Did Europeans really look like this before the ice age?

He is right though. At one point the Indian caste system actually prevented different ethnicities from intermarrying and fair skinned people were usually higher up.

Why are brown people so afraid of the thought that Aryans were white?

Even today, indians place a premium on looking fair for girls. Mums and dads inspect chicks to make sure they aren't too dark. The same doesn't really hold true for men though- what matters is that they have the moolah.

Anyway, he is wrong not because of the fair thing, it's the dishonest claim of WEWUZ INDOARYANS AND SHIET. If being fair is the only attribute to whiteness, then you might as well claim:
>WEWUZ PERSIAN
>WEWUZ OTTOMANS
>WEWUZ CHINESE
>WEWUZ KOREAN
>WEWUZ JAPANESE
>WEWUZ ESKIMOS

which then completely negates the relevance and usage of that term 'fair' he's using it for.

>In artworks, the Scythians are portrayed exhibiting Europoid traits.[73] In Histories, the 5th-century Greek historian Herodotus describes the Budini of Scythia as red-haired and grey-eyed.[73] The 2nd century BC Han Chinese envoy Zhang Qian described the Sai (Scythians) as having yellow (probably meaning hazel or green), and blue eyes.[73] In Natural History, the 1st century AD Roman author Pliny the Elder characterizes the Seres, sometimes identified as Iranians (Scythians) or Tocharians, as red-haired and blue-eyed.[73][76] In the late 2nd century AD, the Christian theologian Clement of Alexandria says that the Scythians are fair-haired.[73][77] The 2nd century Greek philosopher Polemon includes the Scythians among the northern peoples characterized by red hair and blue-grey eyes.[73] In the late 2nd or early 3rd century AD, the Greek physician Galen declares that Sarmatians, Scythians and other northern peoples have reddish hair.[73][78] The fourth-century Roman historian Ammianus Marcellinus wrote that the Alans, a people closely related to the Scythians, were tall, blond and light-eyed.[79] The 4th century bishop of Nyssa Gregory of Nyssa wrote that the Scythians were fair skinned and blond haired.[80] The 5th-century physician Adamantius, who often follow Polemon, describes the Scythians are fair-haired.[73][81] It is possible that the later physical descriptions by Adamantius and Gregory of Scythians refer to East Germanic tribes, as the latter were frequently referred to as "Scythians" in Roman sources at that time.

That's the Scythians, who were probably the largest of the Indo-Europeans. They had many branches, including Bactarians, TUshara, Saka, Kambojas etc.

The physical characteristics of the Buddha:
>29. Eyes deep blue

the perfect Brahmins according to Hinduism will have blonde hair

There was no before the ice age retard as the ice age started before humans even existed.

>The last glacial period, popularly known as the Ice Age, was the most recent glacial period within the Quaternary glaciation occurring during the last 100,000 years of the Pleistocene, from approximately 110,000 to 12,000 years ago
We as a species are between 100,000-250,000 and the Neanderthals (Whites have trace amounts of their DNA) back to 600,000 years

Neanderthal DNA is actually found in Asians as well.

White skin was the primary skin when humans first evolved. With time, black skin came around

But yes, you are correct. Neanderthals roamed Europe/Siberia while separated from Africa

Holy trips confirm

All listed are stinking horse nomads who repeatedly invaded the civilized nations of the indus and the indo-gangetic plains and then settled down into sedentary life.

I dont think you know how to comprehend what you read if it is contrary to your assumptions which is pretty sad.

>the perfect Brahmins according to Hinduism will have blonde hair
Where does it say that exactly?

>bactrians
>tocharians
>Kushan
>Tushara
>horse nomads

GTFO fucktard

Dude you get rekt, chill

broader features but still dark skin. white skin didnt evolve until some thousands of years into the holocene. also there have been many different types of pre-proto-IE europeans like cro magnons, western and eastern hunter gatherers, gravettians, danubian culture, etc

the truth prevails!!

>The physical characteristics of the Buddha: 29. Eyes deep blue
Kek, that list also said he had a "Ten-foot aura around him", "Saliva that improves the taste of all food", and most hilarious of all a "White ūrṇā curl that emits light between eyebrows". Sorry but the Buddha was not a god.

