A Geneology of Amorality

From here.
I will quote from a few snippets below:

Research on hypocrisy shows that people are mostly motivated to appear moral rather than to actually abide by their moral judgments.

Once you understand this hard truth about humans, so many other deliciously cynical hard as nails truths shine through the light, and you can finally find your somewhat disgusted way in life.

Research on ‘motivated reasoning’ shows that people deviously craft moral justifications to push their own agendas.

Yep. Sad but true once again. Plug this truth into your brain and watch the whole world light up before your very eyes. In other words, when people are good, they are good. When people are bad, they are also good. People are always good, no matter how good or bad their behavior is. No one wants to be bad. Except me. The bad boy.

In fact, humans are more eager to judge other people than to follow their own moral advice.

You know, you really can’t understand life at all until you plug into ugly little truths like this. Plug this in and watch everything converge together, an endless epiphany.
We proclaim our moral values, and then we don’t even follow our own rules. But that’s ok, because we all just lie and say we do anyway. Evidence to the contrary? Not an issue. Deny it. Things hitting a little too close to home? Not a problem. Project away the blame onto someone else so you go scot free. Defenses are a handy little bag of tricks.

They Walk Among Us

Neandertals, that is.

New data indicates that all of the Out of Africa (OOA) people (that is, everyone but Blacks) are related to Neandertals, in part anyway. About 1-4% of our genome is Neandertal. This % is much mistaken. White nationalist sites are saying that this means the difference between Blacks and Whites is 4%, while the difference between humans and chimpanzees is only 2%. Whoa! Another blow to the multiculturalist scum! Turns out “niggers” really are apes anyway, or worse, apes are more human than niggers!

Forget it. They didn’t do the math right. The Neanderthal difference between Whites and Blacks accounts for a whopping .04% of the total. It’s not much of anything. And those high percentages of genetic convergence with non-humans can be misleading.

Multiculturalists like to shriek about how much genes humans share with each other, but so what? Humans share 98% of their genes with chimps. So? So are humans chimps or what? Nope, at least not most of us. We share something like 75% of our genes with flatworms. So are we flatworms? No, not most of us anyway.

Sequencing of the human genome to look for human-Neandertal interbreeding has been going on for some time. For a long time, there was no evidence of any human-Neandertal breeding, but that was because they had not finished sequencing the entire genome. Now that they have finished, it’s clear that there was breeding between humans and Neandertals.

The breeding occurred when we first moved out of Africa 70,000 YBP, when the breeding occurred in the Middle East, and later on, there was more breeding in Eurasia. That breeding occurred soon after we moved out Africa in the ME means that all Out of Africa humans are related to Neadertals. Blacks are the only humans with no Neandertal in them.

Range of the Neadertals in Europe, Eurasia and the Middle East. They lived from about 400,000 to 30,000 YBP.

Much nonsense is being parroted about about this interbreeding. It was interbreeding because Neadertals and humans are so far apart genetically that Neandertals are a completely separate subspecies from modern humans. Subspecies of living organisms can always interbreed, but are usually prevented from doing so since they do not inhabit overlapping territories.

The fervor on the White nationalist boards is high, and predictably idiotic. WN’s all around the globe are swooning over these hideous, primitive Neandertal creatures.

A Neandertal kid. Good Lord, even the kids are hideous. I think they might still be alive, actually. I've seen kids like this around some trailer parks.

We bred with Neadertals! Niggers didn’t! Dontcha realize that this makes Whites superior to niggers, and it makes niggers inferior? Many theories are tossed about. Whites bred with Neandertals, and that’s what makes us superior to inferior niggers (those cool Neandertal genes), bla bla. Many posts are glorying in the wondrous beauty, brains and achievements of the great Neandertals.

Yeah, like I want to be related to this guy. Get real.

I had to LOL the whole time I was reading this stuff. This is one of those times I feel like playing Lou Reed’s song, “I Wanna Be Black.” Seriously, Blacks are superior for not having any fucking non-human Neandertal blood in them, not inferior! That Neandertal, non-human blood in us doesn’t make us better than Blacks, in fact, it’s an embarassment! At least Blacks are fully human! We Whites are part non-human. FFS, how humiliating is that?

I realize that there's porn for every fetish out there, but it's hard to believe there would have been much of a market for Neandertal porn. I hear Black guys never fucked these chicks. Good for them!

Neandertal women were incredibly ugly. Yes, our people mated with them. To me, this means that either guys will fuck anything, or human females love to fuck stupid hulking brutes who can barely even speak (Neandertals were apparently not able to speak human language, but they probably had advanced sign language).

There are many posts suggesting that breeding with Neandertals is what gave Whites and Asians their brains, since, you know, Neadertals were so damn smart and all. It’s true that Neandertal did have a large brain. But so what. So does a fucking elephant. But some suggest that most of the brain had gone over to memory. One theorist suggested that a Neandertal could remember every single day of his life, nice if he ever got questioned by the cops for an unsolved Paleolithic murder, but not much good otherwise.

In addition, all OOA folks have Neandertal in them, including Papuans (IQ 64) and Aborigines (IQ 62). Yeah, lot of good those super Neandertal rocket scientist brains did them, huh?

It’s clear that the Out of Africa folks (Yeah, the “niggers”) thoroughly outcompeted the Neadertals. Much is made of the Neandertal toolset, but the OOA folks had a better one. And the OOA folks had speech, which may have trumped them all. No one knows if we exterminated the Neadertals or if they just could not compete in a changing environment (I figure we took them out) but at any rate, the OOA folks handed the Neandertals’ asses to them quickly.

That WN’s are falling all over themselves for these hideous Neandertal non-humans shows how stupid racial nationalism is. At the end of the day, its sin is the sin of pride. As pride makes  a man act foolish (consult any good Greek tragedy) so does racial nationalism, nothing more than egotism writ across the entire race, with the volk subbing for the ego.

It's possible that either some Neandertals still live among us, or some Whites have a lot of Neandertal genes. Some researchers say that Nickolai Valuev, a Russian boxer, may be up over 90% Neandertal. Looking at him, it's clearly possible, but his genome has not yet been sequenced. He eats multiple pounds of red meat every day, another clue to his possible Neandertal roots.

One last theory.

Jews are Neandertals.

That’s the Jews are so evil, you know. Because they aren’t human. LOL.

Safeguard Your Own Women, Steal the Enemy’s Women

In the comments section, Cyrus points out that some ethnic groups do place priority on breeding within the group, particularly the Jews and the Armenians:

Robert, in addition to Jews having a fixation on non-intermarriage, I might also add that I have noticed this pattern with Armenians as well. Just an observation. Though, I believe there exists a social rational behind Jews and Armenians holding such views. A similar history of persecution, perhaps? A Near Eastern cultural element?

Yes, the Armenians and the Jews do want you to marry inside the group. And many immigrants to the West do too. I have noticed that with East Asians, there is strong pressure for Chinese to marry another Chinese, Koreans another Korean, Japanese another Japanese, etc. Even among SE Asians, there is pressure to marry your own. Khmer are pressured to marry other Khmer and not those horrible Lao or Viets, etc.

What’s funny is that marrying your own tribe can’t really be natural, since in order to keep it going, you have pound it into your people’s heads how evil the other tribes are. Most of these accusations against the other groups are simply lies. So the only way to prevent mass miscegenation is with mass lying propaganda. Doesn’t sound like an inborn trait to me.

If you study tribes, it’s clear that most totally don’t give a fuck about genetic purity. I studied Amerindian tribes, and it was quite common to take a wife not just from another village, but even from another tribe. She left her tribe and came to yours, abandoned her language and culture and adopted yours, and she was automatically one of your people. It also makes sense from a genetic POV, as you are avoiding becoming inbred. It seems that primitives had some understanding of genetics after all.

Further, tribes have always conquered other tribes and raided them to steal their women. One thing you can do is raid the other tribe and rape all their women to force them to bear your genetic line. Or bring the women back to your tribe and breed them in with your tribe, and extinct their tribe in the process.

Primitives did not understand genetics very well, but clearly there was a prerogative to keep the tribe going and in many cases to wipe out the competing tribes. By kidnapping their women, bringing them back to your village, and making them bear your kids, you extinct their tribe while incorporating their genes into your own line.

Any group doing this cares not one whit about genetic purity. They just mass-miscegenated with the enemy! Come on!

However, they did keep their tribe going and extinct a competing tribe. These tendencies may well be genetically driven.

Kevin MacDonald says that humans have evolved traits to do two opposite things:

1. Guard the women of your own tribe from breeding with enemy or competing groups.

2. Conversely, the men have a drive to breed with the women of the competing group (in addition to breeding with their own)!

Maybe this is not so contrary as it seems. Women are the seed stock of your tribe. When they are gone, you are gone. You need to preserve them from the enemy taking them out and extincting your group. On the other hand, by stealing the enemy’s women, you weaken them, force them to carry your line, and possibly wipe them out altogether.

The result is the imperative in the title: Safeguard Your Own Women, Steal the Enemy’s Women.

All makes sense from a group competition POV.

On Female Emotionality/Illogicality

Alpha Unit comments in the I’m So Sick and Tired of This Shit thread:

Men don’t really know women at all.

Instead of actual knowledge and understanding of women, what they have are assumptions and myths.

“Women have no souls.” “Women are illogical.” “Women see you as friends after you’ve unsuccessfully dated them.”

How did these soulless, illogical beings gain the upper hand over you men? You, with all the soul and all the logic?

Could someone answer that?

Answer: They don’t have the upper hand. We guys rule, even still, probably. It’s a Man’s World, even 2010 USA. As far as the rest of the world, sure, of course we’re in charge.

Look, sure women are more emotionally directed, and men less so. Everyone knows this.

You’re out hunting a bunch of woolly mammoths. You can’t be getting all emotional. It’s dangerous. You have to stay calm and quiet so you can kill the beast. One of you might die in the assault on the mammoth. Man World is an intensely violent place. If guys were as emotional as females, we’d be beating and murdering each other all over the place.

You’re a caveman. You see some guys from another tribe. A dispute occurs, a potentially fatal one. Instead of flipping out and turning to all out war like women do, and then regretting it the next day, you negotiate your way out of it. What if we went to all out war, some of our guys got killed, then we sat down and cried about it the next day and went back to say we’re sorry to the other guys. They’d probably kill even more of us!

We can’t afford to be emotional. It’s deadly. Women can afford to be emotional, hate each other’s guts, start fights and wars with each other all the time, because females are not dangerous. Female aggression is nothing. What happens when women are having a catfight? Nothing. Someone cries, and everyone gets their feelings hurt. Oh, boo hoo. If a men had the same type of catfights that females do on a regular basis, someone’s going to get killed.

