Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 36 of 36

Thread: The Problem with Subracial Types

  1. #31
    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 
    16
    Thanked in
    16 Posts

    Re: AW: The Problem with Subracial Types

    Quote Originally Posted by Agrippa View Post
    Its not. Leptoprosopic refers to the facial index which can be determined very precisely with simple anthropometric means.

    Going after the scheme of v. Eickstedt (for males, for females -3, on the skull -1):
    facial height (mm) x 100 : facial breadth (mm) = facial index and everything 88,0+ = leptoprosopic/narrow faced.

    Atlantids must be, as a rule, narrow faced since they are the result of Nordid and Mediterranid mixture, influences or ancient transitions. The Swiss examples I posted once prove that too. Like in Nordid and Mediterranid proper variants there is variation of course...
    What I meant is to choose 88+ as leptoprosopic is subjective. Why not 86 or 90?

    The two examples I posted do not look narrow faced to me. Their faces look square.
    .

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

    http://www.internationalrevisionistconference.c om/

  2. #32
    Progressive Collectivist
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Agrippa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Last Online
    Monday, January 31st, 2011 @ 09:22 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Location
    Asgard
    Gender
    Politics
    Progressive Collectivist
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    6,968
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    25
    Thanked in
    25 Posts

    AW: Re: AW: The Problem with Subracial Types

    Quote Originally Posted by tinman View Post
    What I meant is to choose 88+ as leptoprosopic is subjective. Why not 86 or 90?
    Because most anthropologists agreed in a time when this indices were determined that it makes the most sense to use such numbers and distinctions. If you would use another, it would mean to go beyond the more common borders between types for which they were designed. However, 88-90 is what is most common anyway (for males), I dont know of too much other positions on that since this makes perfect sense for distinguishing groups of narrow-, medium- and broad-faced individuals, types and populations.

    F.e. to use -65 for dolichocephalic alone would mean to have no dolichocephalic population in this world which would make the distinction useless. Or speaking of people being tall only if the measure more than 210 cm's - which would be as stupid etc. Simple explanation and examples of course, but this should be enough for now...

    The two examples I posted do not look narrow faced to me. Their faces look square.
    Thats because they have no really narrow, but just rather narrow faces and their jaws are broad-squarish-upward angled which is often an as clear indicator for Cromagnoid ancestry, influences, as is a broad face.
    Magna Europa est patria nostra
    STOP GATS! STOP LIBERALISM!

  3. #33
    Member
    Galaico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Online
    Sunday, February 5th, 2012 @ 02:44 PM
    Ethnicity
    Iberian
    Subrace
    Atlanto-Med + Baskid
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Politics
    Atlanticism
    Posts
    937
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5
    Thanked in
    5 Posts

    Re: The Problem with Subracial Types

    Quote Originally Posted by tinman View Post
    Finally someone who understands what I'm saying. I don't totally agree with all of it but it's some place to start.

    What is leptoprosopic is a matter of opinion. Even though Atlanto-Med and atlantid share the word "Atlant" I don't think they share a common UP origin. Atlanto-Meds are in my opinion leptoprosopic. But Atlantids are not.
    Atlanto-Mediterranids are the southern extreme of the Atlantid type. In fact the only difference between Atlanto-Mediterranids and Atlantids is that the latter are slightly lighter. The Atlantids are the descendants of the Atlanto-Mediterranid seafearers that colonised the Atlantic coast 12.000-10.000 years ago.

    To me, these two are Atlantid and are not thin faced.

    These two woman are not Atlantid. The first one looks mostly Brünn with North-Atlantid influence, and the second one looks Alpinoid with Dinaroid influence.

    They share a Cro Magnon origin.
    Atlantids are morphologically opposed to Cromagnids.

    Berberid, if you mean North Africans share an UP ancestor with Arabs not Cro Magnon.
    Berberids are UP Cromagnid survivors, related (at least morphologically) to the European Cromagnids and opposed to the Gracile and Leptosomic Arabids. That much of North Africa was colonised by the Arabs, doesn't mean that they are related to the native Berbers.

    Indid, Arabid and Iranid having a common UP origin is sketchy too I think. But there has been a lot of movement of people in that area.
    The Iranid type shows a clear relation with the European Auregnacids, and was probably brought to Central Asia by ancient Indo-European speakers of Corded type or similar. Arabids and Indids show a much more distant relation, and are IMO proto-Auregnacids not really proper Auregnacids, they could even be the most ancient Caucasoids if we take into account their geographical situation and pre-historic human migrations.

    I'll give the benefit of the doubt about Baltid being Cro Magnon. Perhaps we have two different types in mind. It's curious to me that the Balts, Lithunanians and Latvians speak an eastern IE language though.
    You must separate linguistic groups from racial sub-types, they are two different things.

