PDA

View Full Version : Blond Blue Eyed Alpinids



FullForce
Tuesday, January 13th, 2009, 02:06 AM
I know that Alpinids are classified as having brown hair and brown eyes. How would you classify a blond haired blue eyed alpinid from slovakia. I noticed western Slovakian people have a higher frequency of blond hair and blue eyes. Do they have Germanic or Nordic ancestry? Or is there a different reason?

rainman
Tuesday, January 13th, 2009, 02:35 AM
I think Alpine is mainly dark hair and blue/grey/green eyes. In a true Aryan population brown eyes are almost non existant. This is why some racial groups will not allow in any person with brown eyes. Modern Europeans often have brown eyes though. One possibility is that it is a remnant of our ancient darker ancestors, but more often it is the product of interbreeding. Rome with its heavy mix with semites brought a lot of brown eyes into North Europe centuries ago. Thus most brown eyes can be trace to some mediteranian mixture. Because brown eyes are dominant- people can have brown eyes and who almost no features from the interbreeding. In other words appear to be %100 alpine but with brown eyes.

most modern Europeans have a mixture of traits from various subgroups. Obviously those traits can mix in any possible way thus Nordic blondness could mix with other Alpine features. Or possibly albino genes have worked to make "blond alpines" in a region. jews have recently been turning more blond due to natural selection for example.

Sigurd
Tuesday, January 13th, 2009, 02:37 AM
I know that Alpinids are classified as having brown hair and brown eyes.

Pigment is over-rated when it comes to classification. It can be a pointer, but does not have a definitive quality. Depigmentation may have happened for a variety of reason, recombinations may have taken place in a variety of ways, etc.

I find that it is usually easier to hint people to this post (http://forums.skadi.net/showpost.php?p=797698&postcount=2) of mine a fair while back, which IMO sums up pretty well how hair and eye pigment come together. Maybe fittingly called "Genetics in a Nutshell", that post. ;)


How would you classify a blond haired blue eyed alpinid from slovakia.

See above. Alpinid. ;)

IMO a good example for a blonde-haired blue-eyed Alpinid would be German skier Carolin Fernsebner. I have used her on several occasions as what IMO is a prime example of a light-pigmented person who exhibits almost exclusively Alpinid morphological traits.

http://www.zoll.de/z1_bilder/a1_zoll_ski_team/e0_sonstige/perner_fernsebner.jpg

She may not be Slovakian as your question immediately concerned, but I hope it highlights certain trends equally well. :)


Do they have Germanic or Nordic ancestry? Or is there a different reason?

Nordid does not equal Germanic. Germanics are derived from several phenotypes, and not all Nordids are Germanics - for example many Slavics are Nordid, and could be classified as East Nordid or Baltid/Nordid. Likewise, the Baltic and Fennic countries, typologically oft closer to the Baltid than the Nordid type, and very oft sporting specimens which are intermediate between those two types, are amongst the nations with the lightest pigment.

As to why depigmentation/blondism happened in the first place - now that is a different question over which a variety of theories exist, and since I must admit that I lack the knowledge to test them for validity on face value without seperate analysis, I will not point you to any specifically. Usually they include selective breeding, nutrition, freak genetic mutation, etc. etc. pp.

EDIT - Addendum:
[...]

Mind to back up your rather unorthodox theory with genetic or anthropological evidence? I would yet have to see a source which precludes the possibility of dark pigment in ancient Germanics, nor one which attributes immediately "Semitic" (Orientalid? Armenoid? - Semitic is no scientific anthropological term) properties to ancient Romans? Mind to point us to your research, or at least offer a good explanation as to how you arrived at your conclusion?

Angharad
Wednesday, January 14th, 2009, 04:16 AM
Is there some reason why you don't consider your blond blue eyed, round faced friend Baltid? She doesn't really sound Alpine to me.

TheGreatest
Wednesday, January 14th, 2009, 04:51 AM
I think Alpine is mainly dark hair and blue/grey/green eyes. In a true Aryan population brown eyes are almost non existant. This is why some racial groups will not allow in any person with brown eyes. Modern Europeans often have brown eyes though. One possibility is that it is a remnant of our ancient darker ancestors, but more often it is the product of interbreeding. Rome with its heavy mix with semites brought a lot of brown eyes into North Europe centuries ago. Thus most brown eyes can be trace to some mediteranian mixture. Because brown eyes are dominant- people can have brown eyes and who almost no features from the interbreeding. In other words appear to be %100 alpine but with brown eyes.
There's a Roman Statue @ the British Museum with glass blue eyes. Methinks it would had been cheaper to put brown studs or rocks in. ;) Maybe they were trying to make a point? :)


You mentioned the reason why I don't consider Italians to be white. I'm taking a course on Roman History and we're learning about groups such as the Etruscans (Asians), large scale migrations from the Balkans, Northern Africa and the Middle East. And this didn't stop in 300 AD and it hasn't stop now. I've met a lot of Italians (yep even the ''Northern Ones"), most of them stink of Semitic ancestry.


