Mediterran-oid peoples (including Nordics proper) are considered the most beautiful in features.

Men with dark hair are considered more attractive than men with light hair, in general (at least in the USA). The stereotype for male attractiveness is "tall, dark, and handsome." Blond hair is feminizing in men. I think Med-oid men with some UP ruggedness are considered maybe the most "sexy" - and UP ruggedness can substitute for light hair.

I think many Nord-ish women in the USA consider Med proper men (Italians, etc) very sexy, but maybe unsuitable as a mate.

For women, I think maybe Nord to Alpine are considered the most beautiful. In women, blond hair is considered "the best" by popular consensus in the USA. Med proper women are considered beautiful - and many men from non-Nord cultures consider them the only really proper mates (blondes are desirable casual sex partners, however.)

As I've said before, each "type" has its own attractions. Pure UP types are less beautiful, but the man can be "sexy" to women. Alpine features are "soft" on a man, but in a woman they can add some softness that is quite erotic and attractive.

Demigorgona
Tuesday, April 13th, 2004, 08:55 PM
Nords of course. Meds mostly look arab or mongrelised imho.

AND I find blondes way sexier then more pigmented men.

Awar
Tuesday, April 13th, 2004, 09:59 PM
To me, the Dinaric(ized) women are the most attractive, and other types that resemble this type ( north Pontid, Atlanto-Med, darker Nordid types etc. )

The combination of UP and Mediterranean( oid ® courtesy of Scoob™ ) result in the best looking girls.

I really don't like ultra-Nordic women, who have way too chiseled faces, and other too depigmented types, although it can prove to be cute on some women. Faelid, Brunn, Orientalid and some other types look way too weird for my tastes.

Vlad Cletus
Tuesday, April 13th, 2004, 10:12 PM
How can you compare? There are ugly and beautiful of each sub-race. How many threads are going to be created which Counter Meds and Nords, will it ever end?

I didn't vote.

Personally, though Olive Skinned Med-Woman with dark hair and light eyes, isn't bad :P. Red-Heads are truly enchanting too.

galaicco
Tuesday, April 13th, 2004, 10:13 PM
Are there only 2 types? Med and Nord?
and what about Alpine,Dinarid...?
Anyway i find all types of the White race attractives everyone with his own characteristics,there are minor diferents between white types than comparing white than non-white.

Awar
Tuesday, April 13th, 2004, 10:29 PM
heh... I didn't vote either, I consider the poll too restrictive.
But, I love to talk about the ladies :naughty whatever the cause may be :D

leinad
Tuesday, April 13th, 2004, 10:40 PM
beauty is in the eye of the beholder

Glenlivet
Tuesday, April 13th, 2004, 11:31 PM
I can think of three categories of women that are pleasing to my eyes. See the attached pictures for examples.

Classic Nordid as found among Anglo-Saxons in England, Northern Netherlands, North-western Germany and Jutland (Jylland).

Example: Naomi Watts

Also Phalian which in my opinion only look like a broader faced, lower skulled and more robust form of the above.

Found in Britain, the Netherlands, Belgium, Northern France, Western Germany and Austria.

Example: Renate Götschl

The third can be as light skinned but is usually much darker haired and often with dark blue or light mixed eyes. The look is from a Northern European point of view more exotic and the type is more common in the British Isles and most of Western Europe.

What I also prefer are the more delicate-boned Keltic Nordic or North Atlantid with preferably a Phalian element that make the female more paedomorphic. Also the nose will in that way become less sharp, shorter, overall associated with less masculine looking noses. It will also add stronger cheekbones (with or without Phalian) which one can see in the examples of Keltic Nordic but probably not how Lundman describe the composition of the his North Atlantid. These types look more aristomorphic because they have more linear, lean features.

Found on the British Isles and most of Western and Central Europe.

Example: Elisabeth Hurley

Loki
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 01:10 AM
Blond hair is feminizing in men. I think Med-oid men with some UP ruggedness are considered maybe the most "sexy" - and UP ruggedness can substitute for light hair.

That is pure nonsense. In Europe, blond men are usually associated with taller, more robust size, and more muscular and powerful. Mediterranean men are typically smaller, more gracile and skinnier. I don't know where Americans get these weird ideas.... in Europe, blond hair and blue eyes was always associated with fearless, masculine and powerful Vikings - instilling fear in the hearts of everyone whose paths they crossed.

Awar
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 01:24 AM
Actually, I'd be really happy if what Loki says is true ( since I'm light-pigmented ), but where I live, women prefer Dinarids / guys who look like Vojvoda. :wave

In sunlight my hair looks reddish and partially blonde, and my facial hair including eyebrows goes blonde during summer ( though it looks dark with hair-gel ).....and I've witnessed quite a few girls tell me I look better with darker hair. :(

bocian
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 01:30 AM
I think that whatever phenotype dominates, then the opposite will be found as most attractive in any given country.

Personally I don't have a preference. It depends on mood, just like music.

Loki
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 01:39 AM
Actually, I'd be really happy if what Loki says is true ( since I'm light-pigmented ), but where I live, women prefer Dinarids / guys who look like Vojvoda. :wave


I didn't say anything about women's preferences, but rather about perceptions relating to the Nordic phenotype in Europe.

After all, who knows a woman's mind?

ginoJDA
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 02:07 AM
I would of voted nords because the love of my is nord, but I Voted for meds because I'm half med and because they're losing.:~( :D

nemo
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 02:29 AM
I would of voted nords because the love of my is nord, but I Voted for meds because I'm half med and because they're losing.:~( :D

Their losing here because they are out numbered, put the same vote on dodona, and the meds would win in a landslide :)

Mac Seafraidh
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 03:11 AM
This has been a post before only a little more in depth. I would have to go with them as a tie because I am of full mixed European origin. Sometimes I see the most beautiful Germanic women,Meds. vice versa.

Evolved
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 04:24 AM
Both are equally capable of attractiveness/unattractiveness.

Vojvoda
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 04:31 AM
Doh, a real man can't limit his love machine to just a couple of Europid sub races :D

Vestmannr
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 06:43 AM
I had to go with my gut on this one, and vote Nord (which includes Atlantids, Alpinids, Nordics, and UPs in my opinion). All the Med women I consider highly attractive tend to resemble the four groups above far more than other Med women. The attraction for Med women for me, is based upon a personal standard of Nordic beauty, and how far non-Nord women approximate those types. That, and I just have a thing for redheads, blondes, and girls with that brown hair that shines gold, red, or both. (And, for some reason all the models I've ever really been attracted to in magazines were basically of Celtic, German, or Slavic ancestry.)

goidelicwarrior
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 11:19 AM
Nords of course. Meds mostly look arab or mongrelised imho.

AND I find blondes way sexier then more pigmented men. mongrelized is not a term to be used by people from the americas.. since its very likely that they been mong...... :D

norda
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 11:39 AM
Both are equally capable of attractiveness/unattractiveness.
LG, Which one is Mediteranean? Gah!!! I am lost now and don't know who to vote for :D

Alkman
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 04:56 PM
Should i choose between Monica Belucci and Cherlize Theron? No way! :)

Nordhammer
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 07:39 PM
That is pure nonsense. In Europe, blond men are usually associated with taller, more robust size, and more muscular and powerful. Mediterranean men are typically smaller, more gracile and skinnier. I don't know where Americans get these weird ideas....

From the nonstop Jewish propaganda in television and movies.

The "all American" male has always been the tall, strong, blond-haired, blue-eyed male.

Nordhammer
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 08:28 PM
Their losing here because they are out numbered, put the same vote on dodona, and the meds would win in a landslide :)

Don't be so sure...

Scoob
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 08:35 PM
That is pure nonsense. In Europe, blond men are usually associated with taller, more robust size, and more muscular and powerful. Mediterranean men are typically smaller, more gracile and skinnier. I don't know where Americans get these weird ideas.... in Europe, blond hair and blue eyes was always associated with fearless, masculine and powerful Vikings - instilling fear in the hearts of everyone whose paths they crossed.I said, blond hair is feminizing in males.

I didn't say blond males are feminine in other ways. Blondess is associated with youth and femininity - since young people and women are more blond than older people and men.

In the USA, guys who bleach their hair are considered "fags" - because it gives an impression of femininity. Possibly because blond hair also softens facial features, visually.

I am aware of the stereotypes of the big/strong blond Vikings versus more gracile Med men. Tacitus described the same thing 2000 years ago. I was discussing other relevant factors.

Nordhammer
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 08:42 PM
This is just my subjective opinion, of course:

One of the most beautiful women ever is Laetitia Casta which is Central Medish. She looks much better with dyed brunette hair and blue contacts, however (image #1 compared to image #2; that's also Laetitia, this time with dark hair, brown eyes).

Dyed brunette hair? She is a natural brunette. Blue contacts? She is naturally lighteyed. (from the pictures I looked at)

I consider her peripheral Nordish.

Peripheral Nordish doesn't necessarily equate to Peripheral Medish, as Peripheral Medish could be Med+Asiatic.

Nordhammer
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 08:52 PM
I said, blond hair is feminizing in males.

In the USA, guys who bleach their hair are considered "fags" - because it gives an impression of femininity.

Blondness is perhaps associated with femininity simply because so many women dye their hair lighter. I don't think it necessarily makes a guy look more feminine.

The same could be said for men with long hair. It works for some men, for others it doesn't.

What about light eyes, are they considered feminine?

Fair skin, feminine?

Are darkhaired women then more masculine? Women who dye their hair dark are dykes? :D

The media also displays black men as being masculine and white men as being feminine and weak, do you believe that too?

Glenlivet
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 09:02 PM
I have heard many girls say that it does, although I believe that it can indeed be masculine with for example strong Phalian features. It depends if the face is otherwise chiseled, with rounded and smooth features. One should also mention that many Mediterranids are very gracile with smooth features that are associated with females. So it goes both ways.

Maybe blondism can emphasise youthfulness. There is a type of Mediterranid that look youthful too, which is the Insular as is found in Spain. I noticed that Arabid boys who are 18 look as if they are like 25.



Blondness is perhaps associated with femininity simply because so many women dye their hair lighter. I don't think it necessarily makes a guy look more feminine.

The same could be said for men with long hair. It works for some men, for others it doesn't.

aprilness
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 09:07 PM
I prefer men of Nordic features for breeding purposes. This doesn't mean particularly that they have to have blond hair, but the blue eyes are a must for me (or at least very light eyes, which the chances of the offspring having blue is pretty high). Being that I have blue/gray eyes and blond hair of mostly the Nordic phenotype, I want my children to look like me (which they do :))

As far as just sheer attractive values go, White males of all sorts are attractive. But the more Med they get, the more unattractive they are in my eyes.

At least from this female's perspective.

Nordhammer
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 09:12 PM
I have heard many girls say that it does, although I believe that it can indeed be masculine with for example strong Phalian features. It depends if the face is otherwise chiseled, with rounded and smooth features. One should also mention that many Mediterranids are very gracile with smooth features that are associated with females. So it goes both ways.