Female emotionality is best because her emotions probably pick the best provider for her and tell her when to stay with him and when to leave him. They probably also help keep him around.

Also, female emotionality is great for raising kids and building bonds with other females. Women create the network of civilization around the village. They string it all together through their friendships. Men are also lousy at friendships, so we don’t sow a connecting network together to make the village thing work.

I think men suck at raising kids. Women’s emotionality helps to tune them in to the baby or kid’s emotions and attend to his needs. If it were up to guys, a lot of kids would just die because we don’t care.

The sexes are different. Female emotionality can be hard to deal with at times, even for other women, but it was obviously evolutionarily necessary and probably still is. I don’t feel that either sex is maladaptive. Both sexes are for the most part probably very adaptive in most ways.

The sexes complement each other, yin and yang, and make a whole. Alone, each is incomplete. Together, the circle is complete.

Sure, men complain about women. Hell, women complain about women. But they can’t help it, and neither can we.

And female emotionality is easier to take and less destructive than male violence. Women are nutty and hard to take sometimes, but there’s always another one across the way to trade her in for, and anyway, males have tried to kill me. Not once, but repeatedly. I’m lucky I survived. No female has ever tried to kill me. Compared to male dangerousness, the breezy emotions of the female are a walk in the park.

Getting down to brass tacks, do you really want a world where the women all act like men? Forget it. It’s bad enough that 50% of the population are asshole males, can you imagine if the whole world was like that? Thank God that only half the world is male. Thank God females act like females and not males.

Female Rule Violates the Laws of Nature

In the provocatively titled The Cunts Versus the Men post, perceptive commenter Tyciol writes:

Maybe a better word than feminism would be ‘equalism’ or something?

Like, it’s relative to position. Women were certainly downtrodden in the past and lacking rights, so equalism would be feminist in that case.

But in the reverse scenario, if men could not vote and related things then equalism would have a masculinist agenda.

Suffrage and stuff to me has never been about focusing on women’s rights, but simply equality since they are also people and also have opinions which should be counted. Similarly, right to choice (abortion) to me is not about favouring women, but rather that people should not be forced to carry parasitic feti for months if they don’t wish to.

I’m pro-choice, and I’m all for equality for women in all of the sane ways. But I wonder if equality ever works. We offered women equality, and instead they took their equality and ran past the 50 yard line heading for our goalposts to try to dominate us and rule us. I guess it’s natural. Neither sex is going to be happy with mere equality. If you give women equality, they’re always going to use that step stool to try to install Female Rule. And I guess we asshole guys will always try to install Male Rule.

Sigh.

Nevertheless, equality is surely something to support. Better than equality: how about this? Rights. Not necessarily equality, but rights. No matter what we think of them, females have basic rights, and in most ways, they have the same basic rights as we do. So do gays, Blacks, lots of folks. It’s not a matter of liking. You don’t have like Black people; a lot of White people don’t. And a lot of straights are not too fond of gays. But how can we deny that gays and surely Blacks have a set of basic rights that any human does?

I have nothing against Female Rule in principle, assuming they were capable. But I don’t think they are. And I don’t want to live under Female Rule. The chicks will dig it (I guess! Or maybe they won’t?!), but it will suck for the guys. We already have a Matriarchy with the Politically Correct crowd, and honestly, it sucks.

Male Rule sort of sucks for women, but they seem to be happy, and the men surely are happy. Female Rule violates Nature* and seems to make both sexes increasingly miserable.

I don’t think that females ought to be allowed to install their Female Paradigm in society. Think about it. Is there any society that ever let the women rule? I can’t think of one. Why is that? Surely it must have been tried in the past. Not all human males are patriarchal shits, and a lot of us are lazy. Surely there were times in the past when the lazy guys said, “We give up. You do it. You rule. Go for it.” I assume it was tried in many cases in the past, and the result was the same as it is now: Chaos. In which case, the sane people realized that either you have Male Rule or you have Chaos.

Allowing the Male Paradigm to rule society works, and most societies work that way, but it also often violates women’s rights and keeps them down. But in a lot of these societies, like Hispanic ones and many other traditional societies, women seem to like living under Male Rule. You go to these places, and as long as Male Rule isn’t too evil, everyone seems happy. It’s like they know they are Living In Nature.

I don’t hear a lot of complaints from the Hispanic females around here about the Male Rule they live under. Women get to be feminine, men get to be masculine, and everyone is happy. I don’t think Hispanic women want to rule. They want some relative equality, at least in terms of earning power, and around here they are granted that. Hispanic women can make quite a bit of money, and some do here. But they’re still quite feminine.

OTOH, White women seem to have so much greater freedom than Hispanic women, but they seem to be so much more miserable! It’s like the more freedom you give women, the less happy they are, and the more they complain about Male Rule.

Even when the women are in charge, increasingly the case nowadays, the women keep complaining about the Patriarchy. As Female Rule deepens, the women get angrier and angrier (paradoxically as they get more and more rights and power!) and become more and more masculine. This upsets Nature, and Nature doesn’t tolerate defiance. She demands balance, just like in the forests and jungles.

As the women get increasingly masculine, the males will have to become increasingly feminine to compensate and create the Balance of Nature. As women become increasingly masculine, they get more and more unhappy, because it violates women’s own nature. On some level, the female organism knows that acting masculine is fucked up, and this throws the organism into disarray.

Of course, as males become increasingly feminine, they get more and more miserable too, because femininity violates man’s own nature. So you end up with Northern California White People, where even the straight people act like queers and dykes.

It follows from this scenario that you would see increasing situational and opportunistic homosexuality in both sexes. As males feminize, they engage in increasing amounts of homosexuality. As females masculinize, they also engage in increasing amounts of homosexuality.

As Female Rule deepens, women will increasingly reject persistent marriage and raise fatherless men. Once again, a violation of Nature. Nature demands that both males and females have fathers. Nature punishes those who defy her. She punishes fatherless males by turning them into criminals who lash out at the World As Surrogate For Missing Father. She punishes fatherless females by turning them into sluts, trying to screw their way to Daddy’s Missing Love.

Both criminals and sluts are often unhappy, probably because most men are not supposed to be criminals and most women are not supposed to be sluts. Both criminals and sluts frequently lead at least difficult and often tragic lives.

Women can have power, but only if they either don’t upset Male Rule or at least only try to be equal.

*I am applying Nature in the sense of Natural Law, especially the Catholic or philosophical sense. When I say something violates Nature, I mean it violates Natural Law – that is, it’s unnatural in terms of mankind’s evolution.

Of course violations of Natural Law occur, but as they violate our evolutionary imperative encoded in our genes, there will be ill effects, since humans are not meant to violate Natural Law. Violations of Natural Law will have consequences.

Feminine men and masculine women are miserable. Female Rule (matriarchy) violates Natural Law and results in chaos and even unhappiness for females, since even females dislike Matriarchy deep down inside because it’s unnatural. Fatherless families violate Natural Law and result in criminal boys and slut daughters, both miserable.

When I say something violates Natural Law, I mean it violates our evolutionary imperatives coded in our genes. The result will be unhappiness and pathology as our natural and genetic imperatives are violated, thwarted and twisted.

Body Odor and Race

This is a followup to the older piece, Do the Races Smell Different?

According to this interesting but very un-PC paper, Human Body Odor, which I was afraid to even write about, yes, they do.

Blacks seem to sweat more than other races. That they sweat more enables them to cool off better in a hot climate, as perspiration is a way of cooling yourself off. So Blacks are ideally adapted to staying cool in a very hot place, Africa, which is where they came from.

Whites sweat quite a bit too, but not as much as Africans.

Asians seem to sweat least of all, and the paper says that Asians are well-known for having little body odor. Asians actually have more active eccrine glands than Caucasians do, but due to the low number of osmidrotic apocrine glands in axilla (armpit), they have less axillary odor than other races. Asian apocrine glands are either poorly developed or nonexistent.

It’s not so much how much you sweat, but it has to do with the apocrine glands in the axilla, since it is from the axilla that the odor comes from. So there are glands for sweating and glands for producing odor, and they are different. Blacks have about 20% more apocrine glands as Whites, but the glands are larger, wider and more active in Blacks. Blacks also have more active eccrine glands. All other things being equal, Blacks will produce greater body odor when they sweat than Whites do.

Many people have noticed body odor differences in the races, but I never have, and I have a great nose. Then again I never played football with Black guys. This probably is not a problem with Blacks most of the time, as long as they are not sweating like pigs. On hot days, there’s always deodorant. I carry a stick around with me at all times and periodically whip it out and apply it during the summer.

I’m going to make this article available for download on the site since it’s a bit hard to find.

References

Hart, Robert. 1980. Human Body Odor. Nexus 1:1. Available for download on this site here.

If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.

Muslims Are Dumbfucks Too

Here.

In addition to all the other problems with Islam, and I believe that they are considerable, it turns out that Muslims are complete dumbfucks when it comes to science. As you can see in the article, Islam is opposed to the Theory of Evolution. It’s often said that this is yet another problem with Islamic fundamentalism, but actually the rejection of evolution is across the board with Muslims, with a majority, and possibly a vast majority, of Muslims rejecting Darwinism, including most moderate and liberal Muslims.

Like everything else between the West and Islam, Evolution is coded in the Muslim World as a tool of Western imperial hegemony. Battles are being fought all over the Muslim World, mostly in the moderate states, to remove evolution from the public school curriculum. These battles have been most prominent in moderate states like Turkey, Indonesia, Egypt and Lebanon. I assume that in the rest of Dumbfuck Land (excuse me, I mean the Muslim World) evolution is simply not taught in schools so there is no curriculum to remove.

Now that the battle against Idiot Christian Creationists has been all but won in the West (despite a 60% majority of Americans rejecting evolutionary theory), the next battle will move to the Muslim World. What is even more disturbing is that Islamic Creationism is being taken up by Muslim progressives, liberals and more secular types as some sort of a way to bridge Islam and science, religion and the secular world.

Belief in Evolution
Nation             % Believing in evolution
Iceland*           80
Denmark*           80
Sweden*            80
France*            80
United States**    40
Turkey**           25
Indonesia**        16
Pakistan**         14
Egypt**             8

*Smart countries
**Dumbshit countries

So, in addition to making people violent, (Yes, Islam makes people violent indeed.) Islam also makes people stupid. A stupid person is just an idiot, but a violent stupid person is a dangerous idiot, and that is another matter altogether.

Mountain Yellow-Legged Frogs in the Sierra Nevada

Repost from the old site.

I don’t write much about amphibians on here, but I am amphibian nut, in addition to being a mammal, reptile and bird nut. I would be a plant and insect nut too if I could only figure out how to identify them. I’m interested in fish, but they are a little harder to observe in the wild unless they are at the end of your hook.