Pigment is over-rated when it comes to classification. It can be a pointer, but does not have a definitive quality. Depigmentation may have happened for a variety of reason, recombinations may have taken place in a variety of ways, etc.
Light-eyed Alpinids are not needles in the haystack. A bunch existed before the "mixing days". I have a family drawing (pre-photograph) that shows everyone as having blue eyes, and a number of the men were your textbooks Alpinids. And of course we can't trust drawings... But I do have a photograph circa 1878 that does prove everyone having light-eyes...

And in the modern day, I met a lot of people in Southern Germany who were Alpinid and light-eyed. I think the whole dark-eyed Alpinid is more of a French and Polish phenomena...

Jäger
Wednesday, January 14th, 2009, 08:11 AM
Pigment is over-rated when it comes to classification.
It mostly is.


It can be a pointer, but does not have a definitive quality.
No, pigmentation is a definite quality, one should think in terms of light pigmentation and dark pigmentation, not definite colors though.


Depigmentation may have happened for a variety of reason, recombinations may have taken place in a variety of ways, etc.
If so a new light pigmented Alpinid has formed, then we have a new race.
It would be highly unlikely that pigmentation would be the only thing that changed.


I find that it is usually easier to hint people to this post (http://forums.skadi.net/showpost.php?p=797698&postcount=2) of mine a fair while back, which IMO sums up pretty well how hair and eye pigment come together.
It talks about inheritance, and thus, in a non separated population, about mixing.


IMO a good example for a blonde-haired blue-eyed Alpinid would be German skier Carolin Fernsebner.
Her hair is dyed. Anyways, she still is light pigmented for an Alpinid, but one can't rule out Faelid influences, etc.
Do you have pictures of her parents, or grandparents?


Do they have Germanic or Nordic ancestry? Or is there a different reason?
They most likely have admixture from a light pigmented race, which does not have to be Germanic.

rainman
Wednesday, January 14th, 2009, 09:40 AM
Just google percentages of blue eyes in various populations. Iceland is over %90 blue or green eyes. Ethnic English is about %80. In "pure" Aryan families you typically see similar around %90 blue eyes. In Europeans known to be mixed (via say Roman semite etc.) we see more prevalence of brown eyes. And non-whites are typically over %90 brown eyed. It would lead you to conclude that brown eyes is an anomoly among Nordics and probably from some ancient mix breeding as we know just about everybody has some little drop of impurity in them. Many racial groups therefore only accept members with non-brown eyes as being "pure" Nordic. If you have brown eyes its nothing bad but it certainly isn't a normal feature of a pure Aryan.

Cythraul
Wednesday, January 14th, 2009, 10:49 AM
The problem with pigmentation is that it does not correlate with ancestral "purity". It can be a marker, but not always. Example - My fiance has brown eyes but her brother and sister are textbook blonde/blue-eyed Nordids. Are they more 'pure'? Obviously not. They just appear to be. So it always makes me laugh when light-pigmented Europeans laud their genetic 'superiority' over dark-pigmented Europeans. They could, and often do, have more 'impurities' in their genes than dark-pigmented 'mongrels'.

Besides, I contest this whole idea of 'purity'. The original paleolithic inhabitants of Europe were at least partly 'Med' in appearance. In my opinion, pigmentation is mostly climal, so Meds are not necessarily dark-pigmented because of inter-mixing. And there are northern and western European remnants of the paleolithic inhabitants mixed among the blonde populace of these lands. Likelihood is that they were there even during the early development of Germanic culture. I've heard reports that the dark-pigmented were ostracized from Nordic society, but if that was the case, it only serves to highlight the flawed-arrogance of our ancestors - because they weren't perfect.

Rozenstorm
Wednesday, January 14th, 2009, 11:06 AM
Is a nordid with hazel eyes and hair then possible? Because, else I'd have to change my suburace. I have a pure blood-line though.