Well, everyone has their own opinions about things.

IMO, I don't think it's necessarily the color, but the idea of a man altering his appearance like a woman does. If a man dyes his hair any color, it's "feminine", or wears makeup, or tweezes his eyebrows, etc. The metro-sexual male who spends as much time in the mirror as the woman.

Nordhammer
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 09:14 PM
I prefer men of Nordic features for breeding purposes. This doesn't mean particularly that they have to have blond hair, but the blue eyes are a must for me (or at least very light eyes, which the chances of the offspring having blue is pretty high). Being that I have blue/gray eyes and blond hair of mostly the Nordic phenotype, I want my children to look like me (which they do :))

As far as just sheer attractive values go, White males of all sorts are attractive. But the more Med they get, the more unattractive they are in my eyes.

At least from this female's perspective.

We need more women like you. :)

Demigorgona
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 09:19 PM
mongrelized is not a term to be used by people from the americas.. since its very likely that they been mong...... :D


Well I can use it as I am only 2nd generation Canadian and have no fear of chug blood in me ;)

Awar
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 09:23 PM
Don't be so sure...

:rotfl I think we have some 3-4 members who are negroid... coincidence? :D

Espana04
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 09:47 PM
:rotfl The "all American" male has always been the tall, strong, blond-haired, blue-eyed male. :D

I beg to differ. The All American woman and child has always been blonde haired, blue eyed. The All American Male of the fifties and sixties was almost usually portrayed as having dark to black hair and piercing blue eyes. Hence Elvis, Superman, John Travolta(portrayed as a greaser), Frank Sinatra, The All American dad,Humphrey Bogart, Rock Hudson(yeah I know he's gay), The Fonz, Bruce Wayne.
The tall, dark, and handsome cliche was overdone to the point of extinction back then. Now these days with the rapid incoming of immigrants, the status has changed to the usual Abercrombie/Brad Pitt cliche.

nemo
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 10:30 PM
Don't be so sure...

SE are not meds historically, that's the label these inferior nodicists put on them, they think by mislabeling people that it makes them better, well in the eyes of most SE we consider them idiots just like their fairy tale ideology that they have about themselves.

Meds are people who come from countrys in the middle east, SE are Europeans because their countrys are on the continent of Europe, and all these subgroup titles all of you keep talking about were manufactured by idiots who had a nordicist agenda.

Over 90% of the white people in this world don't know what your talking about when tou talk about sub groups, nordic just means north, and the northern part of Europe has people of all different phenotypes and many of them have the genes of other races.

One of the most stupid things I hear on these web sites is that SE want to mix with the nordics lol! oh well what more can I say?

Abby Normal
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 10:56 PM
Nordic men, Mediterranean women.

ginoJDA
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 11:20 PM
how about Med/Nord mixes?? Are we considered attractive by you women? We get the best of both worlds after all.;)

Loki
Wednesday, April 14th, 2004, 11:22 PM
I said, blond hair is feminizing in males.

It is not. Since when? I understood your post perfectly well.


I didn't say blond males are feminine in other ways. Blondess is associated with youth and femininity - since young people and women are more blond than older people and men.

False on your second claim. There is no evidence that women are more blond than men (naturally). I think it is roughly equal between the genders.


In the USA, guys who bleach their hair are considered "fags" - because it gives an impression of femininity. Possibly because blond hair also softens facial features, visually.

That could probably only be Americans' weird ideas. In other places it is not true. But I also think guys who bleach their hair are fags - because pampering one's looks so much is a feminine thing, along with make-up. It has nothing to do with the colour of the hair, though.

goidelicwarrior
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 03:01 PM
Nords of course. Meds mostly look arab or mongrelised imho.

AND I find blondes way sexier then more pigmented men. uuuuhh.. Miss.. maybe it would be a good idea to catch a plane to Europe before making statements... here are two pics.. one is a Spanish " Med " crowd, the other Iraqi semites... is there no limit to the new world ignorance ? :D

Siegfried
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 03:12 PM
I am more attracted to Nordish and Alpine women. My girlfriend seems peripheral Nordish with, I think, some Alpine characteristics. Whether Alpine qualifies as (peripheral) Nordish, seems to depend on who you ask.

Graeme
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 03:32 PM
goidelicwarrior I am with you regarding the Gorgon. Doesn't know her face from her arse. Canuks are not noted for their brains or their looks. She thinks she is Nordish? She is peripheral Europid. Canada is full of woglish people i.e mongrels.

Most Meds are not short, gracile or effeminate looking. Most gracile people I know are women. I can't see much difference in robustness or gracileness between the two sub races. Eastern Europeans tend to be very solidly built as are most Alpinids. What I do see is that most people of whatever race or sub race are not attractive. Attractive people are very rare! Only certain blue eyes are attractive; the violet ones, the others are rather washed out and boring. I find it strange that the bluest eyes belong to the Irish who are frequently dark haired and very white skinned. That is the most attractive type: the Irish type.

Nordhammer
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 04:27 PM
I beg to differ. The All American woman and child has always been blonde haired, blue eyed. The All American Male of the fifties and sixties was almost usually portrayed as having dark to black hair and piercing blue eyes. Hence Elvis, Superman, John Travolta(portrayed as a greaser), Frank Sinatra, The All American dad,Humphrey Bogart, Rock Hudson(yeah I know he's gay), The Fonz, Bruce Wayne.
The tall, dark, and handsome cliche was overdone to the point of extinction back then. Now these days with the rapid incoming of immigrants, the status has changed to the usual Abercrombie/Brad Pitt cliche.

And what generation American are you?

The quintessential American male (and female) is of a hearty Northern European stock. Fair skin, light eyes, blond in youth and blondish or light brown in adulthood.

What Jews portray on television as propaganda hardly defines the foundation and history of this country. Your example of the "The Fonz" played by a short Orientalid Jew defining the American male is just an example of how ridiculous your argument is.

Vestmannr
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 04:40 PM
Nordhammer wrote:
" The quintessential American male (and female) is of a hearty Northern European stock. Fair skin, light eyes, blond in youth and blondish or light brown in adulthood."

Indeed. And the UP/Nordic ideal was much admired in the early period in cinema, though Alpine women and others were not unknown. However, the modern period has Keltic Nordics predominating in American cinema, television, and other media. If one reads novels from 19th c. America, one can see that the standard of beauty revolved around two types that Anglo society considered themselves comprised of: the Anglo-Celtic (Keltic Nordics, Atlantids, Brunn) and the Anglo-Scandinavian (Hallstat, Borreby, Anglo-Saxon/Tronder/Falish types). There was a period in the early 1800s where the Anglo-Celtic type predominated as the 'American type', then it shifted back towards the Anglo-Scandinavian. Now the shift (since the 1960s) has come back again.

der_mannschaft
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 06:16 PM
The quintessential American male (and female) is of a hearty Northern European stock. Fair skin, light eyes, blond in youth and blondish or light brown in adulthood.
I find your claim that the typical american male is seen as blond very hard to believe since most white-american males have dark hair, not blond.

Allenson
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 06:24 PM
I find your claim that the typical american male is seen as blond very hard to believe since most white-american males have dark hair, not blond.


What Nordhammer and Frontiersman are talking about is the typical American man from a more historic perspective. Perhaps, earlier in our history, American men were lighter of hair than we are now (due to interracial and intraracial blending) and the "all-American man" was depicted as such.

In this say and age, it's hard to define what is a "typical American male".

Also, Nordhammer did not say that adulthood, the American man is purely blond--he said that they are blond as children and light brown in adulthood.

I understand what they are speaking of. Until very recently, "American" meant of old, colonial stock and of NW European heritage. These days? We're giving away "American" status to anyone...and nearly free too!

Glenlivet
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 06:24 PM
I would go so far and say that the European-Americans descended from Northern Europe are on average blonder than their brethren back in Northern Europe. That is my humble impression.



I find your claim that the typical american male is seen as blond very hard to believe since most white-american males have dark hair, not blond.

Allenson
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 06:32 PM
I would go so far and say that the European-Americans descended from Northern Europe are on average blonder than their brethren back in Northern Europe. That is my humble impression.


That is interesting Volks and perhaps there is something to this. Some American 'nativists' throughout our history have spoken or written about a "self-selection" of certain groups that decided to uproot and come to the New World.

This is a precarious notion perhaps....but I recently got my hands on some craniofacial anthropometry for modern North Americans--and I think many may raise an eyebrow at the results. ;)

I will post this data soon!

der_mannschaft
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 06:51 PM
I would go so far and say that the European-Americans descended from Northern Europe are on average blonder than their brethren back in Northern Europe. That is my humble impression. I dont know man. When I compare white-america (and with white-america I mean all whites : italian-americans, swedish-americans, english-americans etc) with Germany and England I cant see much difference in haircolour.
White-americans are as blond as English people and German people in my opinion.

der_mannschaft
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 06:55 PM
By the way :

the darkening of hair during life is common for all Europeans however the pattern of most children blond, but most adults brownhaired is typical for Central-Europe. In central-Europe (england, switzerland, czech rep, germany etc and even France) most kids have blond hair, but most adults have brown hair.

In scandinavia most children and also most adults have blond hair. In Southern-Europe most children and also most adults have brown hair.

Vestmannr
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 08:08 PM
Well, to be fair it does depend on the region of the United States. Most media/contact that people have with the USA is largely areas that are heavily Med in origin or admixture: the North East, California, Texas, Florida, about any urban area. I'll have to dig around, but I have a file that was a survey of Y-STR lineages in American populations and it mirrored something to that effect ... the heavily 'liberal' urban/coastal/New England Gore vote area is where Med associated Y-STR predominates, and the heavily 'conservative' rural/interior/South-West-Midwest'North clustered more closely to Germany and northern England. Of course, it is my theory that the South/West is more heavily populated by Atlantid/UP (Brunn)/Keltic Nordic elements ... while the Midwest/North is more to the Anglo-Saxon/UP (Borreby)/Hallstat side.

That migratory populations may differ from their place of origin is something Coon covered in TROE, and I think is a pretty solid theory. Minority types in one place can migrate to another and be the majority in a new place. Hence, I think that Germans were largely seen as portly and dark in Early America: because most of them were of Rhineland/Bavarian/Hessian stock. The representation of Irish changes as well: early on they have characteristics more of the specialized Aran Nordic type (reminding me of Hugh O'Neill's portrait) or as Keltic Nordics. After the post-famine Migration the depictions are more towards the Med-seeming Paleo-Atlantids, and the ruddy Brunns.

There was even a period of American historians that argued for Americans being the more aggressive, courageous, risk-taking, solitary, and hardy individuals from Europe. IOW, a 'distillation' of European masculinity.

Scoob
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 08:28 PM
It is not. Since when? I understood your post perfectly well.