Anyway, I have long taken an interest in amphibians here in California and to a much lesser extent, throughout the entire West. I am particularly interested in threatened and endangered amphibians here in the state.

The mountain yellow-legged frog has declined disastrously here in the state, starting with heavy fish stocking in the Sierras by pack mules, and then declining wildly with arial stocking of high country lakes via airplane that began after World War 2. This arial stocking has since proven to be one of the stupidest things that the California Department of Fish and Game has ever done.

Every year, countless fingerlings were dropped into lakes all up and down the Sierras, even though after a while almost all of these lakes had completely self-sustaining populations and many lakes saw few if any fishermen in a given year. Furthermore, the populations grew so high that the fish became stunted and malnourished.

In addition, they caused serious problems to the entire ecosystem of the Sierra. This is because in general, fish were absent from much of the high country in the Sierra. The exception was in the Southern Sierra, where the golden trout was native. In the North, Paiute Cutthroats and Lahontan Cutthroats were native to some streams.

Rainbow trout were present, but mostly at the lower elevations. Apparently the streams were so steep that trout were not able to climb up the rivers and creeks to even get into the high country. When men first came in numbers to the High Sierras in the late 1800’s, they found most waterways devoid of fish.

However, there were vast populations of amphibians, in particular mountain yellow-legged frogs. They were so numerous at many high country lakes that you could almost hardly walk around without almost stepping on them.

Before World War 2, limited fish stocking began in the Sierras. Stocking was done in the high country via mule trains and was not particularly effective. However, the stocking was already starting to cause declines in the mountain yellow-legged frog population.

After WW2, arial stocking began and soon turned into a comedy routine and a massive waste of taxpayer money. The CDFG was addicted to fish stocking in the Sierras and refused to stop it or even study it even when environmental groups demanded that they do so.

CDFG claimed that the fish stocking program was somehow exempt from CEQA, California’s landmark environmental law and probably the one law that California’s business class hates more than anything else. Business interests have been trying to get rid of CEQA for decades now, but it’s not going anywhere.

The reason environmental groups wanted the stocking stopped was because studies began to show that fish were having a devastating effect on the mountain yellow-legged frog (MYLF) populations. This is because the MYLF did not evolve in the presence of fish and hence had adopted no defenses against them. Wherever fish were present, MYLF was either not present or there in only reduced numbers.

The fact that CDFG dragged their heels on protecting the MYLF for ages shows that CDFG hardly has an environmentalist agenda at all. They almost never propose any species for threatened or endangered (T & E) status anymore, and usually reject almost all petitions by environmental groups to list anything. They hardly protect anything once it does get listed anyway, so one wonders what good the listing even does.

The CDFG screams that budget cuts means they can’t do anything at all, and another problem is that much of their budget is funded out of fishing and hunting licenses. I have met quite a few individual biologists who work for the agency and by and large they are good folks. I think that there are political appointees at the top that thwart just about anything reasonable getting done though.

It’s not well understood that California is not really a very liberal state in many ways. The voters are still mostly White and older and they are much more conservative than the population as a whole.

Despite blatherings by White Nationalists that Euro Whites are the only race that bother to protect any nonhuman life that lacks utilitarian use for man, since 1980 and US Whites voting rightwing, there has been no greater enemy of the environment and nonhuman life in the US than Whites.

These Whites have solidly supported a pro-business and pro-corporate agenda that has declared war on the environment and every living thing in it. If we let capitalists have their way, they will exterminate all nonutilitarian nonhuman life on this planet, all because those living things get in the way of making a buck.

Hence we have a state run by Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger that is almost totally beholden to corporate and business interests. This has been the case for every California governor since Jerry Brown.

Anyway, various hypotheses have been proposed for the decline of the MYLF. The non-native fish hypothesis has born out well. Pesticides from the Central Valley drifting up the mountains have also been suspected in the decline, along with the ozone hole.

There is some evidence that pesticides are related to MYLF declines, but testing the ozone hole hypothesis has shown that a thinning ozone layer is not frying frog eggs, even at high elevations. However, the thinning ozone layer has been having a bad effect on other frog and toad species. It seems that different species are variably effected by the thinning ozone layer.

Another hypothesis has been that a fungus called chytrid has been killing MYLF’s. This seems to be the case, and the killings are accelerating. Chytrid has been devastating frog and toad populations in various distant parts of the world, especially North, Central and South America and Australia.

An article was recently published in the journal Nature claiming that global warming was causing chytrid to spread. However, a subsequent article was published in another journal that seemed to indicate that global warming had not been proven to be behind chytrid’s spread. A cautious analysis seems to indicate that neither side has proven its case yet.

This particular type of chytrid seems to have escaped from a lab in Australia and has since been devastating frog and toad populations. First it pounded populations in Australia, then it moved to the Americas. Frogs and toads may not have evolved with this fungus, so it’s been hammering them hard. If any frogs and toads can survive the fungus, they may be able to pass on an immunity to it and enable the species to survive.

There have been widespread chytrid outbreaks in the Sierras in recent years. Just when some recent efforts to eliminate fish from some national park waters in the Sierra seemed to be bearing fruit, the fungus has been nailing the MYLF but hard. There have been 25-30% reductions of all types of frog populations in the Sierra over the past five years due to the fungus.

One theory is that the fungus has always been there but that recent environmental changes such as industrial and agricultural contaminants in the air, the frogs’ immune systems have been compromised, making them susceptible to the fungus.

However, some populations get hit very hard by the fungus for a while and then bounce back. The theory is that they have some sort of genetic resistance to the fungus. If this is true, then maybe the MYLF can survive in the Sierra after all.

As usual, the Bush Administration, the most anti-environmental President in recent history, refused to list the MYLF although it has been petitioned repeatedly. The most recent designation is “warranted but precluded “.

This is a sickening game that the Fish and Wildlife Service has been playing for some time now, dating back the “liberal” Clinton Era. The game says that the species qualifies for listing, but there are no funds to list it. It’s just a despicable bureaucratic game. How much does it cost to publish a listing notice in the Federal Register? Very little.

At the same time that the Administration pricks whine that there is no money to list any new species, they cynically and dishonestly cut the budget for listing new species! “Liberal” Bill Clinton started this bullshit, but Bush took it to overdrive. Sometimes, there is no lower life form than a politician.

Anyway, there are all sorts of species sitting on this idiotic warranted but precluded crap list for ages now. As the MYLF has declined by 93.3% in the last 100 years, that’s an endangered listing right there, and I’m not even a biologist. I know the listing criteria.

The Southern California population, which may be a separate species, is virtually extinct. It has declined by 99%. The Bush Administration did list this frog, but it’s almost gone anyway, as there are only 79 frogs left.

Probably no man has done more to save the MYLF than Roland Knapp, a Research Biologist at the University of California Sierra Nevada Aquatic Research Laboratory.

These guys associated with universities are usually pretty honest and non-corrupted, while the fisheries and wildlife biologists and botanists I met working for the local National Forest were some of the most awful, corrupted and dishonest people I have ever met. If you don’t care about species and whether they go extinct or not, don’t take a job with the feds dedicated to protecting them.

The local national forest, the Sierra National Forest, is doing absolutely nothing to my knowledge to protect MYLF and MYLF is almost gone from Sierra National Forests anyway. Truth is that even USFS wildlife and fisheries biologists are ecstatic if a rare species of extirpated or nearly extirpated from their forest. Now we don’t have to save it! Less paperwork! I’m not kidding.

It was Knapp’s research a while back that conclusively proved that it was nonnative fish that were driving the MYLF extinct.

Knapp’s MYLF blog. Knapp’s MYLF page.

Fishermen are understandably upset about fish removal projects in the Sierras. To date, these projects have been very limited. It is probable that the main reason that the Feds are not listing the frog is that a listing would mandate fish removal from many or most Sierra waters. Those fish were not even there to begin with, and the MYLF is only present at high elevations anyway. There are plenty of low elevations to fish in.

I’ve done fishing in the High Sierras myself, but if you are so shallow that you can’t hike into the High Sierras and just dig it for what it is without wetting a line, I don’t even think you should even be back there.

Even better, fish removal would probably reduce the number of humans in the backcountry. It’s mostly wilderness anyway, so why do we need tons of people back there? They can remove the fish from most of those waters for all I care. If there are no fish in the lakes, just bring a book or lie on your back or explore around all day.

Recent research indicates that there are three separate genetic units of the MYLF in the Sierras, a Northern, Central and Southern genetic unit. At present, these have been split off into a new species, the Sierra Yellow-Legged Frog , or Rana Sierrae.

The Southern California population and some southern Sierra populations have been split into a whole new species, the Southern Mountain Yellow-Legged Frog. Distribution maps for Rana Sierrae and Rana Muscosa. Rationale for the split. The two species are estimated to have split 2.4 million (!) years ago. Hence, the Mountain Yellow-Legged Frog, the subject of this post, no longer exists in its former form.

This split was done on the basis of an article last year (Vredenburg et al 2007). Whether the three separate genetic clades of the Sierra Yellow-Legged Frog warrant splits into subspecies has not yet been determined. In order to split into subspecies, usually a certain X genetic distance must be shown.

In February of this year, the Center for Biological Diversity petitioned again to list Rana Sierrae as endangered. Surely it qualifies.

Lots of cool frog, tadpole and terrain photos at the links.

References

Lips, Karen R., Diffendorfer, Jay, Mendelson III, Joseph R., Sears, Michael W. 2008. Riding the Wave: Reconciling the Roles of Disease and Climate Change in Amphibian Declines. PLoS Biology Vol. 6, No. 3.Pounds JA, Bustamante MR, Coloma LA, Consuegra JA, Fogden MPL, et al. 2006. Widespread Amphibian Extinctions From Epidemic Disease Driven by Global Warming. Nature 39: 161–167.

Vredenburg, V. T., R. Bingham, R. Knapp, J. A. T. Morgan, C. Moritz, and D. Wake. 2007. Concordant Molecular And Phenotypic Data Delineate New Taxonomy And Conservation Priorities For The Endangered Mountain Yellow-Legged Frog. Journal of Zoology 271:361-374.

Science Proves It: The Best Age For a Woman is 17

Studies all over the world have shown that men and boys find that the most beautiful women of all are aged 17. This makes sense because at that age a female is fertile, healthy and has a long, healthy breeding and mothering period ahead of her.

So, here in the US, what is normal is deemed sick, evil, perverted and pedophilic.

We have been discussing this theme here for a while now, and here is yet another take on it, this time from the UK.

