Can someone explain to a brainlet here why hungarians and finns aren't indo-european...

>Paleohumans were phenotypical Mongrids (Mong+Negrid)

Bushman are an example of original human founding stock that show a combo of both: Mongolid (epicanthic fold, flat face, flat head)
Negroid (dark skin, curly hair)
both of these phenotypical groups also share the traits of: flat nose (platyrhinus), prognathism
also, if not from the ancient stock then it can be attributed to: Fetal alcohol syndrome, fetal features of human (undeveloped nose etc), neoteny etc

basically, the undeveloped human fetus is exactly a Protohuman (having features of Mongrid)
neotony is retaining the features of protohumans that also exists in the fetal state

if whites do not have the neotonic features of Mongrid, then the white is of the AndronovoYamna stock . the original AndronovoYamna of Asia got replaced by YakutoMongs

the true Mong+Negrid is neotenized and does not morph out of the fetal facial structure aka they stay fetus-faced
the true non-Mongrid develops out of the fetus-face

those infantile/fetal features are shared in Negrids and Mongolids.
True Caucasids are distinctly less infantile than all other races. Caucasids morph out of the fetus-face state.
though some borderline "Caucasids" have infantile features retained from the fetus due to either:
upper-paleo origins (non-neolitic)
mongol/negrid mix
fetal alcohol syndrome

tru-caucasids metamorph out of the fetus-face (neotenic, infantilized features) state, while other groups do not

Flat nose is the default nose.
body hair is related to decreased neoteny.
caucasids are the least neotenic (fetalized) group.
mongolids and negrids lack body hair but possess the most infantilizaed, neotenic features.
besides lack of neoteny, caucasids also possess the most sexual dimorphism.
the genders in mongolids and negrids are very similar. the faces of male and female West African or Chinese lack the striking differentiation that exists in the faces of Maltese males and females.

The whole infantile/mongoloid/cromagnid stuff is clinal Paleolithic european craniofacial variation, and ancient skulls compared to modern people show this. Lower protrusion of nose causes epicanthal folds.

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047248417300921

>The pattern of association between climate and morphology of the mid-face in western Eurasia was then compared to that in east and north Asia. Although differences between the two were found, there were also similarities that support existing functional interpretations of morphology for the bony parts of the upper airways. Last, in a preliminary analysis using a reduced set of measurements, mid-facial morphology of several Upper Paleolithic European Homo sapiens specimens was found to be more similar to groups from northern and northeastern Europe than to southern European populations. Thus, the population of northeastern Europe rather than east and north Asian groups should be used as a model when studying climate-mediated mid-facial morphology of Upper Paleolithic European H. sapiens.

>Posterior probabilities from the DFA show that all eight Paleolithic individuals are predominantly classified as belonging to one of the northern European groups: Finn, Morvinian, or Norse (Table 5). In all cases, the highest posterior probability was found for one of the three northern groups, and the sum of probabilities
for these three groups is much higher than the sum of probabilities for the two southern groups. Further, if...combined in two mega-samples (“South”and“North,”
respectively), all ancient skulls are classified as belonging to “North” with much higher posterior probabilities (Table 5)...More specifically, the Upper Paleolithic specimens studied share with northeastern Europeans a lower but wider face, lower orbits, and a relatively wider and much less protruding nose compared to populations from southern Europe.

I think that negroes with their giant noses and fces are not neothenic, chinks are though, you're right

Also Australian aboriginals are not neothenic either

2 is not possible. Linguists agree that the oldest layer of Indo-European loan words in Finno-Ugric languages is from Proto-Indo-Iranian which corresponds to 2500-2000 BC. Genetics also doesn't offer anything contrary to that.

There is a proposed Indo-Uralic superfamily of languages, and I'm tempted to believe it, bot based on genetics and linguistics.

*both, not bot

More realistically Uralic languages have a substrate from an indigeous European language related to Proto-Indo-European but the main core is Siberian.

>Also Australian aboriginals are not neothenic either
yes, they were once known as archaic caucasoids

whites are like butterflies that leave the larvae stage and get wings.

compare a baby photo of a white dude with an adult photo, you would not be able to relate that the two are the same human

compare a baby photo of a beijing/bantu dude with an adult photo, you would be easily able to relate that the two are the same human

Samoyedics have a heavy substrate from Paleo- Siberian, they're not the Uralic core which was in the Volga forest zone. There is no substrate resembling proto-IE or para-IE in Uralic and couldn't be because of the age difference.