>the perfect Brahmins according to Hinduism will have blond hair
I need some sauce

>Scythians
Scythians came after the Mauryan Empire, and they only really had dominance in some parts of Northern India. While, yes, the Scythian migrations did have a big effect on India, this is a far cry from your original statement.

>pre-proto-IE europeans

nigga wha

dravidians arent australoid

b-but they are

scythians are from andronovo and more than 4k years old

veddoids/auatraloids are the original ppl of asia from whom other races developed.

caucasoid elamites moved to india and introduced the dravidian language to veddoids of india.

dravidians are veddoids who adopted the language of the elamite elites

indians are veddoids. elamites (migrants from persia) created harappa.
The Veddoid natives of India experienced Dravidification by adopting the language of the Elamites.
mitochondrial DNA (which is maternally inherited) studies indicated that Indian mtDNA lineages cluster with the southeast Asians (Papuans), indicative of the Australoid-Veddoid substratum

>tiny kingdoms that get eaten by Indian kingdoms after a century of survival
>They totally made india guys

No they aren't. That's just western confusion and ignorance.

Australoids are original negroes who left Africa and settled before everyone.

Dravidians are proto-proto-caucasians

>the perfect Brahmins according to Hinduism will have blonde hair
t. 19th century indoboo

Being a brahmin is a state of mind you faggot, a person who recognizes brahma and worships knowledge is a brahmin. Which is where the entire idea of brahmins surviving on charity comes from.

He is talking about the indo scythians you mong

b-but they are

agreed dravids are australoids

australoids form the bedrock of races from which other races such as mongoloids and caucasoids spawnes from

(You) #
this
australoids settled india and spread south to indo-china, papua, and australia

india only recently experienced caucasoid elamites and IE

I can't believe it, the genetics are clearly different, and australiods have never amounted to anything while Dravidians build those massive funky temples and were probably the indus valley people

Kalash are 25% Dravidian.

Yeah provide the source for the blonde Brahmin thing you lying humongous faggot.

No he doesn't mean that, Indo Europeans didn't enter Europe before 3000-2000 bc (depending on the region)

Found his reputable source:

stormfront.org/forum/t63830/

To think i bothered.

/pol/babies plz go

Mesolithic Europeans had dark skin but light (blue) eyes, closest looking population would be Baltic people (Estonians, Lithuanians) since they're the closest to them genetically.

Neolithic Europeans were a mix of Mesolithic Europeans and Near Eastern farmers, they originated in the Aegean region and from there they spread to all of Europe bringing agriculture, also building megalithic monuments such as dolmen, stonehenge, malta temples and such, closest people to them genetically are Sardinians and Iberians (especially Basques),
so they would also be the closest looking populations, they had fair skin on average and brown hair and eyes, though the could occasionally have fair eyes and hair.

Proto Indo Europeans were a mix of Eastern hunter gatherer (a relative of Western hunter gatherer) and Caucasian hunter gather (who was mixed with Ancient North Euasian, a Siberian population that is extinct now), when they arrived in Europe they mixed with the native populations and the result is modern Europeans.

WE

nope indian mtdna is haplogroup M same as papuans, abos

agreed indians are australoid

Modern studies indicate that the mtDNA lineages in India belong to the Australoid M haplogroup, whose Indian variety (T at np16223) probably originated around 48000 +/- 1500 years before present (i.e. about 46000 BC), and more than 98% of the M individuals carry this variety. This haplogroup is reaches 96.7% amongst the Kotas of the South.

Among its lineages M2 is the most diverse and occurs in significantly higher frequency among the Austro-asiatic tribals. The M3 (frequent among Dravidian tribals), M4, and M5 are also found in significant numbers.

See genome.org/cgi/content/full/13/10/2277/FIG4 for relations between these.

genome.org/cgi/content/full/13/10/2277/FIG1
genome.org/cgi/content/full/13/10/2277/FIG2

Holy shit look at the facial hair on this dude, never seen growing down from the eyes on anyone ever before.

>Australoids have never amounted to anything
What the fuck? Who is "Australoid" to you?