Suffice to say that most of the outrage over grown men looking at young women and teenage girls comes from females. The fact that this perfectly normal behavior has become pathologized in feminized America shows you what happens when you let women take over your society: catastrophe.

This disaster will continue apace until enough non-mangina males and real women (not feminists) rise up and overthrow the Female Dictatorship that we labor under, restoring a more normative unbiased rule of law in which neither the male nor the female view of sex is prejudiced or given preference.

"There Was An Old Woman," by Alpha Unit

Latest by Alpha Unit. Pretty interesting stuff! We have been discussing on here for awhile why human females live on past menopause (or past their age of “usefulness” to put it brutally). No one seems to exactly know why. The latest research, cited by AU below, is about as good an explanation as any that I’ve read.
One good evolutionary reason for menopause is that past a certain age in Paleolithic times, an older woman was quite likely to die during childbirth. Menopause had survival value for females in that it allowed them to survive by shutting off the reproductive organs around the age at which childbirth becomes quite deadly.
On the other hand, these women have already had kids when they were younger, so where’s the evolutionary value (since her genes are already passed on anyway, even though she’s dead)? It may be that in tribes where the women did have go through menopause, the older women simply died. The death of the grandmothers was so harmful to the group that these groups went out.
Some tribes that evolved menopause managed to keep the grandmas around, and thereby failed to go extinct, passing their genes on. Any tribe that goes extinct is evolutionarily useless. This suggests that grandmothers had survival value for the tribe as a whole. And what might that value have been? These questions are very difficult to answer, but it’s fun to play around with them.
It is one of the most bizarre (and annoying) commercials I’ve seen on TV.
The California-based HMO Kaiser Permanente advertises itself with images of post-menopausal females, including a cheerleader, and a singer intoning in the background: “When I grow up, I wanna be an old woman….”
What?
I mean, I hope to be an old woman one day, since the alternative is to drop dead right now. But what is so wonderful about being an old woman? My mom would know, I suppose. But I have the feeling she wouldn’t want me to ask her. If I did, she would probably smile at me and say, “You’ll see.”
What good is an old woman, anyway?
Researchers have been trying to figure this out for decades now. Apparently there shouldn’t be any old women. The Grandmother Hypothesis, mentioned here , is an attempt to explain why human females survive past menopause. Supposedly the older females help nurture their grandchildren, who benefit from their accumulated wisdom and expertise.
But there are skeptics. They point out that these older females use up resources that could be going to the younger generations, offsetting any benefit the younger ones get from having them around.
Maybe what matters isn’t what Grandmother can do for anybody but why she went through menopause in the first place.
Researchers at the Universities of Cambridge and Exeter published an explanation last March. In summary, they say that females go through menopause in order to prevent sexual competition between themselves and the younger females in the family. According to the press release:

In natural fertility populations, women on average have their first baby at 19 years and their last baby at 38 years; in other words, women stop breeding when the next generation starts to breed.

One of the researchers explained that women everywhere experience a rapid decline in fertility after the age of 40, and, on average, stop having children about ten years before the onset of menopause.

It also helps to explain why in some societies (particularly in Africa and Asia), women are required by social law to stop having children when their first grandchild is born.

And why should older females bow out of the competition?
Reproduction is more taxing on the female body, obviously, than on the male body. It’s probably better for babies to be carried by and delivered from younger, fitter female bodies. So my guess is that at the time daughters are in their prime childbearing years, menopause switches on for mothers, knocking them out of the game.
This is probably the way grandmothers really help their grandchildren. Any accumulated wisdom and expertise they bring are just secondary benefits.
Older women manage to bow out of reproduction and yet live on. And nobody seems able to figure out exactly why.
Maybe those old women in the commercial know but aren’t telling.
Could be that they know there’s no reason to be jealous of those younger women being pursued by older men. They know those younger women have something to look forward to: menopause.
As for the older men…what are they going to get that’s nearly as liberating?

“There Was An Old Woman,” by Alpha Unit

Latest by Alpha Unit. Pretty interesting stuff! We have been discussing on here for awhile why human females live on past menopause (or past their age of “usefulness” to put it brutally). No one seems to exactly know why. The latest research, cited by AU below, is about as good an explanation as any that I’ve read.

One good evolutionary reason for menopause is that past a certain age in Paleolithic times, an older woman was quite likely to die during childbirth. Menopause had survival value for females in that it allowed them to survive by shutting off the reproductive organs around the age at which childbirth becomes quite deadly.

On the other hand, these women have already had kids when they were younger, so where’s the evolutionary value (since her genes are already passed on anyway, even though she’s dead)? It may be that in tribes where the women did have go through menopause, the older women simply died. The death of the grandmothers was so harmful to the group that these groups went out.

Some tribes that evolved menopause managed to keep the grandmas around, and thereby failed to go extinct, passing their genes on. Any tribe that goes extinct is evolutionarily useless. This suggests that grandmothers had survival value for the tribe as a whole. And what might that value have been? These questions are very difficult to answer, but it’s fun to play around with them.

It is one of the most bizarre (and annoying) commercials I’ve seen on TV.

The California-based HMO Kaiser Permanente advertises itself with images of post-menopausal females, including a cheerleader, and a singer intoning in the background: “When I grow up, I wanna be an old woman….”

What?

I mean, I hope to be an old woman one day, since the alternative is to drop dead right now. But what is so wonderful about being an old woman? My mom would know, I suppose. But I have the feeling she wouldn’t want me to ask her. If I did, she would probably smile at me and say, “You’ll see.”

What good is an old woman, anyway?

Researchers have been trying to figure this out for decades now. Apparently there shouldn’t be any old women. The Grandmother Hypothesis, mentioned here , is an attempt to explain why human females survive past menopause. Supposedly the older females help nurture their grandchildren, who benefit from their accumulated wisdom and expertise.

But there are skeptics. They point out that these older females use up resources that could be going to the younger generations, offsetting any benefit the younger ones get from having them around.

Maybe what matters isn’t what Grandmother can do for anybody but why she went through menopause in the first place.

Researchers at the Universities of Cambridge and Exeter published an explanation last March. In summary, they say that females go through menopause in order to prevent sexual competition between themselves and the younger females in the family. According to the press release:

In natural fertility populations, women on average have their first baby at 19 years and their last baby at 38 years; in other words, women stop breeding when the next generation starts to breed.

One of the researchers explained that women everywhere experience a rapid decline in fertility after the age of 40, and, on average, stop having children about ten years before the onset of menopause.

It also helps to explain why in some societies (particularly in Africa and Asia), women are required by social law to stop having children when their first grandchild is born.

And why should older females bow out of the competition?

Reproduction is more taxing on the female body, obviously, than on the male body. It’s probably better for babies to be carried by and delivered from younger, fitter female bodies. So my guess is that at the time daughters are in their prime childbearing years, menopause switches on for mothers, knocking them out of the game.

This is probably the way grandmothers really help their grandchildren. Any accumulated wisdom and expertise they bring are just secondary benefits.

Older women manage to bow out of reproduction and yet live on. And nobody seems able to figure out exactly why.

Maybe those old women in the commercial know but aren’t telling.

Could be that they know there’s no reason to be jealous of those younger women being pursued by older men. They know those younger women have something to look forward to: menopause.

As for the older men…what are they going to get that’s nearly as liberating?

New Erectus Skull in Georgia

Here.
Homo Erectus is not the name for guys with short hair and mustaches running around San Francisco as you might have guessed (Joke!), but actually it was an early member of the human line, Homo. We are Homo Sapiens sapiens, just the latest in a long line. Homo Erectus was an earlier model. He was a man, but not a modern man. Sort of like an earlier model. Going back further, you run into the Australopithecines in Africa, like the famous Lucy specimen. This is not yet a man, but it is not an ape either. It’s sort of an ape-man, or an ape turning into a human. That’s the best way to describe them.
Anti-evolutionist idiots like to yell that we have never found the missing link, but Lucy is pretty darn close. Further, going back even further to about 6 million YBP*, they have found what looks like the closest thing to a missing link so far, an ape that is starting to turn into a man-ape. Proconsul is a famous fellow. He is the first of the apes, living in Africa about 16 million YBP, apparently a split from the monkeys. Yes, monkeys and apes are completely different folks, and this is important to keep in mind. Don’t mix them up!
Erectus was always thought to have evolved in Africa out of a similar line of early Homo types, most of which just went extinct. Probably about 2 million YBP or so. He then is said to have to moved out into Eurasia, and Asia, particularly China and Indonesia. The famous Java Man and Peking Man are Homo Erectuses from Indonesia and China respectively. Java Man was around as early as 1.8 million YBP. And Erectus is living in the Caucasus around the same time.
What’s curious about this skull in Georgia in the Caucasus is that it is said to predate Erectus skulls in Africa. Further, his brain is 40% smaller than African Erectus’ brain. The smaller size implies that he was an earlier model that gave rise to the more advanced model in Africa. The fact that he is earlier also implies that Erectus arose in Eurasia and moved to Africa later on and then did a lot of evolution there, eventually giving rise to Homo Sapiens (Yes, we came directly from Erectus).
The White racists love this, because they really hate the Out of the Africa (OOA) model. Scratch a White person dissing the OOA model nowadays, and you often find a racist motivation. A while back, multiregionalism was a valid perspective, but now it’s been shot all to Hell with excellent models showing that all humans have come from an African Eve that lived in SW Africa (around Namibia and Angola) about 180,000 YBP.
The racists just can’t get over it. “Grandpa was a nigger”* is just too much for their silly weak egos to handle. In contrast, the Asians that I have told about this seem mostly to handle it well. One Chinese guy shrugged his shoulders and said, “Yeah? So what? So we came from Blacks? Big deal. If you go back far enough, we were frogs. Why should I get upset about this.” I told my Mom about this and she laughed and said, “See? Asians don’t get upset about it because they are smarter than us Whites.” I think she’s right.
It’s important to note that this latest find does not shoot OOA at all. All it suggests is that Erectus sprang up in Eurasia. Out of what? Obviously out of prior Homo types. Where did these prior Homo types in Eurasia come from? Africa, where they all came from. See what I mean? Does this find shoot the African Eve Theory? Nope. Even if Erectus rose in Eurasia, he moved back to Africa, evolved a great deal down there, and eventually gave rise to Sapiens in Africa, who gave rise to us. We still all came from one African woman 180,000 YBP. The Georgian find doesn’t change that one bit.
Homo Sapiens idaltu was an early Homo Sapiens that lived about 160,000 YBP in Ethiopia. Although he appears to have gone extinct, nevertheless, he seems to have given rise to Homo Sapiens sapiens. The date of H.S.s is not well known, but he dates back at least to the Khoisan genetic line, which dates to 110,000 YBP. Khoisan are Bushmen.
Nevertheless, the 110,000 YBP date is challenged by a recent find called the Omo Remains, which were also found in Ethiopia. Apparently Homo Sapiens sapiens (modern man), Omo dates all the way back to 195,000 YBP. Much remains to be sorted out.
Idaltu was quite robust, but he looked much more like a modern human than Neandertalis in Europe.
Despite a lot of yelling on the part of fans of the theory, there seems to be zero evidence of Neandertal genes in modern humans. This is also a fave theory of White racists – that White people came directly from Neandertalis, thereby avoiding the sticky OOA theory which claims White folks had some Negro ancestors. Even Paleothilically, that’s a hard sell to White racists.
Some of the hardcores take it a lot further and imply that the races of man actually go back 1-2 million YBP. Whites to some proto-White Erectus, Asians to some proto-Asian Erectus dude, Blacks to African Erectus. This theory seems to me to be quite silly.

