View Full Version : Young Pred. Australid Aborigines

Tuesday, December 20th, 2005, 12:24 AM
Go on this site for others http://www.kururrungku.wa.edu.au/classes.htm






Images found in this thread on Dodona:

Australids just didnt evolved too much morphologically from a certain rather archaic sapiens stratum on, same is true for some Southern Indian people (Malid subtype of Weddids in particular which has Negritid admixture too). There archemorphic-primitive status is obvious, even in the youth, especially in the unmixed individuals.

Compare with:

Tuesday, December 20th, 2005, 12:31 AM
This photograph is excellant for comparison:


Monday, December 26th, 2005, 05:29 PM
Could be taken for a pygmy as well (young age vs. infantilization of the pygmies?), minus the blond hair:

Going into a Sudanid direction:

Looks Saudi Arabian:

Looks Irish:

Some of them should have Europid admixture.

Friday, January 27th, 2006, 02:01 AM
Some of them should have Europid admixture.

It's actually quite rare to find aboriginals who don't. It is quite common for abo's to have Irish surnames.

Saturday, September 27th, 2008, 03:00 AM
Some of these Australid boys resemblence quite alot some Arabians, such as the Omanis, Saudi Arabians etc. Prominent brows are quite common there aswell as wavy hair.

Btw I see some clearly resemblence between some of them and some Finno-Ugric people

This one I photoshoped brown
http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/5764/darkenedfinnkp7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Thursday, February 26th, 2009, 08:47 AM

I've seen a tamil that looks like that before.

Sunday, April 26th, 2009, 01:46 PM
Yes most of them look very much Dravidian or Dravidoid .
I've also heard that Tamils have reached Australia long ago.
Could it be that the Dravidoid (?) mixed with the australid aborigenes back then.

Sunday, April 26th, 2009, 08:32 PM
Yes most of them look very much Dravidian or Dravidoid .

Erm no, most of them do not look "dravidian" if by "dravidian" you mean weddid/indo-australoid.

They have very strong primitive features.

It is true however that these things can pass for "Indian" because anything gets passed as "Indian" with persuasion even sub-saharids can.

The australoid types of India are usually proto-europoid in character. Which is why Indians even though having high australoid blood than west eurasian blood - atleast when talking about the lower castes and dalits - have a more europoid appearance than one would expect considering their genetic make-up.

These australian aborigine kids have wider nasal alea and a larger nose than weddids. Weddid forms in India even can have nose bridges which is completely absent in aboriginal australians.

weddids constantly recieved west eurasian input possibly even during the mesolithic era. also weddids evolved in a very tropical and humid climate versus the temperate and dry climate of australia.

I've also heard that Tamils have reached Australia long ago.

"Tamils" are not a race. When I said I have seen a Tamil like that kid I just implied that I saw someone who comes from Tamil Nadu with such features. And that person would most likely be a low caste.

People in Tamil Nadu have an assortment of ydnas. Even the Brahmins there do.

Could it be that the Dravidoid (?) mixed with the australid aborigenes back then.

Again please refrain from using the word "dravidian" in a racial context. There is no "dravidian" race both genetically and phenotypically because there never was a basis for the existence of such a race.

If we are talking about exclusively australoid phenotypes in India then no they did not mix with australian aborigines.

Because the paleolithic inhabitants of India migrated to Australia - the first humans to populate east asia and oceania belonged to this wave and current australoids of australia descend from this wave.

And I don't think primitive humans from India migrated to India and admixed with Australoids of Australia.