Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27

Thread: The Origin of Races (by Carleton S. Coon)

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    cosmocreator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Last Online
    Thursday, January 18th, 2007 @ 06:36 PM
    Subrace
    Other
    Gender
    Age
    56
    Politics
    Living in the real world
    Posts
    3,850
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    11
    Thanked in
    11 Posts

    Post Conclusion, The Living And The Dead

    Coon's thesis is that about 500,000 years ago, man was a single species, Homo erectus. Homo erectus then gradually evolved into Homo sapiens at different times, as separate subspecies, living in their own territories.

    This idea is not wholly original. In addition to Coon, two others independently of each other thought it out: Frank Livingstone of the University of Michigan and Loring Brace of the University of California at Santa Barbara. Nor is this idea generally accepted.

    Once a race has become established as the principle population of a region, it has a tendency to stay there and to resist the genetic influence swept in by later invasions.

    When two races come into contact and mixture occurs, one race tends to dominate the other. Dominance my be primarily cultural or physiological or both.

    There is a third kind of dominance, expressed by the resistance of a population to intrusion of large numbers of outsiders into its social and genetic structure. Call it xenophobia, prejudice, or whatever, people do not ordinarily welcome masses of strangers in their midst. Social mechanisms arise automatically to isolate newcombers as much as possibly and to keep them genetically separate.

    "Genes that form part of a cell nucleus possess an internal equilibrium as a group, just as do the members of social institutions. Genes in a population are in equilibrium if the population is living a healthy life as a corporate entity. Racial intermixture can upset the genetic as well as the social equilibrium of a group, and so, newly introduced genes tend to disappear or be reduced to a minimum percentage unless they possess a selective advantage over their local counterparts."

    Coon states the above for neither political or social purpose but merely to show that "were it not for the mechanism cited above, men would not be black, white, yellow or brown. We would all be light khaki, for there has been enough gene flow over the clinal regions of the world during the last half million years to homogenize us all had that been the evolutionary scheme of things."

    Hybrids tend to return to one of their parental stocks.

    Each subspecies has a "status quo" that include not only variances in bones and teeth but also skin, hair, lips, ears and also differences seen only with a microscope.

  2. #12

    Post

    Have you guys ever read or seen C.S. Coon's book before Origin of Races, his Races of Europe? This is a truly rare book now, written in 1939 before the war and the advent of "American Anthropology". In it Coon takes all the anthropometic data, gained by 100 years of careful measuement, and synthesizes it into the modern understanding of local races, such as Med.,Alpine, Nordic, etc. This book has been systematically "burned" from most libraries in the name of political correctness. I am proud to say that I have a copy.

    As far as the Origin of Races is concerned, it has its strengths and weaknesses. The real strengths are the Australoid and Mongoloid sequences.

    The former because of discoveries, Holocene discoveries, of Homo erectus in Austrialia. Foremost among these are the Kow Swamp crania found by Thorne. These skulls are good H. erectus yet also look much like modern Australiods.

    As far as the Mongoloids are concerned, please see Coon's discussion on enamel wrinkling (teeth) on Peking man's remains. It is now known that wrinkling is caused by a single or at least simple genetic mechanism. This trait is present in modern Mongoloids and is traceable back to H. erectus showing, at least in my mind, that there is a genetic continuity.

    The Capoid and Congoloid sequences are much, much, much less clear. The Capoids have been swamped by the Congoloids within the last 2000 years or so. For a better understanding of the Congoloids, one must see another Coon book, The Living Races of Man. I believe the Capoid sequence is essentially correct but there needs to be much more fossil evidence for them in North and East Africa for his hypothesis concerning them to be accepted.

    The Caucasoid sequence and their contribution to modern Mongoloids is another matter. We now know from Mit-Con. DNA and standard DNA analysis that there are really two major divisions of mankind (not counting the flow of H. erectus genes into the Australoid and Mongoloid populations). This division is between Africans and everyone else, occurring about 80 thousand years ago. Coon's hypothesis in The Races of Europe of sapiens-Neanderthal hybridization has not been supported, at least not on a large scale. Our ancestors left N.E. Africa and moved northwestward through modern Iraq into Europe.