Homo Sapiens Idaltu, an African ancestor of modern man who appears to have given rise to Homo Sapiens sapiens, who is that funny looking slightly Ape Man critter you see when you look in the mirror.
Homo Sapiens Idaltu, an African ancestor of modern man who appears to have given rise to Homo Sapiens sapiens, who is that funny looking slightly Ape Man critter you see when you look in the mirror.

Homo Rhodesiensis is a very interesting fellow. He lived from 125,000-300,000 YBP in Africa. The best skull was found in Rhodesia in 1921 and it’s an excellent specimen. The best theory seems to be that Rhodesia Man had branched off from Erectus proper into a more advanced line. It also looks like Rhodesia Man gave rise to Idaltu, and Idaltu gave rise to you and me.
Rhodesian Man from a 1932 newspaper. He's actually much more progressive than Neandertal Man in Europe.
Rhodesian Man from a 1932 newspaper. He's actually much more progressive than Neandertal Man in Europe.

The line looks something like this:
Erectus -> Rhodesia Man -> Homo Sapiens Idaltu -> Homo Sapiens sapiens (you, me, Mom and the kids).
Rhodesia Man is quite a robust fellow and has features that have led some to call him “The African Neandertal.” However, this analysis is not proper. Instead he seems to be about halfway in between a Neanderthal and a modern man = he is much more gracile and progressive than Neandertal, who’s a bit of a brute. Idaltu is yet more gracile and progressive than Rhodesia Man, and H.S.s. is yet more gracile and progressive than Idaltu. The evolution of man is a move from archaic robustness towards progressive gracility.
A model of Rhodesian Man, who gave rise to Homo Sapiens idaltu, who gave rise to you and me. As you can see, he is a robust fellow.
A model of Rhodesian Man, who gave rise to Homo Sapiens idaltu, who gave rise to you and me. As you can see, he is a robust fellow.

Homo Sapiens heidelbergensis (found in Heidelberg, Germany) just seems to be a European Rhodesia Man. Looks like Rhodesia Man rose in Africa, then moved out of Africa to Europe. H.s.h. is quite a confusing fellow, and I’m not going to go into him here because I don’t understand him well.
The comments after the article are somewhat interesting.
*Years before present.
**Used sardonically. Please don’t take offense.

Why Do Women Orgasm?

Here.
Along with lots of other questions. Evolutionary biologists are looking into these matters, which all evolved in Africa, so we get to blame or praise Blacks for all the stuff below. For big tits on women, I say thank YOU Blacks! For female orgasms, women the world over, even Aryan women I suppose, stand up and throw a deafening shout out to Black folks. Who says Blacks never gave us anything?
For prolonged periods, many women will find one more thing to curse those darn Negroes about
Such as, why are females’ boobs so huge? No other mammal has such huge and basically useless boobs. There’s no reason for them to be so massive, and most of the tissue is just fat that serves no purpose. Many explanations are offered for huge tits, but none of them seem to make much sense.
Why do women bleed so much when they menstruate? Only a few other mammals bleed much. A few bleed a bit midcycle, but none do like human women. What’s the purpose of sloughing off the entire uterine lining every month? To me, the best explanation offered was that females that sloughed off the entire lining and grew a fresh new one every month had the best chances of implanting an egg. Many would-be pregnancies fail due to failure of the sperm to implant in the embryo. Nothing is noticeable, it just looks like another period at the end of the month. But conceivably an older lining is more likely to fail.
In our nearest relatives, the Great Apes, it is quite clear when the female is ovulating and available for pregnancy – her backside swells up like a balloon basically saying, “Come fuck me guys! All the fucks you want, no charge until the sale ends!” In contrast, it is either impossible or nearly impossible for others to know when a woman is ovulating. I assume it’s totally impossible for a male to figure this out.
Even more bizarre is that the time of fertility is hidden even to the woman. Women have no idea when they can get knocked or not, really, despite what the Catholics say. It’s a mystery hidden even to the woman herself. Why? Many explanations are offered for concealed ovulation, but none of them seemed to make much sense to me.
Same thing with female orgasm. Guys need to come. If we don’t, no babies get made. But female orgasm does not seem to serve any purpose. Orgasm serves no fitness purpose in females and other a few other female mammals do it too. There is another issue, and that is that female orgasm has unfortunate tendency in quite a few women to be notoriously unreliable – a 44 year old girlfriend of mine, who loved sex, by the way, despite the fact that she never got off – told me that she had had one orgasm in her life, at age 15. She ain’t the only one.
Then we come to menopause. Women can no longer have kids past age 50, but most other female mammals can bear kids far into old age. No other mammals have menopause except for the short-finned pilot whale. I did not find any of the explanations for menopause very satisfactory either.

More On Hinduism, Race, Caste and the "Aryan Invasion"

The comment below is from an Indian poster on this popular post. I agree with most of what he says. First of all, I don’t think that the Aryans pushed the Dravidians to the South. There are Dravidian types and mixed types all over North India.
Points 2 and 3 are self-evident.
I have always felt that Hinduism was nothing more than the ancient religion of India, and there is good evidence for this. Clearly it predates the Aryans. It’s not necessarily as old as India, since India is as old as dirt, but clearly it goes back so far that we can hardly even say when it begins.
Ancient Iran also had a caste system, and so did their ancient religion. Yazidism, one of the oldest major religions known to man, possibly dating back 10,000 years, has caste and origins in Iran. The suggestion is that caste is a regional phenomenon across India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Iran and Northern Iraq. Afghanistan lacks caste, but until the Communist revolution was a semi-feudal society.
The fact remains that Aryan languages displaced Dravidian languages to the South, and all of North India is Aryan-speaking in general, and the people of the North are lighter than the people of the South, and this needs to be explained somehow. Obviously, prior to the Aryan Invasion, Dravidian languages were spoken all over North India. Either their speakers dropped Dravidian in favor of Indo-Iranian or they moved south. Possibly both of these occurred.

1) Vedas are not everything in Hinduism, though they form some of the core. There are many books written in ancient mathematics and science in the post-Vedic period which are as relevant to the history of Hindus, if not more than the Vedas. Look at the books written by Bhaskara (there were two Bhaskaras recorded in history), Aryabhatta, Apastamba, Baudhayana, Varahmihira and several other authors.
Some of them have had their base south of the Vindhyas, which indicates the migration of the culture of the Vedic people southward. I am guessing the actual migration of Vedic people might also have taken place either before or after the completion of the writing of the Vedas (500-1000 BCE). Read about the myth of Agastya and his followers and the Vindhyas.
2) Skin color depends on the climate and gradually over generations (maynot be 3 but lets say about 30 generations) it is sure to change.
3) People speaking different languages derived from a root language (or speaking the root language itself) need not share genetic origins or race. For example, I am an Indian, and if I speak or write in English, a European-originated language, that does not make me European. I bet the same applies to speakers of Indo-European languages.
4) Based on several references in the Vedas against dark-skinned tribes, one cannot assume that all the scriptures of the Hindus (the Sruti and Smriti) were written by the highly-advanced fair-skinned race-preserving cohort known as Aryans who came down from central Asia and pushed the locals down south.
One severe contradiction to this simplistic theory is how come there are references of lower-caste tribals getting upgraded to the higher caste of Brahmins (like Valmiki, Vishwamitra) in the epics written by these same racially-finicky people (the Aryans) that was allowed to be published without censorship. The racial references in the Vedas are at best ambiguous. If the Aryans were the vanguards of Hinduism and they were the creators of the scriptures, how did dark-skinned gods like Vishnu and Shiva find their ways into the texts.
More likely they should have been shown as demons given the benchmarks by which they would have decided. Given all these, there surely exists a possibility of a fair-skinned race coming down from Afghanistan or central Asia and contributing to the creation of Hindu scriptures and merging with the locals, in fact there could be several races of this type migrating in at different points of time. But to say that they did this at the expense of a dark-skinned race or an indigenous race is pure baloney, given the facts.
In fact the genesis of Hindu scriptures could have come from different parts (including the non-Indo-European parts which may include Sanskrit speakers of Dravidian origin) of the Indian subcontinent. Likewise, tribes that had originally entered from the northern borders of India (one of them being the Aryans) must have migrated all over the country giving an inseparable and indistinguishable genetic mixture that we know as the people of India today.
Also the caste system in ancient India up to a period must have been rather fluid and based more on occupation than ancestry as is the popular notion. Hinduism (at least the history and references from Hinduism) seems to have a much greater tolerance for skin color and caste than is touted to be.

One More Reason White Nationalists Are All Insane

They are wrong, wrong, wrong on this, “Race-mixing is evolutionarily abnormal and nonadaptive” crap. I have no idea whether it’s non-adaptive or not, as opposition to race mixing has hardly been tried by humans. The whole history of man is one of the endless Race Cuisinart. WN’s argue that this history of man is bad, and that we all should have been breeding ourselves as completely pure lines all this time. But why?
Looking at evolutionary biology, there is no benefit whatsoever to any species that propagates a pure line and refuses to race-mix.
Evolutionary biology and in particular conservation biology is adamant that it is necessary for species to race mix, at least within the species. Subspecies are valuable due to their contribution to the species.
Evolutionarily significant geographical units are once again good for the species due to their particular genetic adaptations. The more genetic diversity, the more healthy the species. The less, the more islandization, etc. as the genetic diversity gets low. A species with low genetic diversity is considered to be on its way out.
Now, WN’s argue that this hold true for every species but man, I guess because they are quoting the Bible now, or as eugenicists, they figure that evolution is over anyway. But if, as the eugenicists insist, evolution is really over, then why fret over race-mixing and differential breeding rates between rich and poor?
All animal and plant breeders operate on the principle of endless race mixing. They breed strains forever and ever to come up with very excellent strains, the most perfect, the best strains, through this evil mechanism known as race-mixing. If race-mixing doesn’t work, why does every plant and animal breeder on Earth swear by it? It works great in all animals, except for humans? Why would that be anyway?
Race mixing is the way of man. It’s basic tribal behavior, and it’s been quite adaptive for thousands of years. See here.