That's one of the stuppied pics I've seen to suggest that they come from same family or are related. Hungarian vocabulary is only 20% Uralic the rest are loanwords from Slavic to Turkic/Germanic. Few loanwords don't prove anything.

Do you actually know what you're talking about?
Seems that you do not.

Volga forest zone has anything to do with Uralic languages at least originally.

I see a very high chance that para-IE languages were spread across a large area but all died off except IE. Possibly even Comb Ceramic culture could have been para-IE. Can't be proved but a million times more likely that Comb Ceramic had anything to do with Uralics.

"Hungarian's traveled to their native land after many eons and exsistences of wandering. They are the warmest asnd kindest and smart too! people on the Earth, perhaps named Debunabenan." - Tesla quoted by the Bat

" They come from a galxay known to astronomers on our planet as pixal 3213. " - Brian Alan Welliver

It's you who are clueless. Linguistic consensus puts proto-Uralic firmly in the Volga forest zone. Everything points there, the greatest diversity of language branches and the early Indo-Iranian loanwords in Proto-Uralic. Comb Ceramic zone was much wider and outside Volga forest zone during the so obviously that was not Uralic, and is not considered to be so by linguists.

during the period*

combs spread slang.

me here, just agreeing with you - brian alan welliver

i mean him - the expert or correct one. - the bat

the 501st? are you simpletons talking about darth vadeths galaxy? greek to me. - bruce wayne

Yep, you're clueless. West Siberia is the leading candidate for the P-Uralic homeland

There are no uncontested PIE loans in P-Uralic/P-Finno-Ugric That makes the Volga a joke candidate.

Indo-Iranian is the oldest layer and Samoyedic doesn't have many of those. The loans happened when P-Finno-Ugric and Indo-Iranian folks met at the Urals. It's as simple as that.
The move into the Volga forest zone happened a bit later.

you obviously never been to the volga forest zone, otherwise you wouldnt be spewing such bs

ok simple. if you say that indo iranian is a studied or recognized proto, old or oldest. you must be reading some crackpots faiked thesis you found lying in some community college library. - Brian Alan Welliver. anything you have to say is not worth hearing GTFO, kindly

I very clearly mentioned indo-Iranian, not Proto-IE loanwords so you are the clueless one and wilfully so. West Siberia is not the leading candidate anywhere, not among Indoeuropeanists or Uralicists. The I-I loanwords were not in proto-Finno-Ugric but in proto-Uralic. These coexisted in the Volga forest zone during 2500-2000 BC, proto-Uralic is not older than that. This means proto-Samoyedics migrated east from Volga forest zone during middle-late Bronze Age.

they traveled southwest as far as arabia as well, there is significant if not ample evidence of that - BAW

>The I-I loanwords were not in proto-Finno-Ugric but in proto-Uralic

Nope. Samoyedic doesn't have them. They were acquired at the Urals and later at the Volga.
Do you not understand that by 2500-2000 BC the Ural mountains were covered in Indo-Iranian sites like Arkaim?

People are a lot more likely to respond to posts with pictures with them (as you just proved), and that's the only thing I had that was relevant.

Do you like this better?

Yes, Samoyed does have them

PII *tašya -> Pre-Samoyed *täši (Katz 2003)
PII *yawa -> Pre-Samoyed *jawa (Aikio 2002)

and PII *wakšaya -> Pre-Samoyed *wakša and so on

Speaking of Samoyedic, does not look like it's even a primary branch of Uralic. The most recent studies indicate the primary split is East Uralic (Ugric and Samoyedic) and West Uralic (the rest)

...

It's all a matter of perspective

Hungarians are Hunnicized Slavs dna-wise

Hungarians are DNA-wise more similar to Austrians than to any Slavs, so are Austrians hunnicized too?

Eastern Austrians are Germanized Slavs

Both Austrians and HUngarians are mainly R1a

austrians are germd Slovenians

They are indo-european their genetics are very similiar to their neighboors but they are speaking non indo-european language