False on your second claim. There is no evidence that women are more blond than men (naturally). I think it is roughly equal between the genders.

That could probably only be Americans' weird ideas. In other places it is not true. But I also think guys who bleach their hair are fags - because pampering one's looks so much is a feminine thing, along with make-up. It has nothing to do with the colour of the hair, though.I only described some stereotypes in the USA right now. I have no idea if these apply in Europe.

Again, I didn't say blond men are in fact less manly.

Allenson
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 08:50 PM
Well, to be fair it does depend on the region of the United States. Most media/contact that people have with the USA is largely areas that are heavily Med in origin or admixture: the North East, California, Texas, Florida, about any urban area. I'll have to dig around, but I have a file that was a survey of Y-STR lineages in American populations and it mirrored something to that effect ... the heavily 'liberal' urban/coastal/New England Gore vote area is where Med associated Y-STR predominates, and the heavily 'conservative' rural/interior/South-West-Midwest'North clustered more closely to Germany and northern England. Of course, it is my theory that the South/West is more heavily populated by Atlantid/UP (Brunn)/Keltic Nordic elements ... while the Midwest/North is more to the Anglo-Saxon/UP (Borreby)/Hallstat side.


Yes indeed--regionality will play a large part in 'typical' types.

I'd be very interested in seeing the Y-STR lineage study if you can find it.

Being a New Englander I of course have to chime in with my own anecdote about the findings that you've reported. ;) Despite our proximity to the urban corridor to our south, here in northern New England, the Mediterranean phenotype anyway is not very numerous and I would assume that genetic markers would somewhat follow suit.

We are far removed from the urban blight to our south and it drives me nuts when we are continuously lumped in with the rest of the 'northeast'. (:o I'm not trying to be argumentative with you, Frontiersman...just with people's perceptions from away. The same can be said for rural upstate New York. I know a few folks over there who hate being in the same state as and culturally lumped in with NYC. New York City and the Adirondaks are about as similar as Rome and the Scotish moors, LOL. ;)

der_mannschaft
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 09:01 PM
The reason why you see more blond white women than blond white men is not just because of hair dying of women. There is also a difference in natural haircolour. On average white women have naturally lighter hair than white men.

Vestmannr
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 09:30 PM
One paper I've seen on Y-STR studies is "Y Chromosome STR Haplotypes and the Genetic Structure of U.S. Populations of African, European, and Hispanic Ancestry", Kayser, Brauer, Schadlich, Prinz, Batzer, Zimmerman, Boatin, and Stoneking.

Of the regions tested in that study, East Texas was the white population furthest away from African or Hispanic populations, followed by Virginia. The Florida White population grouped with the Hispanics. None of the White populations tested were near the Africans (no African male lineage, despite some Euro's claims.) The Alabama Africans were the closest in the tight African cluster to the Hispanic/European groups. Of the Hispanics, Florida and Pennsylvania were the closest to the White, and the Texas and Virginia Hispanics the furthest away. Interestingly enough... Hispanic Florida population tested as closer to the rest of the American white population than the WHite Florida population. Of the Europeans, Spain and Germany clustered with the WHite American populations... Hungary at the edge toward the Hispanics, and Italy and the Gypsies far away towards the Africans.

Can I post a .pdf here of this study?

Allenson
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 09:50 PM
One paper I've seen on Y-STR studies is "Y Chromosome STR Haplotypes and the Genetic Structure of U.S. Populations of African, European, and Hispanic Ancestry", Kayser, Brauer, Schadlich, Prinz, Batzer, Zimmerman, Boatin, and Stoneking.

Of the regions tested in that study, East Texas was the white population furthest away from African or Hispanic populations, followed by Virginia. The Florida White population grouped with the Hispanics. None of the White populations tested were near the Africans (no African male lineage, despite some Euro's claims.) The Alabama Africans were the closest in the tight African cluster to the Hispanic/European groups. Of the Hispanics, Florida and Pennsylvania were the closest to the White, and the Texas and Virginia Hispanics the furthest away. Interestingly enough... Hispanic Florida population tested as closer to the rest of the American white population than the WHite Florida population. Of the Europeans, Spain and Germany clustered with the WHite American populations... Hungary at the edge toward the Hispanics, and Italy and the Gypsies far away towards the Africans.

Can I post a .pdf here of this study?

Yes, you can post pdf files.

Now that I see the title and authors, I recgonize it as one that I've read before.

I made a thread about it once:

http://www.forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=4127

NormanBlood
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 10:21 PM
Nords I'd say. I don't like the look of the typical Italian man. The short stocky, incredibly hairy and loud type :D Though I like red hair as well, men, for me, are more attractive with blonde hair and blue eyes and must be tall and well built.

Vestmannr
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 10:22 PM
Sweet. Looks like you about covered it. I think though the study shows European-Americans being closely grouped (and definitely not 'mongrelized' as some would have it) it does show a North-South difference that us Southerners have always noticed. I'll bet that R1b is more common in the South by a slight margin, and I more common in the North (just Y-STR). I dont think I have a clear enough picture of mtDNA populations yet.

I was digging around just now looking for a more recent study of attraction in men and women in the US. I recall that for men the ideal of feminine beauty now is: brown hair, fair skin, light eyes (particularly green.) I cant recall what it was for American women's ideal of masculine beauty... I had thought it was more towards the blonde, but my wife says no .. that it was primarily towards rugged or robust features: esp. those I would associate with UP or UP/Nordic blends.

der_mannschaft
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 10:24 PM
I recall that for men the ideal of feminine beauty now is: brown hair, fair skin, light eyes (particularly green.) Here in my home country in Europe most women prefer brownhaired guys with blue eyes. So its sort of similar here

Glenlivet
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 10:31 PM
Brown hair and light eyes can come with many different facial features so it is kind of general to say such a thing. It is found in many parts of Europe, especially so along the Atlantic coast, Belgium, France and Northern Italy.

Maybe it is more common for regions where Celts used to live.



Here in my home country in Europe most women prefer brownhaired guys with blue eyes. So its sort of similar here

der_mannschaft
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 10:45 PM
Brown hair and light eyes can come with many different facial features so it is kind of general to say such a thing. It is found in many parts of Europe, especially so along the Atlantic coast, Belgium, France and Northern Italy.

Maybe it is more common for regions where Celts used to live.
I dont think it has something to do with celts.

If you look at it very globally there are 3 regions in Europe when it comes to pigmentation of hair and eyes :

-Scandinavia and some part parts of North-East Europe were blond hair and blue eyes predominate.
-Southern-Europe were brown hair and brown eyes predominate
-Central-Europe (Ireland, Britain, Germany, Holland, Belgium, Switzerland etc) were brown hair and blue eyes predominate

(Geographically the british isles are North-West Europe but I group them in with Central-Europe because their haircolour and eyecolour is so similar to Central-Europeans.)

Im not too sure about Northern-Italy and France. I believe North-Italians and French people have mostly brown hair and brown eyes not brown hair and blue eyes. So I think the French and North-Italians should be put in the south-european group. But I could be wrong though.

nemo
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 10:49 PM
One paper I've seen on Y-STR studies is "Y Chromosome STR Haplotypes and the Genetic Structure of U.S. Populations of African, European, and Hispanic Ancestry", Kayser, Brauer, Schadlich, Prinz, Batzer, Zimmerman, Boatin, and Stoneking.

.. Hispanic Florida population tested as closer to the rest of the American white population than the WHite Florida population. Of the Europeans, Spain and Germany clustered with the WHite American populations... Hungary at the edge toward the Hispanics, and Italy and the Gypsies far away towards the Africans.

Can I post a .pdf here of this study?

The above statesmen are ridiculous, I don't care who did this study, what did you do make this up, yeh sure the hispanic population of florida is closer to the american white population then the white florida population, and Italy is far away towards the Africans you dumb head, modern scientific dna shows just the opposite about Italy with insignificant african dna.

You are either some jew, nordicist or spic trying to make yourself white.

I would like to see on that data where it says all the bullshit you wrote, because it contridicts all the data that was ever printed on this subject.

Also how can hungary be close to hispanics, you are either a liar or your so dumb you don;t understand what you read.

Ithink your just a spic trying to convince people with your BS that spics are white.

der_mannschaft
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 11:06 PM
Here you have a gene map :

http://home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/GeneMap.jpg


As you can see italians are far away from North-Africans (berbers).

Glenlivet
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 11:15 PM
Celts were anthropologically diverse but that is the regions they had the greatest influence. North-western Germany is more blond and blue eyed. Southern Germany got a strong Alpinid and Dinarid component but they are only together in majority. We can assume that many of them have brown hair and blue eyes (but also a significant number got brown eyes).

I would include the Netherlands in the blond and blue eyes group. There is also a very blond and Nordid pocket in Northern Switzerland. Otherwise I agree about the tendency.




-Central-Europe (Ireland, Britain, Germany, Holland, Belgium, Switzerland etc) were brown hair and blue eyes predominate

der_mannschaft
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 11:24 PM
I would include the Netherlands in the blond and blue eyes group. There is also a very blond and Nordid pocket in Northern Switzerland. Otherwise I agree about the tendency.Dutch people are on average darker haired than the English and Germans. Dutch people are comparable to Southern-Germans when it comes to haircolour. I would estimate that 25-30 % of dutch men are blond 2 % have red hair and 70-75 % brown or black hair.
When it comes to eyecolour : about 33,3 % of dutch people have brown or dark mixed eyes. The other 66,6 % of dutch people have light or light mixed eyes.

Vestmannr
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 11:25 PM
NEMO sayeth: "The above statesmen are ridiculous, I don't care who did this study, what did you do make this up, yeh sure the hispanic population of florida is closer to the american white population then the white florida population, and Italy is far away towards the Africans you dumb head, modern scientific dna shows just the opposite about Italy with insignificant african dna."

Thanks, I've done little to be called a statesman ... though I know not if the person on the other side of the conversation is active in the building of nations. ;) As for the data, I gave you the name and reference of the paper ... it should be available at www.genome.org . The data I was mentioning comes from two plots within the paper: Figure 2, MDS Plot based on Rst vaules for Y-STR Haplotypes for U.S. groups. and Figure 3, MDS Plot based on Rst values for Y-STR Haplotypes, comparing global populations with the U.S. groups. Look it up yourself. You do show a basic ignorance of Floridian history. Indeed, the Hispanic population of Florida is old Spanish settlers, along with a large Cuban influx (who are almost entirely of old Spanish stock, and some Carib.. not much African as one may think.) The 'White' population of Florida is of two origins: one is 'Cracker' which is largely Anglo-Celtic with some Native American admixture. The second grouping is largely migrants from the North including mostly Southern and Eastern Europeans. I've seen the studies about Sub-Saharan and North African genes. In Europe, the Celtic Fringe has the lowest amount (zero, zed, nada) of 'African' genes, etc. This wasnt some 'swipe' at Italy, as you obviously took it: it is part of the study.