A tribe which celebrates its male conquests of alien women but closely and jealously protects its own women from alien men is going to spread its genes much more successfully than a neighboring tribe which is indifferent about who impregnates its women.

In fact the latter tribe will over the course of time carry more and more of the former tribe’s genes as its wombs are colonized and its resources and fitness are used to care for the former tribe’s offspring.

After a while there would be no tribes left that are indifferent and it becomes a race to see who has the stronger double standard.
We are all descendants of this process.

We are out of the jungle now and living in the urban jungle instead. You think we are all that different? Forget it. We are mammals, like cats and dogs. Does your house cat act all that different from an alley cat? Not so much.

Paper Adds Support to Aryan Invasion Theory

Note: Repost from the old blog.
The notion that an “Aryan Invasion” that occurred 3,500 years ago in India and subsequently shaped the physical and religious landscape of the country is a controversial one, but it is steeped in Indian socio-cultural politics. Though it is uncontroversial outside of India, a huge debate has heated up inside India.
On the one side are the Dalits and their allies. The Dalits claim that they were the original Indians and practiced some sort of a nice, Utopian religion. I don’t know if it was Goddess worship, but I guess it was something like that. The Dalits really hate Hinduism, because Hindus have decided that Dalits are born and doomed through life to be lower than whale shit, and that’s at the bottom of the ocean.
So the Dalits say that these Aryans (White folks) invaded down from the steppes to the north and west (possibly Tajikistan or around Iran) and conquered a large part of India. They brought with them Hinduism and caste. They made themselves the lighter Brahmin caste and made the darker folks lower castes, and the darkest of all were made into Dalits. So the Aryan invasion started the whole mess.
Hindu nationalists (Hindutvas) love their Hindu religion and feel that it can do no wrong, so they dislike this Aryan invasion theory. Their whole line is that there was no Aryan invasion. Hinduism was native to India and was not some wicked religion brought by evil lighter-skinned dudes. This theory is also very popular with Brahmins, almost all of whom support caste, no matter what they tell you.
White nationalists, some high caste Indian racialists and Afrocentrists all support the Aryan invasion theory. White nationalists feel that there are two races in India – light-skinned cool guy “Aryans” in the north who are smart and get everything done in India, to the extent that anything gets done there, and darker Dravidians, who are apparently inferior muds or something.
In reality, there are just Indians of varying shades. The ones towards the northwest to tend to be more European-looking and lighter, and the ones heading to the south and east from the northwest to tend to get darker and more Dravidian looking. However, there are plenty of dark-skinned North Indians with varying degrees of Dravidian features, and in the south, there are a lot of lighter folks with more European features.
The “Aryans” and “Dravidians” have gotten so mixed in over 3,500 years that these categories no longer make much sense, except to idiots. In which case, they are encouraged to continue using them.
High caste Indian racialists go along with this, and hang out in White nationalist fora trying to convince White nationalists that funny looking light-skinned Indians are really just White people too, albeit with patchouli oil and a taste for curry. White nationalists are dubious about admitting wogs into their midst of their White purity.
Afrocentrists like this theory because they moronically think that Dravidians are Black folks. Except that they are not. Actually, all Indians are pretty closely related and are very distant from Africans – they are no closer to Africans than anyone else on Earth. Any resemblance to Africans is just convergence, genetic drift or coincidence.
Well, India was populated by all these really cool Indian Black folks and then evil White dudes came in, brought an evil White Supremacist religion called Hinduism, and cruelly imposed it on the darkies.
In the midst of all of this swarming intellectual idiocy, it falls to the scientists to add some sense to the discussion.
This interesting paper (available on this blog here) adds to the evidence for an Aryan invasion.
They did find that higher-caste folks tended to be lighter than lower-caste Indians, but that was just a trend. There are light-skinned low-caste Indians in the northwest and many of the Brahmins of South India are quite dark.
They also found a trend for lighter skin and more European features and genes towards the northwest and darker skin, more indigenous features and more Asian genes and one moved to the south and east. The paper felt that they had evidence for a large introgression of European-looking peoples maybe 3000-4000 years ago, though things have gotten pretty mixed up since.
Other papers studying the genetics of India have concluded Indians have been evolving, more or less in situ without a lot of outside inputs, for 15-20,000 years (call it 17,000 years). The result has been this endlessly varying type we call the East Indian. And where did the Indian stock come from prior to 17,000 years ago?
The authors were not sure, but they felt that the seed for the stock that started to grow the modern Indian tree came from the Middle East 17,000 years ago.
India, along with North Africa, the Caucasus and the Middle East, is also one of main staging grounds for the evolution of Caucasians and proto-Caucasians from 39,000-52,000 years ago. In particular, there was a movement out of India to North Africa 30,000 years ago which probably helped to create the Berbers.
There are also other, lesser known influences on the people of India and Pakistan. The Mohajirs in Uttar Pradesh are heavily Persian and Arab. Former Pakistani President Musharaff is a Mohajir, so his background was mostly Arab and Iranian.
Mohajirs are the Muslims that fled India to Pakistan during the bloody partition in 1947. They have since suffered a lot of persecution in Pakistan and are not all that well-liked there. They have set up their own patronage system, along with patronage political parties, that benefit them and only them.
We see an interesting thing in the far western states of Haryana and Rajasthan. Possibly 50% of the population of Haryana and probably all of Rajasthan is related to Scythians from 1,500-2,000 yrs ago. The Scythians were probably the same as the Ossetians of today. Long ago, the Ossetians were known as the Alans, horse-riding nomads of the Central Asian steppes.
There are some theories that try to connect to the Alans to Japan, especially to the Caucasian-appearing Samurai caste, in an invasion centuries years ago. This rests on similarities between Alan names and legends and those of the Samurai. At present, the Alan-Japanese theory remains little more than a controversial hypothesis.
The Caucasian appearance of the Samurai class is probably due more to their Ainu roots than to any Alan invasion.
Even today, the Japanese ruling class looks different (some say, more Caucasian) than the rest of the Japanese, who are closer to the Yayoi, rice-farmers from Korea who invaded 2,300 years ago and conquered the island, displacing the Ainu. The Ainu, despite superficial Caucasian appearances, are actually anthropologically Australoids close to Aborigines. Genetically, they are Asians.

References

Bamshad M, Kivisild T, Watkins WS, Dixon ME, Ricker CE, Rao BB, Naidu JM, Prasad BV, Reddy PG, Rasanayagam A, Papiha SS, Villems R, Redd AJ, Hammer MF, Nguyen SV, Carroll ML, Batzer MA, Jorde LB, 2001. Genetic Evidence on the Origins of Indian Caste Populations. Genome Res 11: 994–1004. Download on this blog here.

16-23 and 33-39

Repost from the old site.
Those are two figures for the ages at which something peaks in each of the sexes in human beings. Males peak at 16-23 and females peak at 33-39. After the male peak, there is a long slow decline down to some pretty low levels. For females, there is a decline, but not much of one, and the female level remains fairly high even into very old age, and I mean the 80’s.
We are talking sex, sex drive to be precise. Actually, they called it sexual responsiveness, and I am not sure what that means. It’s interesting that we think that elderly women are pretty much asexual beings, when their sex drive, or responsiveness, whatever that is, is only somewhat lower than it was at their peak.
People have whispered about this for some time, and if you have ever dated a ready and willing 35-40 year old woman, I think you know what I mean. They’re like the Eveready Bunny, once you wind them up and get them started, they want to go on all night, 7 AM rush hour be damned.
I am wondering what the evolutionary meaning of all of this is. Men are going to die young, so have the drive peak early, then if the guys dies, so what, maybe the woman can raise the kid on her own?
For the woman, in her prime child-bearing years, you don’t want the drive too high, or she will wander off with every guy who comes along. Later, as her looks decline into her 30’s, the male partner is tempted to wander in search of younger pastures.
Hence the female drive kicks into overdrive to dig the claws and squeeze him tight to home. She needs him around as a provider. Kids are grown and raised pretty much, but she still wants a man? What gives? And why does the female drive stay so high through life even into old age? What’s the advantage? Does an old cave woman have a hard time making it on her own, while an older cave guy can has more of a chance?
Higamous hogamous, women are monogamous. Higamous pigamous, men are polygamous. Neat little saying, but isn’t it more or less true across all cultures, all races and through all times? The woman must be coded to monogamy, for if she runs off with every Cave Man Dreamboat who strolls past the cave, the kids never get raised and they will die.
Males who sowed their oats far and wide impregnated more females than the “one woman man” types. The Lotharios couldn’t raise all those kids, and probably a lot of the kids died, but enough of them survived that his Casanova genes get passed on.
Or maybe many primitive societies like the typical village in New Guinea. One guy, the chief, has lots of wives. A lot of guys are losers in the New Guinea singles game and aren’t getting any at all. The Satyr-in-Chief is coded for promiscuity, and those are the randy genes he is handing down. After a while most of the guys are really horny all the time, even those who are striking out.
A lot of these Chief types are probably pretty sociopathic too, as are the guys who are just running around boffing every cavewoman in sight. Maybe after a while, the clan just gets together and kills the philandering bastard. But he’s already impregnated a number of females.
Hence, sociopathy, which doesn’t seem that adaptive, is passed on genetically and survives even today in the form of gansta rap, corporate executives and reptilian creatures called lawyers.
Much ink has been spilled about how humans are naturally monogamous, mostly by romantic types and women. But I doubt it, and I think this is an exercise in wishful thinking. Women tend towards serial monogamy at the very least. In a tribal situation, keeping the man around may not be so important if food is gathered and eaten communally.
Daddy goes out and hunts and kills animals with the guys, throws the meat in the pot and everyone eats. So he’s not with his baby-momma anymore, so what?
The kid is with Mom and there’s food for both, and that’s all that counts.
As an example of a swinging-style Paleolithics, let us look at the Ache, a tribe in Paraguay that was living in a pre-contact style until 1972 (Hill and Hurtado 1976). By age 30, your average Ache female had been married ten times, usually for about a year or so. A lot of the kids die.
The Ache were often not even really sure who the baby Daddy was. Whichever noble savage the Ache woman had been sleeping with the most in the month prior to her periods stopping was considered to be the Primary Father by the rule of probability.
Other randy tribesman she had slept with in the entire year prior to giving birth, including during pregnancy (!), are called Secondary Fathers. There might be a number of these guys. To the growing kid, all these guys are just known as dear old Dad. The Primary Father is likely to play a greater role in raising the child.
The reason for the two types of fathers is that the Ache, unfortunately, had not completely figured out the laws of impregnation. They were clear that the Primary Father played a necessary and sufficient role, known as “putting it (the baby) in her”. However, the other guys she had sex with, including during pregnancy, were thought to have somehow contributed some of their essence to the fetus. At least they didn’t believe in storks.
The tribe had also codified infanticide. Suppose Mommy had a 3 year old child. Then she has another kid. Well, maybe food is short, so she tells the 3 year old, “Hey look, we only have enough food for you and not enough for your baby brother you are so deathly jealous of. So I’m sure you will happy to know that I am going to take baby brother out tomorrow and kill him.”
Kid grows up knowing Mom killed his brother, but it doesn’t bother him much. It’s just life in the jungle, hey. There are worse threats. Nowadays, mental health professionals are convinced that having your Mom kill your baby brother when you were 3 years old would be a sufficient trauma to cause lasting psychological scars and would require extensive therapy. This is an empirical fact just how now?
Primitive people often have developed an excellent sense of memorizing distant visual objects. Bushmen, with otherwise very low IQ’s (57 IQ)1, are the world’s best at this. Then comes another very low IQ group (65 IQ)2, the Aborigines. Eskimos, with a much higher IQ of 94 – near the world average – have a similar advantage.
Looking at Ache life, we can see why. A major cause of mortality is the very thing Mom warned you about as a boy: not making it home before dark. For the Ache, if you are out in the jungle and you don’t make it back to the village by night, you may just die, as temperatures often plunge very low in the evenings.
Plus, sleeping out in the bush, you stand a good chance of being midnight snack for some jaguar. From which felinophobia may have developed?
The saga of the Ache inform us that the pathologies of the urban Underclass that so horrify middle-class Americans – feral males running around like dogs screwing and impregnating females far and wide and then not bothering to support any of them, women having several kids all by different fathers, and last and most incomprehensibly, mothers who murder their own children – may not be so alien and animalistic after all.
People who do these things are told to, “Quit acting like animals and start acting like humans!”. The terrifying thought being, “acting like humans” may be precisely what the Underclass is doing.
These behaviors may simply be genetically coded leftovers from our tribal past. Those of us who don’t stoop so low are just not giving in to our basest tribal urges. Those who do may be just “acting like normal Homo Sapiens”, discouraging as it seems.
On the streets of Detroit and in the jungles of Paraguay, life can be a short, nasty and brutish affair. In our folly, we look down at the Paleolithics. The cultured metrosexual Western man is merely the rudest tribesman in a mirror, and little less.

Notes

1. Over three separate studies.
2. Over 17 separate studies.

References

Hill, K. and M. Hurtado (1996) Ache Life History: The Ecology and Demography of a Foraging People . Aldine: Hawthorne, NY.

Why Are Filipinos So Dark?

Repost from the old blog. Explains why people in hot climates evolved melanin protection of their skin. Guess what? It’s not so they won’t get sunburned.

If they hardly have any Negrito genes, that is. If so, what explains their dark skin?

From a question in the comments on the old blog.
I’ve been over this on the blog before, but since hardly anyone knows about this stuff, we may as well go over it again. The commenter asks, if Filipinos only have .02-.11% Negrito genes (and only in certain tribes that have been tested), why are Filipinos so dark?
The suggestion here is the common popular anthropological notion that Filipinos are part Negrito. The truth is that Filipinos have few Negrito genes, but Negritos have lots of Filipino genes. That is because the Filipinos simply swamped the Negritos genetically.
Various Filipino tribes have been surveyed and the Negrito percentage is given at .02-.11%. I am not sure if that means that the average Filipino or tribal has that much Negrito genes, or if that many Filipinos have Negrito genes. It is often difficult to tell with these studies. Filipinos are no darker than Lao, Thai, Khmer, many Southern Chinese groups and types, and Indonesians.
All of the Austronesians are dark. The Austronesians are the Filipinos (mostly Austronesian), the Indonesians (20% Austronesian), the coastal New Guineans (25% Austronesian), the Polynesians (50% Austronesian) and the Micronesians (35% Austronesian). Also Malays appear to have some unknown Austronesian element. There is also some Austronesian in the Vietnamese and the Khmer. All of these are in whole or in part Austronesians.
One of the biggest lies around is that all of these SE Asian groups are part Australoid. In particular, Chinese are very fond of this notion. It is true that many Indonesians are partly Australoid of unknown origin, probably Papuan. The Indonesians closer to the Philippines and Malaysia are much more Austronesian. Getting towards New Guinea, we see a lot more Melanesian introgression.
In the case of the Filipinos, the big lie is that Filipinos are very heavily inbred with Negritos. This is not true, and there is no evidence of it. However, some Filipinos are part Negrito. You can recognize them because they are noticeably darker and they tend to have woolly or frizzy hair like Negritos. It was common knowledge 100 years ago that Filipinos had little Negrito in them, and most Filipinos know this to this day.
In between, somehow the notion among amateur anthropologists got started that Filipinos are heavily Negrito. The Filipino group is very closely related to the Ami aboriginals of Taiwan and the Guangdong Southern Chinese from around Hong Kong. In fact, this group is so taut that I lumped it into a race called the South China Sea Race, with those three groups included.
Filipinos are, for all intents and purposes, a Chinese (Taiwanese) people, even though they live outside of China. Some commenters have hollered about this, saying that Filipinos look nothing like Southern Chinese. Well, that may be so, but looks deceive. In genes, they are remarkably close, and nowadays we prove relation by genes.
The vast majority of Filipinos came from an outward ocean voyage by the Taiwanese Ami aborigines about 900-2,200 years ago that ended up in the Philippines. This was part of the Lapita culture. About 900 years ago, a large infusion of Southern Chinese came to the Philippines, but only 20% of Filipinos have significant Chinese genes.
Much fewer have significant amounts of Spanish genes. The Filipino mestizo is largely a myth, though Filipino politics and especially the entertainment industry is heavily populated by mestizos. Even in the Philippines, Whiter is apparently better.
Why are Filipinos so dark? The Philippines lies from 0 to 20 degrees in latitude. Let us look at the nations in at that latitude and who the indigenous people are.
In that latitude range, we find northern Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, southern Burma, South India, Sri Lanka, Oman, Yemen, far southern Arabia, Somalia, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Djibouti, Sudan, Chad, Central African Republic, Cameroon, Niger, Burkina Faso, Nigeria, Benin, Ghana, Cote d’ Ivoire, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Mali, Mauritania, Senegal, Gambia, the Guyanas, all of the Caribbean except Cuba, Venezuela, Colombia, all of Central America except Mexico, Hawaii and the Mariana Islands.
If you notice, almost all of these countries are populated by indigenous people with pretty dark skin. Dark skin is selected for in hot climates because otherwise UV rays will destroy folic acid stores in the woman’s body, which will cause a lot of birth defects. There may also be a protective effect for sunburn and melanoma, but this is uncertain.

UV radiation chart along with zones of skin color. Zone 1 has the darkest skin of all. Note that the Philippines is in Zone 1. Zone 2, which includes Italians and Spaniards, has skin that tans easily. Zone 3 contains light skin that enables residents to absorb as much Vitamin D as possible from the sun due to lack of sunlight at higher latitudes.
So it’s not just latitude, but it’s also intensity of UV radiation. UV radiation is extremely intense in Africa, so Africans have some of the darkest skin of all. Pale, light or white skin is nothing special or superior. It is simply an evolutionary adaptation to low levels of sunlight. Melanin went off the skin in order to pick up as much Vitamin D as possible. Otherwise, people had Vitamin D deficiencies.

Almost all native peoples at latitudes like that have pretty dark skin. The only exception is the Vietnamese, and they have only been there for 2,200 years or so, being products of a massive movement of Southern Chinese into the area around that time. Anyway, a lot of Vietnamese are relatively dark.
So the dark skin of Filipinos is to be expected, and there is no need to postulate Negrito genetic ingression. Filipinos aren’t really that dark anyway. A lot of native peoples at that latitude are a lot darker than Filipinos.
Some Australoid genes related to Papuans have been found in Malays, Southern Chinese and coastal Vietnamese, but the numbers are very small. So really Southern Chinese need to be quiet about SE Asians being heavily Australoid. It’s not true, and they have a few of those genes anyway.
Keep in mind that the question of Negrito genes in any SE Asians is somewhat academic. After all, all of SE Asia was populated mostly by Negrito or “Melanesian” Australoid types until about 5,000 years ago or so, at which point they fully transitioned into the types that we see today.
NE Asians were also Ainu aborigine Australoid types until 9,000 years ago, when they fully completed progression into the Mongoloid types that we know today.
Negrito or “Melanesian” types were generalized throughout Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia until 2,000-3,000 years ago, when they were rapidly displaced by movements from South China. They were also generalized throughout Thailand and Malaysia until about 5,000 years ago, when they were largely replaced by movements from Taiwan and South China.
They have only survived in large numbers in the Philippines, but that is merely accidental.
So, in the background of all SE Asians is a Negrito, and in the background of all NE Asians is an aborigine Ainu type.

References

Jablonski, N. and Chaplin, G. 2000. The Evolution of Human Skin Coloration. Journal of Human Evolution.

This research takes a lot of time, and I do not get paid anything for it. If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a a contribution to support more of this valuable research.

Get Small Or Die

Repost from the old site. Discusses why people in very hot climates evolve to be short and dark-skinned. It’s that or die, real simple.
Why are Pygmies (a tiny Negroid people living in Central Africa) so small?
Same reason folks living in tropical rainforests all over the world tend to be small. In that environment, it’s get small or die. Real simple. Understand, pilgrim?
A tropical rainforest is an unusual place. It’s not 115 in the shade like the deserts of the Middle East. It’s more like 80-90 all year round. While it’s not extremely hot, it does have very high humidity – close to 100%. That creates a serious problem with cooling off.
At lesser humidity, you sweat like a pig and the lesser humidity allows the sweat to evaporate. As it evaporates, the sweat cools. That’s how you cool off. A similar cooling by evaporation mechanism is used to cool off your refrigerator.
When the humidity gets near 100%, your sweat stops evaporating. You can sweat all day and nite and it doesn’t do much good. Our body temperature of 98.6 runs the risk of rising, even past the survival point of 107-108.
It’s true that Pygmies sweat a lot, but not enough to save their hides.
As the website explains better than I can:

First, the surface area of a small body is greater in relation to its volume.
It is a mathematical fact: if cube A in Fig. 1.4 is 1 centimeter along each side and cube B is 2 centimeters, then A’s surface area is one-quarter that of B, but its volume is eight times smaller.
Heat is produced in the mass of the body, particularly in the liver and muscles, and is lost through the surface; if the latter is larger relative to body mass because a person is small, heat loss is easier and cooling more efficient. In a warm and humid environment, it is best to be small.