According to this map, I belong to Falid which is Nordid, and although I have a pure and Flemish bloodline, I have hazel eyes and hair...

http://carnby.altervista.org/immagini/lundracesmap17.jpg

http://carnby.altervista.org/immagini/lundracesmap17.jpg

Cythraul
Wednesday, January 14th, 2009, 11:39 AM
Is a nordid with hazel eyes and hair then possible? Because, else I'd have to change my sburace.
Some members here would have you hung drawn and quartered for claiming to be Nordid ;). Consensus is divided. Some who believe pigmentation is a vital part of classification would not call you Nordid.

Sigurd
Wednesday, January 14th, 2009, 03:14 PM
For those who ask questions that I've answered in the post I linked to, I shall spell said quote out again, as sheer linkage doesn't seem to suffice, 't looks like very few actually bothered doing so.

It is perfectly possible for a pure Nordid to have brown/brown hair and eyes, as a matter of recombination. The Nordid mean isn't white blond/clear blue eyes anyway, which is the only combination that will definitely render blond/blue in the long run for definite. Anything from medium blonde/gray blue (closer to the Nordid mean, really) can render brown/brown in the long run, even with pure ancestry.

Anyway, here's what I wrote back then about this subject matter:


Genetics in a nutshell.

Eye pigment is made up out of 0-6 dominant genes. The parents can pass on the sum of both of their dominant genes at maximum:

0 - light blue; 1 - grey-blue; 2 grey/blue-green; 3 - green to hazel; 4 - medium brown; 5 - dark brown; 6 - black.

Hance two parents with blue-green eyes could have children that have an eye color between light blue and medium brown.

Hair pigment is mainly made up of Melanine. There you have Eumelanine and Phomelanine, but it is enough to concentrate Eumelanine since it answers the question.

Assume for the sake fo it, that half of the genes determining hair colour come from the mother and father and that each of them pass on 4 genes...now let's use "h" for light pigment and "H" for dark pigment.

hhhhhhhh - white blonde
HHHHHHHH - black

Now assuming that both parents are dark blonde (HHHhhhhh - HHHhhhhh) - [which could well be possible, if their parents were both middle-blonde then they have a good chance to have anything up to light brown[ - all combinations between white blonde (hhhhhhhh) and darkish medium brown (HHHHHHhh) become possible.

In a way this could work the other way round as well. I will use a family example to highlight this, in fact that is what happened with the sister of my father: Grandmother, dark brown (HHHHHHhh) + Grandfather, light brown (HHHHhhhh) = Aunt, medium blonde (HHhhhhhh)

Hence, it becomes possible that the children of two blonde, blue-eyed parents can indeed be brown-eyed and brown-haired. Now even assuming that all of their ancestors were of pure Nordid phenotype (whose typical pigmentation is assumed to be medium blonde), so will the children be of pure Nordid phenotype (there are no other racial influences for them) - since, even though the children will have "wrong" pigment, the facial and bodily features will be manifestly Nordid.

Anything else is a simplification of genetics to push an agenda.

...And since it is perfectly possible that no dominant eye genes are inherited, it is also perfectly possible that a fully Negroid person could technically have blue eyes, even though the likelihood is exceedingly small, usually it takes an intelligent average, with a slight tendency towards the darker, and dominant genes are more likely to be inherited than recessive ones anyhow, there's a reason why they're called dominant genes.

But to claim that Nordid = Blonde/Blue by definition = Germanic by definition is a dangerous oversimplification.

Jäger
Wednesday, January 14th, 2009, 07:06 PM
Is a nordid with hazel eyes and hair then possible?
No, you still could be pred. Nordid.
Race is a classification system, an abstract concept by humans, if you can make a case that pigmentation does not matter then bring it forth.


According to this map, I belong to Falid wihich is Nordid, and although I have a pure and Flemish bloodline, I have hazel eyes and hair...
Maps do not determine your race, they are generalizations of generalizations.

Oski
Wednesday, January 14th, 2009, 07:16 PM
I always figured a blond blue eyed alpinid would be classified as borreby or something related.

Sigurd
Wednesday, January 14th, 2009, 08:27 PM
I always figured a blond blue eyed alpinid would be classified as borreby or something related.

That is hardly a defining factor there. Borrebies can be dark pigmented, and oft enough are. When discussing the extreme Borreby types in Fehmarn, Coon actually hints that their pigment is more often than not towards the darker shades of the European spectrum, with most having brown hair and a large portion having brown eyes, too.

As I already identified, and as Jäger affirmed to some degree - pigmentation is a pointing factor, but not immediately a deciding factor. There are subraces that are by definition blond or by definition dark-haired or of course by definition dark-skinned, but that does not mean that specimens who do not fulfil these criteria are outwith the wider racial spectrum for that racial group.