To understand what I meant, regarding Figure 3 the Africans in the study were in the range of -0.5 to -2.0 on Dimension 1, and between -0.8 and 0.4 on Dimension 2. Italians were at roughly 0.2 on Dimension 1, and roughly -0.1 on Dimension 2. By comparison, American 'Whites' were in the range of 0.5 to 1.5 on Dimension 1, and between -0.3 and 0.2 in Dimension 2. Plot it yourself.

Nemo sayeth: " You are either some jew, nordicist or spic trying to make yourself white."

Well, you can think what you want :) Obviously, thinking is not something you are comfortable with. That, however, is something you can change with effort. I'm interested to see your list of 'enemies' though: 'jew, nordicist or spic'. I think generally we call this transference when discussing pathologies. Your confrontational tone suggests you see an enemy where there are none, and your choice of enemies suggests qualities that you hate in yourself.

" I would like to see on that data where it says all the bullshit you wrote, because it contridicts all the data that was ever printed on this subject."

Please do look it up. I see I've struck a nerve, and I'm sorry if I've injured your agenda.. ahem, pride. However, I have read much of the data on this subject and would suggest that you cannot have read 'all the data that was ever printed on this subject' because you missed this important paper, and it does not 'contridicts' (you meant contradicts, I hope) what we have done in these studies so far.

" Also how can hungary be close to hispanics, you are either a liar or your so dumb you don;t understand what you read."

Sure, but call a man a liar (falsely even) in my part of the country, and see what happens. I think there is another thread about it specifically on 'the Colonial Vanguard'? ;) How can 'hungary be close to hispanics', is simple. Hungary measures closer to the Hispanic fringe on Dimension 1 of Figure 3, but closer to the Europeans in Dimension 2. If you could see the Figure, you would see the Hispanics and Europeans are closely grouped together... with only Texas Hispanics grouping much further away (because of native American blood, in fact, on Fig. 3 they plot next to Chinese). I do fully understand what I read in this study, and it is most suggestive that Hispanics in most parts of the United States not bordering Mexico are largely of Iberian stock.

" Ithink your just a spic trying to convince people with your BS that spics are white."

How entertaining. My genetic material has been tested, I can assure you that all of my ancestors are from within the continent of Europe within the past 35,000 years. I am R1b myself, of a unique haplotype diverging from the Atlantic Modal Haplotype about 3500 years ago (the closest relations I have found genetically are McGregors). Geneaologically, the furthest West I have for any ancestors is Co. Waterford, Eire .. and the furthest East is Kiev (the furthest south is Rome itself, and the furthest north is Skane in Sweden... unless Scotland is further north?). I am guessing you have little direct experience of American Hispanic populations?

I would also guess that you are an instigator. Either of the rather sensitive and brutal type, what we Christians call 'zeal without knowledge'... or you are engaged in a form of Counter-Intel. 'Jew' and 'spic' were quick out of your mouth, how can you assure us that *you* are not Mossad? I've dealt with your likes before... 'yap, yap, yap' :D

Vestmannr
Thursday, April 15th, 2004, 11:27 PM
On the above gene-map, what exactly is being plotted? Is it single gene alleles, Y-STR haplogroups, haplotypes, mtDNA? What? The 'gene-map' shown is near worthless out of context with the legend it should have, and the data and paper accompanying it.

As for the Celtic question, I think it directly has something to do with the modern population of Celts, or the group that became identified as Celts (and Gauls) in the Classical period. The same Atlantic groups have this look, which maps exactly to the range of R1b prominence (like father, like son): ie, Denmark, W/S Germany, Switzerland, N. Italy, France, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Britain, Iceland. Of course, I dont expect many to be familiar with looking at things from a perpective that is oriented towards the 'West Men' or Atlantic peoples. For a good read as an introduction to our Atlantic peoples, I would suggest Barry Cunliffe's "Facing the Ocean: the Atlantic and its Peoples, 8000 bc - AD 1500."

nemo
Friday, April 16th, 2004, 01:08 AM
One paper I've seen on Y-STR studies is "Y Chromosome STR Haplotypes and the Genetic Structure of U.S. Populations of African, European, and Hispanic Ancestry", Kayser, Brauer, Schadlich, Prinz, Batzer, Zimmerman, Boatin, and Stoneking.

and Italy and the Gypsies far away towards the Africans.

Can I post a .pdf here of this study?

Unless I am misunderstanding you, but what you are saying is that the Italians(who are white) are much closer to the African group then the white group, and that spics are even much closer to the whites then the Italians are, if that's what your saying you are 100% wrong.
Even the gene map shows how far the Italians are from Africans and are close to denmark and british etc.
All you did was copy and paste the heading from a scientific report to make it look legit then put your own spin on it, nice jew trick.

a DNA tests done on jews last year showed that jews and palestinians are genetic brothers, it was in all the newspapers here which proves that jews in their original form(no mixing with whites) are not white.

I did not see in that link you put up where it says Italians are far away from the white population but are toward africans, that's just something you want to suggest because you are a jew trouble maker.

Cuba is not a white country, 90% of the population are negro and mulatto, and all these hispanics you talk about are not white, that is quite obvious.

I don't know what your agenda is, but I know you distort the facts to prove your malicious motives.

Vestmannr
Friday, April 16th, 2004, 02:16 AM
"Unless I am misunderstanding you, but what you are saying is that the Italians(who are white) are much closer to the African group then the white group, and that spics are even much closer to the whites then the Italians are, if that's what your saying you are 100% wrong."

Yes, you are misunderstanding. However, White Americans do cluster in this study close together, further from Italians.. and with the Italians closer to the Africans than White Americans. Please go read the study, it is based upon a 1997 study by Caglia, et al. Again, I've pointed you to the study ... www.genome.org , so your argument isnt with me, it is with the gentlemen from the Max Planck Institute, and others who performed the study. As regards 'spics', I dont know whom you are referring to... the pure Spaniards and Basques settled in the USA, or the Mexicans? Of course, I love Basques...

" Even the gene map shows how far the Italians are from Africans and are close to denmark and british etc. All you did was copy and paste the heading from a scientific report to make it look legit then put your own spin on it, nice jew trick."

Well, you are an agent provacateur, arent you? The gene map has no legend, so one cannot tell what particulars were tested. As for 'copy and pasting', I gave you the name of the report... you can check the report and see if it is so, so can everyone else. The 'spin' being put here I think belongs to yourself with claims of 'jew trick'.

" a DNA tests done on jews last year showed that jews and palestinians are genetic brothers, it was in all the newspapers here which proves that jews in their original form(no mixing with whites) are not white."

That wasnt last year, that was 2001 and the study was by Nebel. Furthermore, the Sephardic and Oriental Jews were the only ones to cluster with Palestinians, as well as with Syrians ... making them not Arab, but rather Assyrian, an Alpinid form. I take it you think Alpine folk are not white then? As for the rest of the Jews, the Ashkenazi... they cluster with the Kurds, and other Turkic, Slavic, and Persian groups... I'll let you call Persians and Slavs 'not White', though I wont argue either way on the Turks.

" I did not see in that link you put up where it says Italians are far away from the white population but are toward africans, that's just something you want to suggest because you are a jew trouble maker."

No, its something my slug-like Mossad agent, that you were unwilling to work for. You obviously could do with a lesson on the value of work! Here, my lazy student: http://www.genome.org/cgi/content/full/13/4/624?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&author1=Kayser&titleabstract=African+European+Hispanic&searchid=1082074274123_1681&stored_search=&FIRSTINDEX=0&journalcode=genome

There is the article, with the abstract. Here is the figure with the plotting of the data, so you can see I am reporting the findings, not 'spinning' : http://www.genome.org/cgi/content/full/13/4/624/F3

"Cuba is not a white country, 90% of the population are negro and mulatto, and all these hispanics you talk about are not white, that is quite obvious."

It is no more obvious to me than discussing S. Italians, etc. I have to have solid evidence, as I have a rational mind. The Cuban diaspora to Miami in the early years was exclusively of the upper class, Spaniards. Later refugees have not been treated the same. Of course, I dont know from whence you have figures for a 90% figure of negro/mulatto for Cuba. You might post that?

" I don't know what your agenda is, but I know you distort the facts to prove your malicious motives."

My agenda is Truth. Truth against the World. It is the same motto my Druid ancestors (you are not even worthy to be spit upon by them) lived by, and is not malicious... I'll leave that motive to you: it fits your racial character better. Distortion of facts I'll leave to you as well, you distort the English language and spelling well enough. Might you stick to your native Yiddish instead ? ;)

Vestmannr
Friday, April 16th, 2004, 02:52 AM
Here, my crippled Nemo ... that you might swim in the current...

Caglia, A., Novelletto, A., Dobosz, M., Malaspina, P., Ciminelli, B., and Pascali, V. 1997. Y-chromosome STR loci in Sardinia and continental Italy reveal islander-specific haplotypes. Eur. J.*Hum. Genet. 5: 288-292

The abstract:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=9412785&dopt=Abstract

With that, you should be able to find the paper at a Uni library.

Remember: Arbeit Macht Frei! :D

or better: ??? ???????? ??? ????????, ??? ? ??????? ??????????? ????. 'And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.', or the language you pretend is yours: et cognoscetis veritatem et veritas liberabit vos

V R S N S M V - S M Q L I V B

nemo
Friday, April 16th, 2004, 03:59 AM
One paper I've seen on Y-STR studies is "Y Chromosome STR Haplotypes and the Genetic Structure of U.S. Populations of African, European, and Hispanic Ancestry", Kayser, Brauer, Schadlich, Prinz, Batzer, Zimmerman, Boatin, and Stoneking.

and Italy and the Gypsies far away towards the Africans.

Can I post a .pdf here of this study?

There is nothing in that article that suggest what you wrote their, I'm not going to waste my time with you because as the coward you are you hide behind your computer making insulting remarks to me, you just double talk, you discredit the gene map and any other data that does not go along with your agenda, only your data is valid and I don't give a damn what you think, and you took this data and just put your own spin on it, like the slime ball you are.

Your a arrogant jew boy, I know what I am, when I look in the mirror I see a fair skinned blue eyed man you idiot.

Your saying things that the tests do not, this is a part of that thread you put up


We also compared the U.S. populations to worldwide data for haplotypes for the same nine Y-STR loci. An MDS plot (Fig. 3) shows that sub-Saharan African and African-American groups are clustered together, separate from the other groups. Hispanic groups tend to be associated with populations of Asian and European ancestry, whereas European-American groups tend to be associated with European populations, but there is some intermingling between Asian/Hispanic and European/European-American groups. A neighbor-joining tree shows the same

now willyou please show me in actual wordswhere in that article it says that Italians cluster closer to Africans then to whites. you mulatto nordicist or should I say you semitic jew, and stop discrediting the dna about the jews, hymie boy.

nemo
Friday, April 16th, 2004, 04:07 AM
Here if you want to learn the truth about Italians? read this






http://www.angeltowns.com/members/racialreal/italians.html

Vestmannr
Friday, April 16th, 2004, 04:27 AM
Okay, my crippled little CLOWN fish...

