I don't want to start another thread about where the boundaries of 'whiteness' are, because it's very subjective. I am not clear what makes Dinarics white and Armenoids not white, in the eyes of many. I do know that some racialists consider Armenoids white. I avoid the term 'white' when I can because it is very subjective and assigned hypocritically or arbitrarily. Evolutionary gradients and later mixing both result in large regions that are of debatable 'whiteness.'
My goal with this thread is very general: I want to establish what the major races of humanity are... Generally it is said there are three races: Caucasoid, Mongoloid and Negroid. I have always wondered where Australian Aborigines fit into this scheme. Some people say they are mixes of the 3 main races, but this doesn't seem consistent with the data. The skulls are different, and the IQ is lower than that for any of the 3 main accepted races according to sources I've read.
What about south Indian/Sri Lankan Dravidics??? I've heard it claimed that they are by far the darkest of Caucasoids, but still genetically within the Caucasoid race. Some have argued that they are all partially Negroid. I know that some are 'Negritos', which I believe are east Africans that apparently sailed across the Indian Ocean to India, Malaysia, New Guinea etc. I have encountered many Dravidics, however, and the VAST majority have no noticeable Negroid features. They have straight hair, narrow, long noses, and normal lips. Are they Caucasoid?
What are the Maori? They seem to be in the same category as Australian Aborigines; I don't think they arose from simple mixing. My basic question is whether or not the 3-race system is adequate to describe the racial groups one encounters. If not, how many more races do we need to add?
Bookmarks