    There was a previous migration of H. sapiens people, and this is the really interesting story. It happened 100-130 thousand years ago and is evidenced in remains found in Palestine. Modern geneticists say these guys died out, but is that really true? Could it be that with a 20-30-50 thousand year head start these guys made the genetic modifications reflected in the Upper Paleolitic people? Perhaps these people also provide the unique genetic material for Nordic peoples.

    Morant, who did the most exhaustive metrical examination of U. Paleoliths, says they resemble most the Neanderthals who came before them and the modern Europeans who came after them. This fits the bill for the "lost" 100 thousand year sapiens migration from Africa.

    Speaking in the religious-metaphysical, the H. sapiens migration through Iraq is exactly what two religious Austrian writers, Norbert Juergen-Ratthofer and Ralf Ettl, have been saying and writing for years (in German language). Ten years ago, nobody gave them the time of day. Now, they are looking pretty good.

    Dr. Solar Wolff

  3. #13

  4. #14

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    cosmocreator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Last Online
    Thursday, January 18th, 2007 @ 06:36 PM
    Subrace
    Other
    Gender
    Age
    56
    Politics
    Living in the real world
    Posts
    3,850
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    11
    Thanked in
    11 Posts

    Post

    That site would be better if all chapters were available.
    .

    IHR Revisionist Conference, April 24, 2004, internet broadcast:

    http://www.internationalrevisionistconference.c om/

  6. #16

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    cosmocreator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Last Online
    Thursday, January 18th, 2007 @ 06:36 PM
    Subrace
    Other
    Gender
    Age
    56
    Politics
    Living in the real world
    Posts
    3,850
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    11
    Thanked in
    11 Posts

    Post Supplementary

    More similarities between Mongoloids and Sinathropus:

    1. A sagitall keeling of the skull vault, found among Eskimos and North Chinese. Pithecanthropus also had this, as do modern Australians and Tasmanians.

    2. Inca bones, found in three or four of five skulls. These are found in 15% of the Amercian Indians and are more frequent among Mongoloids than in other races.

    3. Broad nasal bone that show little or no difference between upper and middle breadths.

    4. A gently rounded contour of the nasal saddle.

    5. The profile angle of the roof of the nasal passages equals 89 degrees, a little higher than in Mongoloids, who have the highest such angle of living men.

    6. The outer border of the orbit is set forward as in Australopithecenes, gorillas, and orangs, and the forward part of the temporal muscle is extended anteriorly above the edge of the brow ridge, compressing the lateral half of the orbit.

    7. The infraorbital margin is rounded and even with the floor of the orbit, as in modern Mongols.

    8. Buccal exostoses (bony growth) of the mandible are found in all three upper jaws of Sinathropus; these growths are found in from two to five per cent of the Aleuts, the Japanese, the Lapps, and the natives of Siberians.

    9. Exotoses of the internal auditory meatus (tube of the ear hole).

    10. A general thickening of the tympanic plate. This and the preceeding are found chiefly among Eskimos, American Indians, and Icelanders.

    11. The "infantile gap" in the tympanic bone.

    12. A special external growth on the border of the tympanic plate, found in Sinanthropus Skull X and in no other fossil hominid; it occurs in 18 to 20% of the Polynesians, 12 to 30 % of American Indians, and only rarely in Caucasoids.