" There is nothing in that article that suggest what you wrote their, I'm not going to waste my time with you because as the coward you are you hide behind your computer making insulting remarks to me, you just double talk, you discredit the gene map and any other data that does not go along with your agenda, only your data is valid and I don't give a damn what you think, and you took this data and just put your own spin on it, like the slime ball you are."

First, you and no one else had identified 'the gene map'. I take it is an article of faith for you. Here is another one, the same one I gave you the links to. So you can read it simply: the white circle labeled ITA is Italians. The round black circles are European Americans. The black squares are Hispanic Americans... other white circles are other European peoples: SPA is Spain, GER is Germany, HUN is Hungary, ROM is Romani Gypsies ... notice the white squares ... PAK is Pakistan. Notice how CLOSE ITA is to PAK, and that the Hispanic Americans separate ITA from the clusters of the European Americans. Triangles are Africans (Black is African American, White is African.) You can see it plainly enough... the data goes with the above mentioned studies. Again, I have no agenda but truth. I dont get anything out of it either way if you are an Italian and are Nordic, or are an Italian and cousin to a Baboon. What does it have to do with me, eh? Me, I dont have an agenda.. unless it is to see the filioque ripped out of the Latin Creed, and the Papacy taken back down to just the Patriarch of Rome. No racial agenda. Obviously, this hurts you alot more than it hurts me. Sorry about that. Sometimes you have to wound to heal.

" Your a arrogant jew boy, I know what I am, when I look in the mirror I see a fair skinned blue eyed man you idiot.

Your saying things that the tests do not, this is a part of that thread you put up"

Well, look at the plotted data and tell me that Italians on the graph are *not* plotted according to Caglia's data, away from Euro-Americans and past most Hispano-Americans, closer to Pakis and Africans? I have a mirror ... I look in it and see a sane man with an education, imprinted with the features of my ancestors: O'Neills, O'Morrows, Plantagenets, Capets, Canmores and Balliols. With the way you write, I'm surprised you dont only see red when you look in the mirror. Careful, you might end up murdering some more Palestinians.


" We also compared the U.S. populations to worldwide data for haplotypes for the same nine Y-STR loci. An MDS plot (Fig. 3) shows that sub-Saharan African and African-American groups are clustered together, separate from the other groups. Hispanic groups tend to be associated with populations of Asian and European ancestry, whereas European-American groups tend to be associated with European populations, but there is some intermingling between Asian/Hispanic and European/European-American groups. A neighbor-joining tree shows the same "

I note you found this paragraph (not my words, but those of the study) .. good job. It says just what it says: that for Americans, the three groups African, European, and Hispanic were clearly separate. It also noted that the Hispanics clustered around both Asian and European groups (if you note the MDS graph mentioned on this post... some Hispanic americans cluster entirely with Europeans and European Americans ... closer together than the Italians.

" now willyou please show me in actual wordswhere in that article it says that Italians cluster closer to Africans then to whites. you mulatto nordicist or should I say you semitic jew, and stop discrediting the dna about the jews, hymie boy."

It is right there on the MDS graph on this post, which I linked to previously and told you where to find even before (Fig. 3 of the paper). You can call me a 'jew' or 'mulatto' all you want, and it doesnt make it true. It just makes you a liar. You can see the graph for yourself. Why should I believe a slavering, hateful, whiner like you over a team of scientists with experience in this area? Prove to us that the data is incorrect for that MDS plot. As for 'discrediting the dna about the jews', I did no such thing ... I mentioned the exact study that you were blindly groping for. I have a copy on my computer (also in .pdf form), and if you had read it (and could read graphs), you would understand what I said about them. If I discredit anything, it is false theories... I handle you with the same ease I handle Talmudists, Flat Earthers, and Afrocentrists. Welcome to reality pal, its up to you to start behaving like more man than beast. So far all I see is cussing and empty threats ... iow, 'methinks he doth protest too much'. Wasnt Shylock Italian?

Vestmannr
Friday, April 16th, 2004, 04:35 AM
ye say: "Here if you want to learn the truth about Italians? read this"

Then direct to the 'racial reality' website? Please, that is a political website. I've directed you to hard data. Who has an agenda here? Have I directed you to anything political in nature? The problem with that website is that it mirrors the unsubstantiated claim of Cavalli-Sforza that 'race does not exist', while hypocritically turning around and speaking of 'population groups' defined and treated the same way as races. The word for that is 'Political Correctness', or 'newspeak' ... ie, word-smithing. If you want to convince me, you need to show the hard data : I'm no country rube, I'm not about to buy the Brooklyn Bridge from you, or wooden nutmeg. You need something more to convince me than trying to smear me with 'jew' or 'anti-Semite', or crass political pamphleteering and anecdote. C'mon here, I'm giving you a chance.

And BTW, my religion is GREEK ORTHODOX of the Western Rite (basically an Anglo-Catholic in communion with Moscow, Constantinople, and Antioch.) My race is a mixture of Atlantid and UP (with trace Nordid and Alpinid). I'd have to say you are far closer to a Jew than I, most likely racially, and absolutely as regards belief, tactics, and philosophy.

Med
Friday, April 16th, 2004, 04:00 PM
" now willyou please show me in actual wordswhere in that article it says that Italians cluster closer to Africans then to whites. you mulatto nordicist or should I say you semitic jew, and stop discrediting the dna about the jews, hymie boy."

It is right there on the MDS graph on this post, which I linked to previously and told you where to find even before (Fig. 3 of the paper). You can call me a 'jew' or 'mulatto' all you want, and it doesnt make it true. It just makes you a liar. You can see the graph for yourself. Why should I believe a slavering, hateful, whiner like you over a team of scientists with experience in this area? Prove to us that the data is incorrect for that MDS plot.

The Italian sample is indeed slightly "towards the Africans" when compared to the Hungarian and German samples, but it doesn't cluster with the Africans any more than the Gypsy and Javanese samples do. It still clusters entirely with the Europeans, as these other Y-chromosome plots confirm:

http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/9224/sicily.jpg
(Maria Elena Ghiani et al. 'Y-chromosome 10 locus short tandem repeat haplotypes in a population sample from Sicily Italy'. Legal Medicine, 2004)

http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/3775/plot.jpg
(Ivan Nasidze et al. 'Testing hypotheses of language replacement in the Caucasus: evidence from the Y-chromosome'. Hum Genet, 2003)

goidelicwarrior
Friday, April 16th, 2004, 04:20 PM
goidelicwarrior I am with you regarding the Gorgon. Doesn't know her face from her arse. Canuks are not noted for their brains or their looks. She thinks she is Nordish? She is peripheral Europid. Canada is full of woglish people i.e mongrels.

Most Meds are not short, gracile or effeminate looking. Most gracile people I know are women. I can't see much difference in robustness or gracileness between the two sub races. Eastern Europeans tend to be very solidly built as are most Alpinids. What I do see is that most people of whatever race or sub race are not attractive. Attractive people are very rare! Only certain blue eyes are attractive; the violet ones, the others are rather washed out and boring. I find it strange that the bluest eyes belong to the Irish who are frequently dark haired and very white skinned. That is the most attractive type: the Irish type. canucks... he he ... nice weekend.. :D

nemo
Friday, April 16th, 2004, 04:28 PM
[nemo is shunned for 4 days, one day for each insult. You've been here awhile, you should have a good idea of what is and isn't allowed.]

Again you discredit evidence on Italians, you know something you are a jerk.(1 day)

Italians, hun, and germans are at about the same distance from Euro/Americans.

the spanish and hispanic make up a very large portion of the american population so are placed closer, you know you are just a hymie semitic twerp (2 days) and you are misinterpreting the whole map to suite your own agender.

The fact that you would say that a bunch of spics are closer to euro/americans then Italians just proves what an idiot you are.(3 days)
What your saying is that Euro/Americans have a lot of Spanish spic blood and the Italians don't, well if thats the case, then I will go along with it.

and the data I put up is valid data and is accurate, the problem with you is that you think your so smart, and yet you don't even know understand the data you read.

If you ever had the balls to insult me to my face, I would split your head in half. you faggot (4 days)

Scoob
Friday, April 16th, 2004, 04:38 PM
I suspect that the Hispanic Florida population grouped closer to the average American White than the White Florida population because of shared Iberian lineages (lots of Irish descendants in the USA). Hispanic Floridians are largely Cubans, and they look remarkably "White" (Iberian, specifically). White Floridians are often from the NE ethnic melting pots, and are perhaps further from the American White average for that reason.

nemo
Friday, April 16th, 2004, 04:42 PM
Thanks for the charts medhammer, but this idoit says that Italians are far toward the Africans, a real wise guy.

Your charts easily shows that the Italians are clustered all around the other Europeans as they should be.

You can see he is just out to slander Italians, he is so stupid that he says the hispanics are closer to euro/Americans then Italians.

Allenson
Friday, April 16th, 2004, 05:49 PM
If you ever had the balls to insult me to my face, I would split your head in half. you faggot



OK--everyone take ten dep breaths and cool off for a while. Discussion is enouraged but calling others a "clown" or a "faggot" is unacceptable.

Any more of this and there will be some shunning going on! (:o :-O

Please see the forum rules posted below if you have any questions.

http://www.forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=2729

Amar421
Friday, April 16th, 2004, 05:58 PM
Non-hispanic white floridians in South florida are heavily drawn from the northeast thus there are many jews and italian-americans in south florida. However, florida north of Orlando is heavily "Southern" in its composition meaning scots-irish and english descendants.

Vestmannr
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 12:04 AM
"Again you discredit evidence on Italians, you know something you are a jerk."

Thanks. I've been called jerk before by better people (actually, everyone else who has ever called me jerk.) As for 'discredit evidence on Italians', you clearly do not understand what I did say. Subtlety and precision seems lost on you. Again, you can see from the study that it is just as I said.

" Italians, hun, and germans are at about the same distance from Euro/Americans."

Not exactly... there is some differentiation... again I suggest reading the whole paper, and studying the figures.

" the spanish and hispanic make up a very large portion of the american population so are placed closer, you know you are just a hymie semitic twerp and you are misinterpreting the whole map to suite your own agender."

First and again: I have no 'agender'. I'm not some craven Nordicist or Medicist arguing for some Blonde/Dark 'Master Race'. And again, I note that you must be practicing some transference with the slanders, even though I have pointed out: I am not your enemy (not Italian's enemy.) However, you have made me wonder as to the validity of the party you represent. The historical ignorance you display of American history is horrendous. There was never a major Spanish or Hispanic settlement in the area of the USA. If you knew the history of American settlement, immigration, and migration ... you would know America enjoys a large majority of the population being of German, Irish, British descent. We do have a large Italian American population, in the Northeast. The problem again manifests, and it is your own ignorance.

