Atlanto-med posted a link to a very interseting book addressing racial differences. http://www.charlesdarwinresearch.org/
Blacks exhibit substantially lower IQ, higher impulsivity, greater social permissiveness, greater individualism (lack of group consciousness), etc than Asians. They also have millions of fewer neurons - i.e., less brain cells to work with. Whites are intermediate between Blacks and Asians.
I notice that the two most "progressive" Caucasian groups, Nordics and Mediterraneans, have tropical physiques, compared to UP and the Eurasian humans. They also have greater individualism and greater aggressiveness, according to Gunther.
I think Leptosomic (slender) Caucasian subraces represent a phenotype that left North Africa for Eurasia, and became various leptosomic subraces. Notably: Nordids/Atlantids/Mediterranids and Indo-Iranians of the steppes. I suspect that this leptosomic group that left Africa was the catalyst that revolutionized the human species, culiminating in "Modern Humans."
Yet I now question some of the ideas about these revolutionary (catalytic) humans from Africa. Maybe they were stupid, compared to UP Europeans. Yet they were quite active, and their marauding, mixing, and destruction and dominance of societies across Eurasia (I mean Europe and Asia as one supercontinent, not the central part of the landmass) helped form what we call modern societies.
But I think they were only able to do this because there were communal, peaceful, hard-working, sedentary humans that they were able to dominate, destroy, and force to adapt! The dynamic of these types creating what we call "Modern society", I think.
Consider the Aryan invasion of India. The existing (Veddid?) civilization was very peaceful - there does not seem to be any war industry in Harappa and other sites. Compare that with the invading Vedic peoples - who were rather primitive, and formed a highly stratified society, run by a warrior/priestly elite.
Consider how much military science has advanced civilian science in recorded history.
Suppose these invading, warlike, mobile, primitive humans invented the idea of an elite in the settled societies they took over. Consider the implications of that elite for those societies. A rich, non-working upper class has time to think, to find new directions for society, etc. The "common working man" has little imagination and usually fails to see the "big picture" of where society is going - he thinks more of paying his rent, feeding his family, etc.
So the Aryan invasion theory might be partially correct, but only half of the equation.
This type of revolutionizing influence from NE African pastoralists or other mobile groups might have happened more than once. I don't know much about pre-sapiens fossils, so I'll have to educate myself on the matter.
Anyway, these ideas are just sketches - I appreciate any feedback.
Bookmarks