As such, it works mainly as a pointer.

And it is once more best described in the example of two lads we had at our school, brothers and who both actually ended up going to the same university as I. One of them was blonde/brown and the other was brown/brown.

At face value, it even seemed that they looked quite distinct for brothers... but then one day, they took a picture with a special function of their camera, where one half is made up of each of their faces, and it fit together so smoothly that it was evident that even though they had different pigment, it would be a fallacy to assume that they were of a different phenotype --- because their faces are near identical, and of course completely identical morphogically. Thus, both fell within either the Atlantid or the Nordid spectrum - but hardly one into one, the other into the other. ;)

Jäger
Thursday, January 15th, 2009, 11:02 AM
It is perfectly possible for a pure Nordid to have brown/brown hair and eyes, as a matter of recombination.


In humans three genes involved in eye color are known. They explain typical patterns of inheritance of brown, green, and blue eye colors. However, they don't explain everything. Grey eye color, Hazel eye color, and multiple shades of blue, brown, green, and grey are not explained. The molecular basis of these genes is not known. What proteins they produce and how these proteins produce eye color is not known. Eye color at birth is often blue, and later turns to a darker color. Why eye color can change over time is not known. An additional gene for green is also postulated, and there are reports of blue eyed parents producing brown eyed children (which the three known genes can't easily explain [mutations, modifier genes that supress brown, and additional brown genes are all potential explanations]).
http://www.athro.com/evo/gen/inherit1.html#uncertainty

You are pretty quick with your final conclusions, quicker than science is.
Pigmentation in race is not overrated, because it has been proven to be arbitrary, but because we know too less about it, as to predict and conclude a certain blood line with it.
Yet, for the benefit of the doubt, I would turn to the more narrow hypotheses, rather than the more universal hypotheses, and postulate for the time being, that no Nordid can have non-blue eyes, observations to the contrary (as with Negros and blue eyes) are by logic a result of (ancient) mixing then.

Rozenstorm
Thursday, January 15th, 2009, 12:56 PM
No, you still could be pred. Nordid.
Race is a classification system, an abstract concept by humans, if you can make a case that pigmentation does not matter then bring it forth.


Maps do not determine your race, they are generalizations of generalizations.

Hey, okay, okay, I allready changed it. It doesn't really make sense though, cause it's a gene factor. Two brown-haired and brown-eyed parents can bring forth a blond, blue-eyed child, given that the both produce the recessive gene that's in them (unless one, or both has both two brown genes).

My father was blond (now he's grey :)) and has green eyes, my mother is brown-haired and brown-eyed. That means that I still have one recessive, blond gene in me, from my father, but that the dominant brown gene of my mother's has found it's way in my appearance.

Jäger
Thursday, January 15th, 2009, 03:00 PM
Hey, okay, okay, I allready changed it.
You don't have to be either or, you still could be predominant Nordic with slight admixture of a darker pigmented race (Dinarid, Alpinid, Mediteranid).


It doesn't really make sense though, cause it's a gene factor. Two brown-haired and brown-eyed parents can bring forth a blond, blue-eyed child, given that the both produce the recessive gene that's in them (unless one, or both has both two brown genes).
Race is first and foremost about the manifestation of biological characteristics, not about that they are recessively carried at all.

Oski
Thursday, January 15th, 2009, 06:13 PM
You don't have to be either or, you still could be predominant Nordic with slight admixture of a darker pigmented race (Dinarid, Alpinid, Mediteranid).


Race is first and foremost about the manifestation of biological characteristics, not about that they are recessively carried at all.

As usual Joseph Goebbls comes to mind.

http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/3382/josephgoebbelsmitfamiliyx5.th.jpg (http://img265.imageshack.us/my.php?image=josephgoebbelsmitfamiliyx5. jpg)

Tancred
Thursday, January 28th, 2010, 03:38 PM
I know that Alpinids are classified as having brown hair and brown eyes. How would you classify a blond haired blue eyed alpinid from slovakia. I noticed western Slovakian people have a higher frequency of blond hair and blue eyes. Do they have Germanic or Nordic ancestry? Or is there a different reason?

Blonde and blue eyes = NORDID!

Sigurd
Thursday, January 28th, 2010, 09:54 PM
Blonde and blue eyes = NORDID!

Of course! :wsg

http://maniabrasil.com/mb/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/negro-albino.gif

Yodel
Wednesday, May 2nd, 2012, 08:05 PM
Most alpinids that i know in real life have light-brown hair and gray-green eyes and they still have round heads and short height.