Australoids: The Ainu and the Earliest Amerindians and Caucasians

Peindish: If the Jomon arrived 15KYA, who were the inhabitants of Japan stretching back 30-40KYA?

It’s said this older population had haplogroup D and the newer Jomon group at around 15KYA had haplogroup C, but haplogroup is not a good indicator of race, since you can have a haplogroup of another part of the world and be 99.9

The Ainu have legends of “Koropokkur,” describing them as very short people who fished for food and lived under butterbur leaves. Either this is some Negrito-like population or it’s the Nivkhs who were pushed by the Jomonese further north into Sakhalin.

What do you think?

Yes, I always thought they were some strange sort of Northern Negritos.

I think the Jomon showed up 13-14,000 YBP.

I don’t know about the prehistory of the Nivkhi. Are they short?

There is some recent data connecting the Nivkhi with some of the earlier Native American populations. It’s thought that the early ones could have come by boat across the Alaska coast down the Western Canadian coast to the Western US coast. They have a petrified shit in a cave in Oregon that is older than 14,300 YBP. That’s older than Clovis, so that’s interesting right there. The Clovis barrier is gone. Let’s just hang it up.

Also, those early people who were in the Americas around 10-12,000 YBP looked something like Negritos or Australoids at least in facial features. There are some remnants in the far south of Chile – the Yaghnan – and there were also some extinct groups in Baja California that were very primitive.

Kennewick Man found in Washington State from 9,000 YBP looks like an Ainu or a Maori, or more specifically, a Moriori, the more archaic and Australoid or Melanesian people who were exterminated so cruelly by the Maori ~1830’s-1840’s.

The Ainu are also Australoid facially. They are sort of a Northern Australoid. Look closely at them. Look at how much they look like Aborigines. Kennewick Man was said to look “Caucasoid,” but that is an illusion, as some Aborigines can look vaguely like this.

In particular, a cross between an Australoid and an Asian can look remarkably “Caucasoid.” Check out some of the Taiwan Aborigines or the Ainu for that matter. The Ainu also were long thought to be Caucasoid, but their genes are Asian, and their faces are actually Australoid. If you go back 9,000 YBP, almost everyone in Asia appears Australoid.

I believe a skull from the Caucasus from 33,000 YBP looks somewhat Australoid. That’s the funny looking bald headed guy that everyone was laughing about, as people were calling him the first Caucasian.

But he was part of the first Caucasians, the Caucasians having arisen 40-45,000 YBP via crossbreeding between 1/3 African population settled in Asia and 2/3 very early Chinese population that may have been quite Australoid. So Caucasians were created by 1/3 Black person and 2/3 Asian person. Most White Supremacists probably don’t want to hear that though ha ha.

Please follow and like us:

13 thoughts on “Australoids: The Ainu and the Earliest Amerindians and Caucasians”

    1. LOL this was 40-45,000 years ago. I guess we could figure this out by looking at the genes, but I am not aware that this has been done. Keep in mind that the early “Chinese” probably looked like Aborigines or maybe Ainu. God knows what those early Blacks in the Caucasus looked like. The “White man” that was created by them looks like some sort of a freak LOL. Most of us Whites would disown the dude.

      PS This data comes from Cavalli-Svorza of Stanford, assuming he is still around. Geneticist. I suppose you could look his data up and see what he said about it. This was part of a huge genome of the human race project he undertook a while back.

      If it’s 2/3 early Chinese and 1/3 early Black, does that imply Chinese men and Black women or is there any way to tell that and could it very well be the other way around?

      1. Have you ever read erectus walks amongst us? I find it odd that it gets very little mention on hbd and especially wn forums.

  1. First of all, black is not a race, and African does not mean black. Many of the most ancient tribes in Africa are light skinned and mostly Caucasoid. Most animals and even chimpanzees have pink skin. Black skin is more of a mutation than white skin. Sub-Saharan Negroids hardly existed 2,000 years ago, but they are 70% of Africa now. It’s not White Supremacy It’s idiot fucking liberals.

    1. Earliest living African humans are the Khoisan and Pygmy. Early Khoisans being darker than modern Khoisans has been postulated. I’ve yet to see a pink Khoisan in any case. Pink Africa full of pink chimps and pink Caucasions yet to evolve into Negroids sounds like a Black Nationalist delusion. Negroids are new, the darker Sudanese type is older I believe.

  2. Watch the Skeletons in the Cupboard video. Very Caucasian Celtic type people that came from South America.

    The original Maori of Easter Island were always described as two distinct tribes, one light-skinned (these Celtic-type) and one dark-skinned (mostly probably the “Australoids”). They claim these Celtic people came from Persia/Egypt during the Exodus of Harrapa and sailed around the Horn of Africa and then into Meso and then to New Zealand. That is HOGWASH!

    This DNA already existed here for thousands of years prior to that, and it is much more likely and plausible that some of these people continued on past New Zealand and then into Cambodia, India, and Persia/Egypt, which is how the geneticists can make those connections.

    That was the original theory of the first anthropologists, assuming that these people must have came from the West, so that is what these people were told, but they have recently confirmed that they came from the East. I have photos of some Ainu that are virtually indistinguishable from Caucasians. Kennewick Man was claimed Ainu until the ancient Ainu were White. Everything is almost the exact opposite of what you were always taught.

    The Siberians were coming in as these ancient Australoid, Celtic, and Ainu types were leaving out of the Americas. The Australoids are only theorized to have been in Australia for 50,000 years because that is when it was geographically possible for them to have gotten there without boats. They cannot disprove that the anthropogenesis of humans wasn’t in the Americas. Anything that does not fit their Out of Africa paradigm is rejected. They are now claiming that the R1B DNA was brought across the Beringian, but I see that it was going the opposite way, and they crossed paths.

  3. There are clear and obvious connections between the Khmer and the Maya/pre-Maya. I believe the Australoids were the Olmecs, and the Celtic types were the Maya/pre-Maya.

    The Hindu also believe they came from an Atlantis. Dravidians are a combination of Caucasoid, Australoid, Mongoloid, and only recently some sub-Saharan Negroid.

  4. I agree. It’s nonsense because it’s a bunch of wishful thinking crap. They did not study enough history. There were no people in New Zealand or Easter Island besides the Polynesians.

  5. “But he was the first Caucasians, the Caucasians having arisen 40-45,000 YBP via crossbreeding between 1/3 African population settled in Asia and 2/3 very early Chinese population that may have been quite Australoid. So Caucasians were created by 1/3 Black person and 2/3 Asian person.”

    Are you saying we’re one third nigger and two-thirds chink? Oh the humanity! Say it isn’t so. I though God himself crafted Caucasoids in His own image in the gardens of paradise.

  6. Hi there guys,

    This is another great racial post. I believe that the Ainu people are the remainders of the original Veddid/Australoid peoples in Asia, and the Margids and Fuegids are the Australoid peoples in America. I do believe that Whites are rather close to especially East Africans like the Nilotes and Omotics who are Negroids and not Ethiopids because the latter had less mutual genetic drift and a later separation.

  7. Sorry, the Western Eurasians like the Danes and English are actually further away from Nilotes than from Yoruba and equally related to Yoruba and Australians on either side from the Europeans. Australians are about double the distance from the Yoruba as the English. I believe that they are more closely related to the East Africans than to any other of these aforementioned ethnic groups.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)