" The fact that you would say that a bunch of spics are closer to euro/americans then Italians just proves what an idiot you are.
What your saying is that Euro/Americans have a lot of Spanish spic blood and the Italians don't, well if thats the case, then I will go along with it."

I think we have come to the real point. Your absurd hatred of Spaniards (and also European-Americans.) Of course, you will note I did *not* say that European-Americans have 'a lot of Spanish spic blood', as they dont. It is historically, demographically, and genetically false. If the Italians were somehow more 'pure' as you seem to believe, they would have clustered the opposite direction from European Americans and other Europeans... rather than close to the Asians, non-European Hispanics, and Africans.

" and the data I put up is valid data and is accurate, the problem with you is that you think your so smart, and yet you don't even know understand the data you read."

You have posted no data. You provide a 'gene map' without attribution or notation. No clue is given to its ownership, or the actual data that is being mapped. The issue is not me thinking that I'm 'so smart', the issue is your inability to rise to the occasion.

" If you ever had the balls to insult me to my face, I would split your head in half. you faggot"

Consider it done. I simply say : The Lord judge between me and you. Your blood be upon your own head.

nemo
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 01:02 AM
"

Not exactly... there is some differentiation... again I suggest reading the whole paper, and studying the figures.

Why do you ignore the gene map, the maps that medhammer just put up and the link on Italians I put up, just the map you put up to you has credibility is that it?also you exaggerate what that map you put up is trying to prove

[quote]



The historical ignorance you display of American history is horrendous. There was never a major Spanish or Hispanic settlement in the area of the USA. If you knew the history of American settlement, immigration, and migration ... you would know America enjoys a large majority of the population being of German, Irish, British descent. We do have a large Italian American population, in the Northeast. The problem again manifests, and it is your own ignorance.

I know about American history, I'm talking about the hispanic population that have come to this country in the last 60yrs, Peurto Ricans,Cubans, Dominicans and Mexicans, I'm not talking about occupation, I'm talking about immigration

[quote]

I think we have come to the real point. Your absurd hatred of Spaniards (and also European-Americans.) Of course, you will note I did *not* say that European-Americans have 'a lot of Spanish spic blood', as they dont. It is historically, demographically, and genetically false. If the Italians were somehow more 'pure' as you seem to believe, they would have clustered the opposite direction from European Americans and other Europeans... rather than close to the Asians, non-European Hispanics, and Africans.

Don't put words in my mouth you don't understand my post, just like you you don't understand that article you read.
What I said if Euro/Americans were close to hispanics, then that would mean they have the spanish blood in them.

Why don't you read the other maps that were put up and it shows the italians cluster with the other Europeans, for you to say that hispanics and Spaniards are closer to Europeans then Italians, shows how flawed your thinking and reasoning is.


[quote]


You have posted no data. You provide a 'gene map' without attribution or notation. No clue is given to its ownership, or the actual data that is being mapped. The issue is not me thinking that I'm 'so smart', the issue is your inability to rise to the occasion.

That gene map is well popular map and the data medhammer put up has more credibility then yours

Nordhammer
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 03:19 AM
Non-hispanic white floridians in South florida are heavily drawn from the northeast thus there are many jews and italian-americans in south florida. However, florida north of Orlando is heavily "Southern" in its composition meaning scots-irish and english descendants.

Amar, you mentioned before that you can blend in with Southern European types. Have you ever been mistaken for an Italian, Greek, etc?

Richard Poe, the Mexican Jew who is married to a Greek wife, says that during his travels through Greece he was repeatedly mistaken for a native Greek.

nemo
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 03:26 AM
Read this on the genetics of Europeans, it is a scientific study, and shows that Italians are more similar geneticaly to Germans and other Europeans, more so then Spanish and Greeks.

This post was put up by another poster here at skadi.

http://www.forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=10204

Part of text!



Salter begins by considering the English as the native population, and examines the effects of the immigration of 10,000 Danes, an ethny very similar genetically to the English. Displacing 10,000 Englishmen with 10,000 Danes results in a loss of genetic interests equal to 167 children for every person of English descent! What if the immigrants were Bantus—a group very genetically dissimilar to the English—rather than Danes? The genetic cost to a single Englishman of the immigration of 10,000 Bantus is the equivalent of 10,854 lost children! What if the level of immigration were larger, more in tune with the massive displacement of Western peoples observed today? The English population is roughly 50 million. If 12.5 million of these were displaced and replaced by an equal number of Bantus, the loss would be equivalent to 13 million children! Salter emphasizes that this loss is not somehow reduced by being spread over the entire native population. The loss applies to every member of the native populace.

To further illustrate these points Salter then determines the number of immigrants of group y necessary to reduce the genetic interests of a random member of native group x by one child equivalent (see table on page 43). For Europeans, an average of only 1.1 African or 1.7 Northeast Asian immigrants is sufficient for the loss of one child equivalent—a powerful and personal argument against racially alien immigration. Salter states that within-group charity is potentially adaptive and that self-sacrificial "heroism" directed at preserving one’s group genetic interests can be adaptive as well.

For example, Salter points out that "an act of charity or heroism" performed by an Englishman that prevented 10,000 Danes from replacing 10,000 Englishmen would be worth it even if the Englishman sacrificed his life and with it the potential of having a family of up to 167 children. Preventing replacement by Bantus would justify a far larger sacrifice. It is therefore very clear that activism performed to avoid ethnoracial displacement is very normal and adaptive, and is entirely justified by a rational analysis. Indeed, it is multicultural surrender which is pathological and abnormal.

What about the intra-European situation? What are the genetic costs of intra-racial immigration and displacement? In general, the trends are, as expected, that Europeans share more genetic kinship with other Europeans than with non-Europeans, Europe being, as Salter states: "a generally racially homogenous region." Of course, within Europe, geographically close populations tend to be even more similar, by another order of magnitude. Germans and Swiss are closely related, so it would take 125 Swiss immigrants to reduce a German's genetic interests by "one child." If we continue to look at Germans, we can see that the same effect will occur with 83.7 Belgians, 78.5 Dutch or Danish, 57.2 Englishmen, 33.3 Italians, 18.5 Spaniards, or 9.1 Greeks. In summary, Salter states: "Immigration between ethnies of the same race can still be maladaptive for the receiving population, but the threshold is typically 10 to 100 times that of inter-racial immigration."

CASE CLOSED!

Dienekes_Pontikos
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 04:52 AM
The southern branch of the Europids is generally more attractive, lacking the adaptations to extreme environmental conditions typical of both boreal and equatorial races (e.g., Nordids/Baltids/Mongolids/Negrids/Australasids)

Vestmannr
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 07:01 AM
Nemo, yet again: " Why do you ignore the gene map, the maps that medhammer just put up and the link on Italians I put up, just the map you put up to you has credibility is that it?also you exaggerate what that map you put up is trying to prove"

I dont ignore it. However, that 'gene map' is without attribution, it needs context and data to compare with. Again, I am not exaggerating on the map.. for the characteristics plotted, Italians plot closer to non-European groups than European-Americans do. That is pretty simple: there is a reason Italians were considered 'foreign', here in the United States.

" I know about American history, I'm talking about the hispanic population that have come to this country in the last 60yrs, Peurto Ricans,Cubans, Dominicans and Mexicans, I'm not talking about occupation, I'm talking about immigration"

And, again you dont know about American history. The Hispanic population that has immigrated in the last 60 years has been extremely isolated from the European American population. The two groups are so inimical, that the sociological engineers (applied anthropologists) have been hired to 'break down' this 'odd' situation where the two populations live side by side, and have no contact outside of services (mostly hard labour and domestic) provided by those of one civilization (the Hispanics) for another (the Americans, or 'Anglos'). Immigration in America has far less impact on the racial makeup of European Americans (or Hispanic, or African) than outsiders realize. The study was about that fact: European Americans are not 'hybrids' in any case. Americans have never 'freely' mixed with those outside of their major races (the exception being African Americans, who received a large amount of European blood ... quite forcefully). Albanians, Italians, Somalis, etc. may move to America, but in general Americans marry those whom they feel more comfortable with (Western Europeans, and now Eastern Europeans). European-American culture is very conservative (far more than Old World populations), chalk that up to colonial inertia. So far: only the Irish, Germans, Scandinavians, and French have been 'fully assimilated' into the primary Anglo-American culture of the major minorities in America. The government may mark 'White' for North Africans and Middle Easterners, but popularly speaking: Americans consider such populations as 'White', but foreign... (some groups forcefully keep themselves apart, such as the Greeks, though many are assimilating to the Anglo-American population.. not enough to influence the American majority.)

The last point: the small colonies of the Spanish Empire in much of North America did not mix so much with the natives as happened further south (and even then, many 'Hispanics' or the majority further south in Central and South America have no Spanish blood whatsoever, and are mostly/entirely aboriginal American.) The colonies in Florida, Texas, Louisiana, and California were mostly from the areas of Navarre, Galicia, Asturias, and Castille (Gallegos and Basques predominating). IOW, a largely Basque/Keltic/Gothic population. These families of the 'old settlers' have kept apart from the later Hispanics (mostly Mexicans of Chicmec, Aztec, and other aboriginal nations). Tejanos and Californios are identifiable for being extremely European, as are the true Creoles of Louisiana (the term there refers not to a mixing of races, but to being fully descended from the original European Spanish, French, and Irish settlers.)

EDIT: I forgot to mention. We do have data on the actual number of Afro-European couples from the Census. The figure is hardly that threatening. We are still talking less than a few hundred thousand couples. In any case, their descendants are considered 'Black' in America, and even if they attain to mostly Euro characteristics .. are taught a strong 'Black' identity. I dont see interracial marriage/coupling as often as many others; so I assume it is largely an urban phenomena.

" Don't put words in my mouth you don't understand my post, just like you you don't understand that article you read.
What I said if Euro/Americans were close to hispanics, then that would mean they have the spanish blood in them."

Oh, I'm not putting words in your mouth: you've produced plenty of foul ones without my help. I understand the article quite well: its primary assertion is that the three groups in America have kept essentially apart (for European Americans, entirely apart) from each other. Your assertion that European Americans having 'spanish' blood is the absurdity: the data far from suggests that assertion, as would common sense given the history of the American peoples.

" Why don't you read the other maps that were put up and it shows the italians cluster with the other Europeans, for you to say that hispanics and Spaniards are closer to Europeans then Italians, shows how flawed your thinking and reasoning is."