    13. The mandibular torus.

    14. Shovel incisors.

    15. Extreme flattening of the femur, accompanied by a flat linea aspera and a distal position of the shaft curve.

    16. A strongly developed deltoid tuberosity of the humerous.

    17. A small wrist bone.
    .

    IHR Revisionist Conference, April 24, 2004, internet broadcast:

    http://www.internationalrevisionistconference.c om/

  8. #18

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    cosmocreator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Last Online
    Thursday, January 18th, 2007 @ 06:36 PM
    Subrace
    Other
    Gender
    Age
    56
    Politics
    Living in the real world
    Posts
    3,850
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    11
    Thanked in
    11 Posts

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Solar Wolff
    Question: One of the arguments against The Origin of Races was that according to Coon's reconstruction, the subspecies evolved before the species. Caucosoids, Congoloids, Mongoloids, Capoids, and Australoids all began, each having a H. erectus ancestor which evolved, five times, into a H. sapien population. But the fact remains that Coon's position is that the subspecies was first and primary and that the species is less important that the subspecies. How can this be?
    I can try to answer. Let's say, we all came from a common ancestor <500,000 years ago. Let's assume it was Homo erectus. This H. erectus spread out to the various parts of the world and there they started to evolve further to different H. erecti -- Pithecanthropus, Sinanthropus, etc. Because change is so slow, these different erecti could interbreed and there was a small amount of genetic exchange to keep them from becoming different species.

    From an above post:
    Sinanthropus skull No. 3 was a juvenile of 8 or 9 years old. Of all Sinanthropi, it could pass as Homo Sapiens. The significance of this is that the sapiens condition of both brain proportions and brain floor anatomy is neotenous. "This evidence indicates that the difference in brain form, as apart from brain size, which distinguishes H. sapiens from H. erectus was a product of one or more neotenous mutations."

    In lay man terms, what this means is Pithecanthropus, Solo, and Sinanthropus and their successive descendents have within them, the genetic capacity to evolve into Homo Sapiens. Whether they made this change by themselves or were aided by injection of genes is another question.


    I don't know if there is some force in the cosmos causing convergence towards H. sapiens or whether there was one single H. erecti that made the transition first and subsequently spread it to the others by a small amount of gene flow. But it would seem the subspecies of H. sapiens, Caucasoid, Australoid, etc. were developing in the direction of H. sapiens before the species H. sapiens existed.
    .

    IHR Revisionist Conference, April 24, 2004, internet broadcast:

    http://www.internationalrevisionistconference.c om/

  10. #20
    Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Nordhammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Last Online
    Monday, February 6th, 2006 @ 07:08 PM
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Gender
    Politics
    Nordicist
    Posts
    3,132
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    24
    Thanked in
    24 Posts

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Solar Wolff
    Question: One of the arguments against The Origin of Races was that according to Coon's reconstruction, the subspecies evolved before the species. Caucosoids, Congoloids, Mongoloids, Capoids, and Australoids all began, each having a H. erectus ancestor which evolved, five times, into a H. sapien population. But the fact remains that Coon's position is that the subspecies was first and primary and that the species is less important that the subspecies. How can this be?
    That idea was based on Franz Weidenreich's work with the Sinanthropus remains. Weidenrich concluded that the peculiarities that made Sinanthropus distinct from other fossil men were of two kinds: evolutionary and racial. From the evolutionary point of view, Sinanthropus was more primitive than any known living population. Racially he was Mongoloid. Other scientists of the time disagreed with Weidenreich and thought that the living races of man could have only become differentiated from a common ancestor after the stage of Homo sapiens had been reached. Coon decided to investigate the matter for himself. Coon discovered that races are possibly older than species, meaning that as races stretch out over time, they can develop into daughter species. So the Mongoloid race spanned evolutionary species from Sinanthropus to Homo sapiens.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Carleton Coon on the Scythians
    By Ahnenerbe in forum Anthropogeny & Ethnogenesis
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Tuesday, June 14th, 2016, 03:13 PM
  2. Was Carleton Coon a Populationist?
    By Rassenpapst in forum Physical Anthropology
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Tuesday, April 22nd, 2008, 07:45 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: Thursday, November 17th, 2005, 04:59 PM
  4. Neolithic Scandinavia (Carleton S. Coon, The Races of Europe)
    By Glenlivet in forum Physical Anthropology
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Friday, October 21st, 2005, 01:07 AM
  5. The Sumerians, according to Carleton S. Coon
    By cosmocreator in forum Anthropogeny & Ethnogenesis
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: Thursday, July 8th, 2004, 07:49 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •