Why do East Africans have Caucasian skulls, but people on the other side of Africa do not?

this isn't fucking difficult

>Caucasoid gene flow into the Ethiopian gene pool occurred predominantly through males. Conversely, the Niger–Congo contribution to the Ethiopian population occurred mainly through females.[25]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_of_Ethiopia#Maternal_lineages

>the Ethiopian population is almost equally divided between individuals that carry Eurasian maternal lineages, and those that belong to African clades. They describe the presence of Eurasian clades in the country as sequences that "are thought to be found in high numbers in Ethiopia either as a result of substantial gene flow into Ethiopia from Eurasia

>m-muh pseudoscience, race doesn't real
this is how you know you've cornered the leftist

that would be fine, but we all know the next step is for the racial pseudoscientists to draw all sorts value laden judgements about the capabilities and virtues (or lack thereof) of this or that racial group.

fuck off back to your racial pseudoscience echo chamber you mong

>that would be fine, but we all know the next step is for the racial pseudoscientists to draw all sorts value laden judgements about the capabilities and virtues (or lack thereof) of this or that racial group
well capabilities can be bound by physical realities, which differ by race
as for virtues? well, that's more of a cultural thing of course
perhaps you're actually referring to more general mental traits, such as the famous 'intelligence quotient'? of course that does appear to differ by race as well, though as many have said before me there may be no benefit to having superior spacial awareness/calculating ability instead of, say, greater muscle mass in a particular environment

the genetic reality is that most sub-saharans possess dna from a hominid lineage which split from that of sapiens between 700,000 and 2mn years ago (hominids only split from apes between 6mn and 7mn years ago, so that shows how quickly evolutionary differences can occur)
OOA descended peoples possess dna from a lineage which split from sapiens between 300,000 and 1mn years ago, which negroids generally lack

ps. if your issue is with intelligence differences, are you a creationist? if not explain how human intelligence evolved in the first place if there are no biological determinants

Why do people get so butthurt about basic physical anthropology the days?

>"hey sweetie you look Japanese are you?"
>"my family has been living in America for generations stop noticing my phenotype REEEEEEEEEEEEEE"

He looks like Ho Chi Minh

>being this triggered by facts.

Rare picture of Africaposter found

Racemixing while west africa was mostly isolated.

>Why do people get so butthurt about basic physical anthropology the days?
Because they want to be judged by the content of their character and not aspects they were born with.

They clearly have different skull shapes you psycho-autist

Because the Afro-Asiatic were Caucasoid that came into Africa and racemixed with the Natives

False. People from the Caucasus Mountains are Caucasian.

Everyone else is not.

I was talking about the skull shape commonly known as Caucasoid or Europid.

They are the original humans of Africa.

Niggers have their simian features due to random mutations like Abos.

provide your sources, brainlet

thicker lips, and flatter noses are adaptations to the environment

the maxillary prognathism is simian though

Because it's straight up racist to assume someone is Japanese considering they look the same as any North Asian

We aren't of recent Admixture for the most part. A note to take for those interested in obsolete racial pseudo-science is that Somali were observed as having measurements closest to Eurasian while these same authors stated Ethiopian were more "mixed"

journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1004393

The above research concludes that we are in fact mostly descended from an ancient back crossing of early out of Africa migrants that arrived back over 20k years ago.

Merely acknowledging somebody's ethnicity these days is racist.

yeah and the protruding brow bones/brow ridges that caucasians have is simian too, they share that feature alone with gorillas

notice the prominent brow ridge

very common in caucasians as well

really dude?
wtf is your problem?

Is that why East Africans have a lower IQ than West Africans?

>the genetic reality is that most sub-saharans possess dna from a hominid lineage which split from that of sapiens between 700,000 and 2mn years ago (hominids only split from apes between 6mn and 7mn years ago, so that shows how quickly evolutionary differences can occur)

First off, it's hominin, not hominid. Hominids are all great apes, hominins include the genus Pan, the genus Homo, and any other bipedal apes at the time. Second, only Pygmies carried that archaic human ancestor, for the rest of Africans it's somewhere around 0.2% to 0.5% Neanderthal, although certain groups that are above Central Africa, and the Khoisan have more Neanderthal DNA, ranging to around 1-2%.

>OOA descended peoples possess dna from a lineage which split from sapiens between 300,000 and 1mn years ago, which negroids generally lack

Homo sapiens is according to new genetic research from a now dead San child's remains, over 350,000 years old. Our common ancestor with Neanderthals and Denisovans is potentially as old as 800,000 years (which is interesting, as Denisovans split from Neanderthals around 700,000 years ago). The unknown archaic DNA some Africans have, according to the distance between it, might just be from a relict population of Homo heidelbergensis, but until we find their DNA for a fact or find some heidelbergensis remains in the Congo or other parts of Africa after Homo sapiens came about, we will never know.

Fun stuff: europeans used to have a brow ridge as pronounced as abo, but it disappeared around 3000 years ago.

Dumb Horner detected. Horner Africans are practically biracial, your actual ancestors before Eurasian farmers came in are Nilo-Saharan looking people, and even before that, the Khoisan race.

...

So basically, humans are apes. Yep, seems to check out just fine.

>europeans
specify

he means neanderthals

Can someone explain to me how human skulls can apparently be categorized into only a few shapes, and why people still buy into this shit in the 21st century?

why you are doing this?¡

>¡
what did he mean by this

Scientific racism, the reason why Creationists think evolution is racist today.

because the Bantu nearly genocided the entire continent and replaced them with their own people.

then after that they started enslaving their own kind and selling them off.

Your character is something you are born with.

kys, LARPer

>larper
tf are you talking about

stop using my username and posting as me

>posting as me
what are you talking about, how am i posting as you

Ehhhhh

using my username

how do thicc lips and flatter noses help people survive better in west africa

While populations across the world differ, the racial categories America and Europe use are arbitrary, unscientific, and "modern".
Now the people of the past were often definitely "Racist". But you have to understand that race is not a scientifically based fact based on any kind of genetics but a cultural mode of thought. What the different "races" are and who belongs to them is different based on time and place. Our current racial categories for instance only date to about the 1600's/1700's. If you told a Roman that he and a Gaul belonged to the same "White Race" he would laugh at your face because the Gauls were obviously a different race than the Romans in his eyes. Similarly whether Jewish people are counted as white has always been more of a political question than a genetic one. Or take for Instance how Native Americans have always been considered their own race when they are genetically near identical to certain East Asian populations that are categorized as "Asian".
In this same way the populations of sub-saharan Africa are all called "black" despite the fact they can have less in common genetically to each other than a European and an Asian.

how about now

>biracial
Fuck no chimpthiopians act just as feral as Bantu monkeys.

Listen retard skull race for race doesnt mean hybridization as the Horners would be much smarter than Bantu if they were mixed yet they score nigger level IQ results in the low 60s on average.

so what are you?

>Bantu empire

Sweet fucking Christ, the Bantu were not a singular ethnolinguistic or political bloc, no more than the Indo-Europeans were a singular horde of rampaging, genocidal maniacs you want the Bantu to be.

Language, ethnicity, and culture are not intrinsically linked.

Protip: caucasian doesn't actually mean anything, phrenology was debunked ages ago

Fantastic reply Amanda

dividing people by skull shape it no more legitimate then by dividing by nipple colour.

really? so caucasian and mongoloid people don't have different size/shaped skulls? because anybody can eyeball that without measuring

nope

Protip: phrenology and physical anthropology are two completely separate things

Caucasian has a meaning in common parlance, and it's almost entirely subjective where you draw the line.
As points out, these words also have value in describing certain phenotypical groups, though there isn't really a generally accepted measure as to where the line between them should be drawn.

and Caucasian as a term has little use in the later as a scientific discipline concerned with the biological and behavioral aspects of human beings, their related non-human primates and their extinct hominin ancestors.

the terms are based off really bad science with nonsensical ideas behind them. Whenever it gets called out or exposed it just made up new groups then go "there there's an -oid group for your answer"

Actually, the Bantus got their metallurgy and farming skills from West Africans, their distant cousins. It is important to note that West Africans and Bantus only share an linguistic background now, sort of like Persians and Germans.

I was talking about their genetics, I could give a damn about their lightbulb headed skulls.

Yeah it was less of an empire and more of a pestilence.

That wasn't the point of my post. Retards literally have no idea what phrenology is.

Phrenology is to physical anthropology as astrology is to astronomy

That a few whackos believe having an occipital bun makes them the next Isaac Newton is not evidence of the non-existence of race. Race exists and biology/anthropology prove it. Applying the standards used to define species to race and claiming you have shown the latter to be a figment of the bigots' imagination is disingenuous, and at odds with reality.

But Neanderthals died out much earlier than that

Amerindians are superior to europeans.

Pure Amerindians are practically extinct.

Dont mind him, he is just got BTFO and is butthurt, that is why he is using my username

The same as pure europeans. How is this even a question?

Memes aside you and I both know that to be untrue, pure Amerindians on the other hand did go extinct.

He should take a DNA test, it'd be pretty amusing.

go back to pol you retard

>if you use the definition of words that I decide on, you are wrong

>simply ask an anthropologically-interesting question about human history/biology
>get called a politically incorrect mong and told to fuck off
doesn't look like you're welcome, OP