Well, Spanish are closer to European ... they are just as European if not more than Italians, especially as regards the Hispanic population in the United States. In this case, genetic selection by colonization meant that Andalusians, Catalans, and Murcians (and except in small local areas, Portuguese) did not contribute much to the makeup of the American colonies. And, of course I did not say that all Hispanics are closer to European than Italians: just certain populations (particularly the Florida Hispanics), the majority of Hispanics tested indeed were grouped with Asiatics... further away from the Italians and other Europeans (especially the Texas immigrant Hispanics, being grouped closest to the Chinese... showing their Aztec descent). I never stated otherwise. "Hispanic" is not some homogenous population. Their various 'tribes' rarely have contact, and often discriminate against each other. If you are going to accuse of flawed reasoning, at least have the data to defend that assertion. I am well versed in Logic and Rhetoric (a wonderful Greek invention, used to great effect by such Celts as the poet Virgil :) ) ... IQ tests primarily test reasoning and logic, and I test usually in a range between 145 and 190 (depending on whom is giving the test, and which test it is.) Before you attack my reasoning and logic, I challenge you to actually identify what my actual position is ... so far you have been unable to mirror my actual statements. My guess is passion has clouded your sight.

" That gene map is well popular map and the data medhammer put up has more credibility then yours"

Credibility is a fickle thing. I am well aware of Medhammer's Internet efforts ... credibility with you does not translate to credibility with all. The common Redneck wont find credibility in the same sources I do (since it isnt the King James bible, and the folks at FOX tv.) Medhammer's credibility is largely only with Medicists, which seems to be entirely a reactionary movement against the excesses of many Nordicists. I dont think that Medhammer's goals are primarily scientific, philosophical or practical. They are entirely political from what I can tell, and seem defined in their entirety in relation to Nordicits. Without the Nordicists as foil, Medhammer's website would not exist. (It is a brilliant piece of satire, and a point well taken. I enjoyed it the first time I found it on the net, and enjoyed the followup : March of the Midgets as well.)

That, however, is the funny thing about definitions. If one defines themselves apophatically, or based upon what is not; then one becomes dependent on the other for their identity. AFAIAC, the apophatic method may only be applied to God (Who only may defined by what He is not in His Essence, rather than what He is ... since He is unknowable in His Essence.) For humanity, being knowable, it is far better (and healthier) to define one's own identity based upon what you are in positive terms. Not doing so produces the extreme philosophies that are inimical to human life: radical Feminism with its definition of womanhood as contrary/opposed to Manhood, Talmudic Judaism with its definition of 'Israel' as contrary/opposed to the Nations (evidenced by their use of the word 'Goyim'). Those Nordicists who primarily define themselves as 'not Med', 'not Jew', 'not Negro' are using the same flawed paradigm and ultimately will lose... seriously, I dont buy into that sort of Nordicism (there are Nordicists who do not gain their identity by opposition to other races, and AFAIC they are far more in the 'spirit' of their race than other so-called Nordicists). Until I see a form of Medicism that also speaks by the Way of Affirmation, rather than the Way of Negation ... I'll have to consider your movement part of the crackpot fringe. Your methods of trying to bludgeon your perceived opponents, and the attempted use of intimidation to produce agreement or submission are evidence enough to me for now that agreeing with your position is not the rational, nor even Good thing to do.

Gesta Bellica
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 11:35 AM
Amar, you mentioned before that you can blend in with Southern European types. Have you ever been mistaken for an Italian, Greek, etc?

Richard Poe, the Mexican Jew who is married to a Greek wife, says that during his travels through Greece he was repeatedly mistaken for a native Greek.

And Gesta Bellica, the Northern Italian, was taken for Italian, Greek, German, American (LOL), Eastern Finn, Russian and French in his trips.
Draw your conclusion about the attendibilty of such "classifications"!!

Nordhammer
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 01:00 PM
And Gesta Bellica, the Northern Italian, was taken for Italian, Greek, German, American (LOL), Eastern Finn, Russian and French in his trips.
Draw your conclusion about the attendibilty of such "classifications"!!

But the examples you give are reasonable considering minor Mediterranid/dark types in those non-Med populations. You were never mistaken for a Jew, Arab or Indian right? Then such a mistake would say something negative about yourself.

There is a big difference with comparing your experience with that of a non-European or non-white person who is repeatedly mistaken for a Southern European.

Med
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 01:30 PM
Thanks for the charts medhammer, but this idoit says that Italians are far toward the Africans, a real wise guy.

You're welcome, but try to calm down. You seem really on edge. I understand how aggravating it is to constantly be dealing with false claims and slander directed at Southern Europeans. But rest assured, the truth is out there and will always be revealed. The people who refuse to accept it defeat themselves.


You provide a 'gene map' without attribution or notation. No clue is given to its ownership, or the actual data that is being mapped.

It's from 'The History and Geography of Human Genes' by Cavalli-Sforza, Menozzi and Piazza (Princeton, 1994). Moreover, it's analyzing overall ancestry, whereas the Y-chromosome maps look only at the paternal side.


Then direct to the 'racial reality' website? ... The problem with that website is that it mirrors the unsubstantiated claim of Cavalli-Sforza that 'race does not exist'

Actually, that site argues that race DOES exist:

http://www.angeltowns.com/members/racialreal/race.html


Richard Poe, the Mexican Jew who is married to a Greek wife, says that during his travels through Greece he was repeatedly mistaken for a native Greek.

In America there are people with 12.5% or more Indian ancestry who pass as Northern Europeans. In Nazi Germany, many full-blooded Jews were impossible to distinguish from Germans. And when I first saw Poe, I assumed he was Anglo-Saxon based on his name and generic look. What's your point?

Gesta Bellica
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 01:50 PM
But the examples you give are reasonable considering minor Mediterranid/dark types in those non-Med populations. You were never mistaken for a Jew, Arab or Indian right? Then such a mistake would say something negative about yourself.

There is a big difference with comparing your experience with that of a non-European or non-white person who is repeatedly mistaken for a Southern European.

No i have never been taken for a non-white (but are jews so easily classifiable? some are even nordic looking) as my skin is really white, expecially in winter.

I never trust what some jew is saying.. they are willing to flatter themseves, moreover in Greece they talk Greek with everybody, it's not a sign of being "one of them". (i've read the Poe's blog in which he talked about that greek experience).
Italians do the same...

i'd like to see those non whites that are mistaken for southern europeans,

Nordhammer
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 02:43 PM
In America there are people with 12.5% or more Indian ancestry who pass as Northern Europeans. In Nazi Germany, many full-blooded Jews were impossible to distinguish from Germans. And when I first saw Poe, I assumed he was Anglo-Saxon based on his name and generic look. What's your point?

12.5% Mongoloid ancestry and someone who is 50% nonEuropean Jew and 50% mixed raced Mexican is no comparison. :)

I fail to see how Richard Poe looks anything like an Anglo-Saxon. He has never stated such a thing and never been confused for one... yet he does state he easily blends with Meds and was thought to be a native Greek by other Greeks.

He changed his last name.

http://www.richardpoe.com/images/poebigcrop.jpg

der_mannschaft
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 02:50 PM
http://www.richardpoe.com/images/poebigcrop.jpg

This dude could easily be German or English. He doesnt look dark at al

silent
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 03:39 PM
Meds are the best looking...just walk around in a Nordish country such as the Netherlands and then take a trip to Spain...you will see the difference
latin people are the best looking


laetitia Casta is definately pure 100% Med



and yes blonde hair on men looks feminine for sure

Meds are classier they got temper etc. and feeling..they can dance...while most nordic males I have seen on the dancefloor look like complete retards..

Siegfried
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 03:47 PM
Meds are the best looking...just walk around in a Nordish country such as the Netherlands and then take a trip to Spain...you will see the difference

latin people are the best looking

I find Nordish Dutch girls much more attractive than Medish Spanish girls. It's a matter of taste.


and yes blonde hair on men looks feminine for sure

Nonsense.


Meds are classier they got temper etc. and feeling..they can dance...while most nordic males I have seen on the dancefloor look like complete retards..

Modern dancing is negrified anyway. There are many beautiful Nordish dances around, just like there are beautiful Medish dances.

Gesta Bellica
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 03:56 PM
I find Nordish Dutch girls much more attractive than Medish Spanish girls. It's a matter of taste.

Modern dancing is negrified anyway. There are many beautiful Nordish dances around, just like there are beautiful Medish dances.

Your view of Nordicism is highly respectable.
I wish there were more Nordic people like you in order to build a stable alliance and not lose time and energies in senseless fights.

johnnywalker
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 04:00 PM
One can always say Nordics are better etc. when they might be not actually

der_mannschaft
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 04:02 PM
Your view of Nordicism is highly repsectable.
I wish there were more Nordic people like you in order to build a stable alliance and not lose time in sensless fights.
He is not nordic, he is dutch.

Nordic only refers to the people of Scandinavia (north-central Europe)

North-West Europeans (brits, irish, dutch, belgians) are not nordic.

North-West Europeans are ``nordish`` according to McCullogh and his cohorts, but nordish is a meaningless stupid term.

johnnywalker
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 04:04 PM
hmm that's why he defended dutch girls...I agree with mannschaft they're arent nordic

Siegfried
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 04:11 PM
Your view of Nordicism is highly respectable.
I wish there were more Nordic people like you in order to build a stable alliance and not lose time and energies in senseless fights

Thank you :) I fully support pan-European unity, White brotherhood and all that - but I see no point in deliberately breaking down the cultural and ethnic walls within the greater Europe. As the creed of the National Alliance (http://www.natall.com) states:


We must have new societies throughout the White world which are based on Aryan values and are compatible with the Aryan nature. We do not need to homogenize the White world: there will be room for Germanic societies, Celtic societies, Slavic societies, Baltic societies, and so on, each with its own roots, traditions, and language. What we must have, however, is a thorough rooting out of Semitic and other non-Aryan values and customs everywhere. We must once again provide the sort of social and spiritual environment in which our own nature can express itself in music, in art and architecture, in literature, in philosophy and scholarship, in the mass media, and in the life-styles of the people.

I think both those who are advocating the mass mixture of all White peoples and those who are totally preoccupied with their own subgroup, are being counterproductive in the long run.


hmm that's why he defended dutch girls...I agree with mannschaft they're arent nordic

Not Nordic in a geographical sense, but some Dutch girls are certainly Nordic in a subracial sense.

nemo
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 04:22 PM
Frontiermans!

This will be my last response to to you about this, it is quite obvious that you ignore all other data and evidence except the article you put up and which you are misunderstanding it's meaning of the data, you must be Spanish because you want to believe that hispanics/Spanish are more closer to Europeans then Italians, you are pathetic.

The article I put up onPan-European genetic intrests, if you read it and if you understand what you read, shows that Italians are closer to Germans and other Europeans then Spanish and Greek, just look at the sample about Germans, English etc.

You use your data as if it is the only reliable data because it fits your distorted view that Spanish are more geniticaly closer to Euros then Italians, and ignore all other evidence which show your claim to be untrue.

Read thePan-European genetic intrest article, and it is written in black and white how wrong you are, and I have never heard anyone ever make the claim about Italians are farther from euros as the hispanic/Spanish.