  4. #34
    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 
    16
    Thanked in
    16 Posts

    Re: AW: Re: AW: The Problem with Subracial Types

    Quote Originally Posted by Agrippa View Post
    Because most anthropologists agreed in a time when this indices were determined that it makes the most sense to use such numbers and distinctions. If you would use another, it would mean to go beyond the more common borders between types for which they were designed. However, 88-90 is what is most common anyway (for males), I dont know of too much other positions on that since this makes perfect sense for distinguishing groups of narrow-, medium- and broad-faced individuals, types and populations.

    F.e. to use -65 for dolichocephalic alone would mean to have no dolichocephalic population in this world which would make the distinction useless. Or speaking of people being tall only if the measure more than 210 cm's - which would be as stupid etc. Simple explanation and examples of course, but this should be enough for now...
    That was also in a time when an understanding of epigenetics didn't exist. I've already posted pictures of twins where one would be narrow faced and the other not. So you can't really make assumptions of UP origin based solely whether they are thin faced or not.

    I don't disagree that Atlantids are a Mediterranean type. But Mediterraneans are Cro Magnon descendants -- at least in Europe. I question whether Iranids and Irano-Afghans are Mediterranean though. I don't think they are.
    .

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

    http://www.internationalrevisionistconference.c om/

  5. #35
    Progressive Collectivist
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Agrippa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Last Online
    Monday, January 31st, 2011 @ 09:22 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Location
    Asgard
    Gender
    Politics
    Progressive Collectivist
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    6,968
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    25
    Thanked in
    25 Posts

    AW: The Problem with Subracial Types

    The Iranid type shows a clear relation with the European Auregnacids, and was probably brought to Central Asia by ancient Indo-European speakers of Corded type or similar.
    Those relations are very old and predate any Indoeuropean expansions most likely. Later Indoeuropean expansion brought just additional Nordoid strains to the Iranid populations.

    Arabids and Indids show a much more distant relation, and are IMO proto-Auregnacids not really proper Auregnacids, they could even be the most ancient Caucasoids if we take into account their geographical situation and pre-historic human migrations.
    They are descendents of Aurignacoid Europids too and split up from the Protomediterranoid strains of ancient times in the respective regions, one being an adaptation for the subtropical and tropical (Indid), the other for the desert and oasis (Arabid) habitat more or less. So the differences to other Europid and especially leptodolichomorphic Mediterranoid variants comes mostly through local, regional adaptation and in some areas admixture too (f.e. in parts of India Gracilindids are very often clearly influenced by older Proto- and non-Europid forms).
    Magna Europa est patria nostra
    STOP GATS! STOP LIBERALISM!

  6. #36
    Progressive Collectivist
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Agrippa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Last Online
    Monday, January 31st, 2011 @ 09:22 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Location
    Asgard
    Gender
    Politics
    Progressive Collectivist
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    6,968
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    25
    Thanked in
    25 Posts

    AW: Re: AW: Re: AW: The Problem with Subracial Types

    Quote Originally Posted by tinman View Post
    That was also in a time when an understanding of epigenetics didn't exist. I've already posted pictures of twins where one would be narrow faced and the other not. So you can't really make assumptions of UP origin based solely whether they are thin faced or not.
    Look, individuals can deviate in extreme, especially pathological cases, an average of a population less so and types even on a much more limited scale. The changes because of environmental factors are known (compare with secular acceleration), but usually have a limited impact in normal cases. But post faces of examples you think prove your point and post their faces so that one could estimate the FI. But non-pathological cases please...
    The FI is not determined by the fat in the face primarily by the way, but by the bony structure of the face.

    I don't disagree that Atlantids are a Mediterranean type. But Mediterraneans are Cro Magnon descendants -- at least in Europe.
    Of "Cro Magnon people" in the sense of "those European strains which were already present in Europe before the Neolithicum", but not in a racial sense if describing the Cromagnoid form and racial types.

    I question whether Iranids and Irano-Afghans are Mediterranean though. I don't think they are.
    They are rather MediterranOID but not Mediterranid in most serious systems. To include and call all Southern Europids "Mediterraneans" was a strange fashion of certain English speaking authors primarily and was almost never seen the same way in Europe. Such a "super term" makes no sense at all.
    Magna Europa est patria nostra
    STOP GATS! STOP LIBERALISM!

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 11
    Last Post: Wednesday, January 29th, 2020, 04:06 AM
  2. Racial Borders and European Subracial Types
    By Rodskarl Dubhgall in forum Physical Anthropology
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: Sunday, June 3rd, 2018, 06:20 PM
  3. Which Subracial Types Have Wide Hips, Short Legs?
    By Hohenheim in forum Physical Anthropology
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Monday, December 4th, 2006, 07:52 AM
  4. Different Diet for Different Subracial Types?
    By Mandible in forum Bio-Anthropology & Human Variation
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Saturday, November 15th, 2003, 03:25 AM
  5. Subracial Types in the Wehrmacht
    By Ith in forum Europoid
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: Saturday, August 16th, 2003, 09:37 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
  •