No but it will after the enrichment age

spot on
indians are indeed australoid

Haplogroup M2 [2] - found in South Asia
Haplogroup M3 [3] - found mainly in South Asia
Haplogroup M29'Q found among Australian Aborigines
Haplogroup M31 [24] - found among the Onge, in the Andaman Islands[15]
Haplogroup M32 [25] - found in Andaman Islands
Haplogroup M33 [26] - found in South Asia
Haplogroup M33a - found in India
Haplogroup M34 [27] - found in South Asia
Haplogroup M40 [30] - found in South Asia[15]
Haplogroup M41 - found in South Asia
Haplogroup M42 [31] - found among Australian Aborigines
Haplogroup M5 [5] - found in South Asia
Haplogroup M6 [6] - found mainly in South Asia

~50k yrs ago veddoids from india followed coastal route to australia to become aussie abs

~5k yrs ago veddoids from india returned and reinforced themselves in australia

veddoids form the bedrock race and have spawned the mongoloids/caucasoids/negroids

elamites are persians who dominated over veddoids before yamna

dravids are veddoids who adopted elamite language

in india there still exists veddoids who speak the original australoid language related to austro-aboriginal lang

>dravidians arent australoid

>b-but user us indians are australoid

I swear every other thread is triggered stormfags wanting brown people to not have nice things.

am i the only indian who is non-selfhating and actually proud of being Veddoid?

why should i submit to the psuedoscience of eurocentrics?

theres more greatness in joining our people into one Pan-Australoid superpower then be a psuedo-euro.

and remember we once had most of asia and australia

Veddoids of Papua, Australia, SEA, India, Arabia, east Africa UNITE!!!

But you don't understand, their entire worldview is under siege by cultural marxist afrocentrist feminist historians.

The confusion arises because some Australoids have always lived in south india, but they aren't Dravidian.

Go look at Sri Lanka, the people there are mostly Dravidian, genetically i mean, yet they look overwhelmingly just Indian, not black weird abbos.

see
the mtdna Haplogroup M unites Australians, Papuans and Indians (Dravids, Hindis included)

there is no confusion aside from eurocentric view that indians are white

we are australoid! you wont separate us apart!

Australoid pride worldwide!!!!

You are a retard

Well, they probably had a higher prevalence of fair hair, but the greco-roman world had a tendency to lump everyone outside their empire(even the balkans) as "blue-eyed gingers".

Also, they tended to lump every foreign tribe under some umbrella terms(they called goths getae, ffs)

Haplogroups make up like 1% of a persons genes.
Besides that, Mtdna is much less diverse than Y dna, and isn't a marker for Australoids, otherwise what, all of india, half of arabia, even east africa are australoids? No, women just have much less genetic diversity than men, due to less competition since all they need to do is open their legs. Men evolve fast, but thats something for another thread.

Valid point

People with different feature always look exaggerated to foreigners

According to the Greeks ALL Illyrians, Slavs, and Thracians were red haired with blue eyes

The Romans claimed ALL Germanics had red hair and long limbs

>Haplogroups make up like 1% of a persons genes.

source or gtfo

There are an estimated 20,000-25,000 human protein-coding genes, a very small fraction of the entire genome (approximately 1.5%)

human protein-coding gene = 1.5% of entire genome

that means that human genes are make up a small fraction of the entire genome

so with your shit logic human genes are irrelevant

but contrary to your retardation, 1.5% is the critical piece that makes up humans

I challenge you faggots!
Give me a single evidence to back up the mythical aryan race /aryan invasion in india.

Pro tip: You cant.

Indian history is written by colonists. The ancient sanskrit scriptures like ramayana and Mahabharata gives the date 50?? Bce and 40??- 4062 bce (with the help of astronomical omens) .

m.timesofindia.com/city/kolkata/Swastika-is-pre-Aryan-dates-back-11000-years/articleshow/53090079.cms

m.timesofindia.com/india/Aryan-Dravidian-divide-a-myth-Study/articleshow/5053274.cms

hinduwebsite.com/history/aryans.asp

YEH -- LE

That's because nearly all of them did back then. Also the word tacitcus uses for the color of Germanic people's hair means red-blond, but it wouldn't look red blond to us. They just didn't have that shade of blond in the mediterranean so thats how it looked to them.