I think that you are really a provocotor, and most likely some jdl sneak trying to cause trouble, because with all the proof I showed you, you still don't get it, either that or just not to smart and don't understand what you read.

nemo
Saturday, April 17th, 2004, 04:34 PM
There is a big difference with comparing your experience with that of a non-European or non-white person who is repeatedly mistaken for a Southern European.

That's what he says! their is no way to confirm if that is true or not.

imperium
Sunday, April 18th, 2004, 02:36 AM
The answer to this question is so obvious it need not to be said.

Loki
Sunday, April 18th, 2004, 10:58 AM
He is not nordic, he is dutch.

Him probably, but many people are Nordic and Dutch.


Nordic only refers to the people of Scandinavia (north-central Europe)

In geographical terms, yes. In anthropological terms - no. Anthropologically, Nordic refers to a subrace rather than a geographical location.


North-West Europeans (brits, irish, dutch, belgians) are not nordic.

Incorrect. People of the Nordid subrace can be found in all of those countries you mentioned.


North-West Europeans are ``nordish`` according to McCullogh and his cohorts, but nordish is a meaningless stupid term.

Your opinion. Many, including myself, disagree.

Sword Brethren
Sunday, April 18th, 2004, 11:01 AM
Flanders is well known for being full of nordics.

Sword Brethren
Sunday, April 18th, 2004, 11:03 AM
About all this ethnic mixing (Different white groups mating with different white groups)... For Europe, ethnic purity is workable. For America, forget even trying. In the USA, most whites are ethnically mixed, so ethnic purity is unworkable in the USA. Basically, keep it white in the USA, and you're okay. Europe could be a different story.

Med
Sunday, April 18th, 2004, 01:21 PM
12.5% Mongoloid ancestry and someone who is 50% nonEuropean Jew and 50% mixed raced Mexican is no comparison.

Genetically, Mexicans can be anywhere from 20-90% Caucasoid. Poe could have as little as 5% Indian admixture, though he's likely about 22.5% nonwhite.

And I notice you conveniently ignored the 'Jews in Nazi Germany' comparison.


This dude could easily be German or English. He doesnt look dark at al

I agree.

Richard Poe vs. Günter Grass:

http://www.newsmax.com/pundits/images/poe.jpghttp://rehue.csociales.uchile.cl/rehuehome/facultad/publicaciones/autores/grass/grass.gif

Who looks more Mexican?

Amar421
Sunday, April 18th, 2004, 09:05 PM
Nordhammer

I have been mistaken for Cuban and have been talked to in Greek at a Greek party by a greek student (in the USA) I assume that I must seem to be within the range physically for a greek. I have been asked if I am italian-american by one guy (who was a nordic american from wisconsin).
I have been classified as "white" by one cop who gave me a speeding ticket. (i saw the classification on the ticket)

For me its not a badge of pride to be confused for a european. I bring it up to just to prove my point that physical appearance is too superficial to base an ideology upon no matter how much "racialism" appeals to you.

Vestmannr
Monday, April 19th, 2004, 06:36 AM
First, since I've had a full weekend: nice to see you reply Medhammer. The point? The point is that it is most natural for one to vote 'most attractive' for women who look like their mother... and that European Americans are not 'mongrels' that some claim. (Unless one considers mixing Nordic, UP, Atlantid, Alpinid and sometimes Dinarid or Med, as being 'mongrelization'.)

As for nemo: "Frontiermans!"

Again, I would say your frustration is clouding your better judgement. As to whether I am Spanish, well: I do have one Spanish ancestor. A King Ferdinand (not sure what race he was.) I have never been mistaken for a Spaniard, however. American girls think I am French, in the UK folk mistake me for an Irishman (even with the accent, yeah?), in Ireland they thought I was German. Probably all pretty fair given my geneaology. However, I fail to see how intelligent and coherent writing makes one 'Spanish' or 'Jewish'. Truth is my criteria, and not blind loyalty to a group. As for Cavalli-Sforza: his data collection is helpful, but beyond that I find him to be one of the dinosaurs in this field. His politics colour his interpretations heavily.. he is basically stuck in the 60s. However, there are up and coming researchers who have no vested interest in trying to 'disprove' the idea of race.

Nemo saieth: "I think that you are really a provocotor, and most likely some jdl sneak trying to cause trouble, because with all the proof I showed you, you still don't get it, either that or just not to smart and don't understand what you read."

Provocateur. I'm not sure who you mean by 'JDL', it doesnt bring anything to mind. Maybe you mean ADL, who has shares your sentiments about my person :) As for what I 'still dont get', you are right: I dont get the Medicist position which seems merely to be a reactionary movement contra Nord. Muslims, Jews, Calvinists, and apparently 'Medicists' find it frustrating when others 'just dont get' their pseudo-religious political paradigm. I'm fine with that. Not looking for cookies (or canoli ;) ) or pats on the back. Have a nice life, and watch out for Sharks :D

goidelicwarrior
Monday, April 19th, 2004, 03:51 PM
Frontiermans!

This will be my last response to to you about this, it is quite obvious that you ignore all other data and evidence except the article you put up and which you are misunderstanding it's meaning of the data, you must be Spanish because you want to believe that hispanics/Spanish are more closer to Europeans then Italians, you are pathetic.

The article I put up onPan-European genetic intrests, if you read it and if you understand what you read, shows that Italians are closer to Germans and other Europeans then Spanish and Greek, just look at the sample about Germans, English etc.

You use your data as if it is the only reliable data because it fits your distorted view that Spanish are more geniticaly closer to Euros then Italians, and ignore all other evidence which show your claim to be untrue.

Read thePan-European genetic intrest article, and it is written in black and white how wrong you are, and I have never heard anyone ever make the claim about Italians are farther from euros as the hispanic/Spanish.

I think that you are really a provocotor, and most likely some jdl sneak trying to cause trouble, because with all the proof I showed you, you still don't get it, either that or just not to smart and don't understand what you read. why do you mix up hispanic and SPANISH???? its NOT the same thing... Capich ??? :D

Scoob
Monday, April 19th, 2004, 07:40 PM
why do you mix up hispanic and SPANISH???? its NOT the same thing... Capich ??? :D
On the street in the USA, people say "Spanish" or "Hispanic" all the time - to mean people from Latin America. Both terms really mean the same thing. The only way to be more specific is to say "Ecuadoran" or whatever - and even that is a nationality term that doesn't distinguish between a full-blood aboriginal and a Conquistador.

goidelicwarrior
Tuesday, April 20th, 2004, 11:38 AM
On the street in the USA, people say "Spanish" or "Hispanic" all the time - to mean people from Latin America. Both terms really mean the same thing. The only way to be more specific is to say "Ecuadoran" or whatever - and even that is a nationality term that doesn't distinguish between a full-blood aboriginal and a Conquistador. my admiration for the american intelect grows day by day... :P

Abby Normal
Tuesday, April 20th, 2004, 12:56 PM
What is there to argue about? Simply go on google image search and type in Lawrence of Arabia, and you will have evidence that Nordic men are better-looking. ;)

Seriously, it depends on the person.

johnnywalker
Thursday, April 22nd, 2004, 02:25 AM
Lawrence of arabia was gay..

he was attracted to mysterious dark Middle Eastern men...and that's a fact..

johnnywalker
Thursday, April 22nd, 2004, 02:50 AM
http://sg.yimg.com/xp/reuters/20031012/3971454490.jpg

check out the (part) Mediterannean woman among the Nordic women..

Timo
Thursday, April 22nd, 2004, 06:18 AM
Blonde hair and blue eyes are the pinnacle of attractiveness.

Praxus
Thursday, April 22nd, 2004, 02:12 PM
I think both racial sub-types have their attractive qualities.:)

nemo
Thursday, April 22nd, 2004, 05:09 PM
Blonde hair and blue eyes are the pinnacle of attractiveness.

Being attractive has more to do then the color of your hair and eyes how about your features don't they count? I have seen some blue eyed blonds both men/woman who have ugly faces, are fat or to skinny and over all just plain ugly.

I think woman with dark hair to be very attractive " beauty is in the eye of the beholder" no one makes the rules about beauty.

To each his own.

Vestmannr
Friday, April 23rd, 2004, 10:43 PM
Nemo, I see a glimmer of hope for you! You actually quoted the (dang Nordid) Scottish philosopher Hume (whether you realized it or not.) Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, isnt it?

Timo
Saturday, April 24th, 2004, 04:25 AM
Being attractive has more to do then the color of your hair and eyes how about your features don't they count? I have seen some blue eyed blonds both men/woman who have ugly faces, are fat or to skinny and over all just plain ugly.

I think woman with dark hair to be very attractive " beauty is in the eye of the beholder" no one makes the rules about beauty.

To each his own.A woman with dark hair can be attractive, yes. Though choosing between light eyes and dark, and light hair and dark hair, all other things being equal I will go with what is lighter. That is just how I see things. It is selective breeding, and I'd like my offspring to have light features.

Gesta Bellica
Saturday, April 24th, 2004, 11:54 AM
A woman with dark hair can be attractive, yes. Though choosing between light eyes and dark, and light hair and dark hair, all other things being equal I will go with what is lighter. That is just how I see things. It is selective breeding, and I'd like my offspring to have light features.

but aren't u dark haired? if u are the same Timo who posts on The Phora

nemo
Saturday, April 24th, 2004, 05:43 PM
A woman with dark hair can be attractive, yes. Though choosing between light eyes and dark, and light hair and dark hair, all other things being equal I will go with what is lighter. That is just how I see things. It is selective breeding, and I'd like my offspring to have light features.

I have no problem with that.

Timo
Sunday, April 25th, 2004, 12:57 AM
but aren't u dark haired? if u are the same Timo who posts on The Phora
Aye, I have dark brown hair and green eyes. That has nothing to do with what I'd like in a mate. Besides many family members have lighter hair and eyes than I.

dazed&confused
Sunday, April 25th, 2004, 01:42 AM
I like med women with nordic facial traits (such as concave profile, pronounced checkbones and chin) like this one:

http://www.multimania.com/todreb6/trickeyb.gif

who was a cop riding a bike in Pacific blue.
I also like nordic women. In my town there are plenty of russian, bielorussian, polish or ukrainian colfs so I could seduce one of them, maybe giving her anise candies.

MegaSpathi
Thursday, October 28th, 2004, 07:42 PM
I do not mind the poll, i think both are beatiful.
I myself prefer brunetts.

Northern Paladin
Thursday, October 28th, 2004, 09:15 PM
Nords of course. Skando-Nords and Baltids.

SouthernBoy
Friday, October 29th, 2004, 12:43 AM
LOL! This poll is interesting. We get to hear everyone vote for Med. then gaulk over Nord. :) This polls are fun to participate in. I love Nords. I like tall, Nordid-Paleolithic Survivor women with plentiful mass in certain areas.

K.Falk
Friday, January 21st, 2005, 12:32 AM
Attractive looks can be found in both racial types.