Next, Pygmies extend less effort because they are smaller. If you need to use have lots of energy, it’s better to be smaller, because you need to utilize less energy to keep moving if you are smaller. Marathoners tend to be short. It takes less effort to move a smaller body around than it takes to move a big body around, which is why smaller cars get better mileage than bigger ones.
If you are transporting small loads, a pony is a better way to do it. You need a horse for a large load, just like you need an 18 wheeler for big hauls. The fact that a pony is better for the small stuff is why it was used in the Pony Express. They produce more energy per food unit consumed, the same way a Honda gets more energy miles per unit of food gas than a Hummer does.
Pygmies are excellent at dissipating heat and expertly adapted to living in the jungle where there is low carbohydrate and protein reserve. They’re sort of the human Priuses of the jungle.
No one knows how long Pygmies have been evolving. Some say that tropical rainforests have only been around for 5,000 years or less. I disagree. Some gene studies show that Pygmies and other Africans may have split as far back as 70,000 years before present (YBP).
The main problem here is a lack of fossils in the rainforest. Things decay so fast there that we hardly find the bones of anything there. However, there have been skulls found around Central African Republic and north into the Sahel. Here Negroids (modern Blacks) evolved over the past 6-12,000 years. Prior to that, Africans looked like either Khoisan types or Pygmy types.
Pygmies are very athletic and graceful. A Pygmy can shimmy up a tree 100 feet with striking agility.
Pygmies are not necessarily stupid, though some IQ researchers think that their IQ’s are quite low; there has been only one study, done in 1910. Richard Lynn, a racist but generally a good researcher, feels that the Pygmy IQ may be lower even than the African Black average of 67.
Although Pygmy heads are small, their heads are about as big as ours. Nevertheless, the relationship between head size and IQ is weak. Vietnamese have some of the smallest heads on Earth, and their IQ is 99.5.
Pygmies have the widest noses in the world. A small nose is only useful in cold weather. With a small nose, the air inhaled has time to heat up before it reaches the lungs. Air is already warm in the rainforest, so there is no need to heat it up with a nose filter, so a wider nose is better. The wide noses of other Africans may have a similar evolutionary explanation.
Racist idiots like to dog on people for being short. There are short people everywhere there are tropical forests. Examples are the peoples of southern India, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Central American and Amazonian Indians. But the Pygmies are the smallest of all.
This research takes a lot of time, and I do not get paid anything for it. If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a a contribution to support more of this valuable research.

Secular Rise in Black IQ and Head Size: Evidence For a Eugenic Effect

Repost from the old site, with additions.
It is common refrain among race realists, and in particular White racists, who make a fetish out of the number, that the US Black IQ is 85. Broadly speaking, that used to be the case, but IQ’s of Black children have always been higher.
Blacks having high IQ’s as young children that gradually decline towards adulthood unfortunately has been noted by researchers and observers for a long time. There are descriptions of this phenomenon going back to 1850. So there is no need for White nationalists to get all freaked out when someone says that Black elementary school kids are pretty smart.

More charming Black thugs, throwing gang signs and looking menacing. The young woman is a mulatto or very light-skinned Black girl. I used to see kids like her a lot when I taught school. Although the people above are acting like complete idiots, Blacks this age have average IQ's of 90. I've dealt with quite a few Black gangbanger kids like this as a teacher, and most of them aren't stupid at all. They're just assholes. No excuses.
More charming Black thugs, throwing gang signs and looking menacing. The young woman is a mulatto or very light-skinned Black girl. I used to see kids like her a lot when I taught school. Although the people above are acting like complete idiots, Blacks this age have average IQ’s of 90. I’ve dealt with quite a few Black gangbanger kids like this as a teacher, and most of them aren’t stupid at all. They’re just assholes. No excuses.

I believe that Black adult IQ has been bumped up to 89 now and Black child IQ to 92 due to changes in IQ norming in the US. IQ tests were formerly normed on a scale of US Whites = 100. A couple years ago, I think they changed it to US population = 100. That’s the only explanation I can come up with for the scores in the table below.
So now the US White adult IQ is 103 and White kids are the same (actually White adult IQ = 102.5; White Child IQ = 103.5), and the US Black adult IQ is 89, and child IQ is 92. So there is an 10.5 pt gap between B-W kids and a 13.5 pt gap between B-W adults.
But even Charles Murray and Philippe Rushton, two White racist scientists working in this field, concede that the B-W gap has shrunk about 3 points in the last 30 years.
I believe that the US Asian score has now been bumped up to 107. We would also estimate that the IQ’s of US Hispanics to be about 92-93 now and US Amerindian IQ’s should be about 91 or so, all with the renorming.
Things haven’t really changed much, just the whole scale has been bumped up. It’s important to understand that.

These scores are taken from this paper, and indicate varying scores for IQ tests and semi-IQ tests taken over about 30 years. As you move down in each individual row, you move into revised versions of the tests in more recent years.As you can see, White adult IQ (age 25+) in the US is now 102.6, or 103 rounded off. Black adult IQ (age 25+) has increased in recent years to 89.1 or 89 rounded off. There remains a 13.5 point gap between Blacks and Whites. It is no longer appropriate to say that Blacks have an IQ of 85. The B-W child gap is about 11 points. On the Stanford-Binet test, which can be given to both children and adults, there is a 10.8 point gap, but it would be nice to see who the S-B was given to, kids or adults.
These scores are taken from this paper, and indicate varying scores for IQ tests and semi-IQ tests taken over about 30 years. As you move down in each individual row, you move into revised versions of the tests in more recent years.As you can see, White adult IQ (age 25+) in the US is now 102.6, or 103 rounded off. Black adult IQ (age 25+) has increased in recent years to 89.1 or 89 rounded off.
There remains a 13.5 point gap between Blacks and Whites. It is no longer appropriate to say that Blacks have an IQ of 85. The B-W child gap is about 11 points. On the Stanford-Binet test, which can be given to both children and adults, there is a 10.8 point gap, but it would be nice to see who the S-B was given to, kids or adults.

It is correct that with a 10-14 pt B-W IQ gap at the moment, “leveling the playing field”, which really boils down to equality of outcome, is not possible without much magic, fakery and nonsense. It would be ideal if racial IQ differences, while changing, would at least enter into this debate, but that’s not possible right now.
Keep in mind that Black IQ declines as Blacks age. James Flynn, a world-recognized expert in the field, said a while back that Black 5-yr-olds may have IQ’s of 95. Traditionally, they suffered a 10 pt drop down to 85 at age 25.
With renorming, Black 5 year olds may have IQ’s as high as 98. That’s going to drop to 89 by age 25. There have been articles recently remarking on how Black school performance is worse in Black high schoolers than in Black elementary schoolers. Black high schoolers have lower IQ’s than Black elementary students, and this will reflect in scores.

He may have been a thug, but Mychal Bell, famous stereotypical Black thug of Jena Six fame, was also said to be a pretty smart kid. There were reports that he was an A student, but in my discussions with prominent Jena, Louisiana citizens who knew some of his teachers, they said that he was intelligent, but he did not get good grades. I used to see this all the time as a teacher. US Blacks can no longer be said to be stupid. I think that high school failure rates are due to either culture, socioeconomics, or else genetic Black personality, or some combination of one or more of those. Even White highly extroverted persons don't like to be chained to a seat all day, and most of them hate school and studying. They want excitement, good times and adventure. Ditto with Black thrill-seekers like Mr. Bell.
He may have been a thug, but Mychal Bell, famous stereotypical Black thug of Jena Six fame, was also said to be a pretty smart kid. There were reports that he was an A student, but in my discussions with prominent Jena, Louisiana citizens who knew some of his teachers, they said that he was intelligent, but he did not get good grades. I used to see this all the time as a teacher.
US Blacks can no longer be said to be stupid. I think that high school failure rates are due to either culture, socioeconomics, or else genetic Black personality, or some combination of one or more of those. Even White highly extroverted persons don’t like to be chained to a seat all day, and most of them hate school and studying. They want excitement, good times and adventure. Ditto with Black thrill-seekers like Mr. Bell.

White racists like to rant about “no progress” in the Black IQ of 85 over 100 years. That “no progress” claim does not include Flynn Effect Black IQ rise of 22 pts since 1930, much of which have been washed out because White IQ has been rising concomitantly with the Black rise.
These same racists usually say that the Flynn Effect is not a real intelligence rise, but Black skulls have gotten dramatically larger since 1900 to the point where they are dramatically different from African skulls. It would stand to reason that a dramatic increase in Black skull size combined with a dramatic increase in Black IQ would represent a real intelligence increase – the Flynn Effect.
US White and US Black skulls now look more alike than either skull does to its ancestors 150 yrs ago.

We are creating a new race here in the US - the Negro. A study looking at head sizes from the colonial era to today found that Whites and Black skulls now resemble each other more than either one resembles their grandparents. Both Black and White skulls have gotten larger, taller and narrower, the lower half of the face and jaw have receded, and the chin has become more prominent. Both changes are in favor of more progressive features and against more archaic features.That means that modern Whites have skulls that look more like modern Blacks than our White ancestors of 250 years ago. And modern Blacks have skulls that look more like modern Whites than their African slave ancestors of 250 years. I do not feel that it is appropriate to constantly compare US Negroes with Black Africans. Not only are they completely different groups of people living on different continents for centuries, but at the moment, they're not even equivalent racially in many ways. US Negro skulls do not look much like Black African skulls anymore. The change in general is that US Black skulls have moved to an intermediate position between Africans and Europeans, in part due to interbreeding with Whites, but also due to improvements in environment, especially nutrition. Researchers also suggest genetic changes in skull size for both US Blacks and Whites.
We are creating a new race here in the US – the Negro. A study looking at head sizes from the colonial era to today found that Whites and Black skulls now resemble each other more than either one resembles their grandparents. Both Black and White skulls have gotten larger, taller and narrower, the lower half of the face and jaw have receded, and the chin has become more prominent.
Both changes are in favor of more progressive features and against more archaic features.That means that modern Whites have skulls that look more like modern Blacks than our White ancestors of 250 years ago. And modern Blacks have skulls that look more like modern Whites than their African slave ancestors of 250 years.
I do not feel that it is appropriate to constantly compare US Negroes with Black Africans. Not only are they completely different groups of people living on different continents for centuries, but at the moment, they’re not even equivalent racially in many ways. US Negro skulls do not look much like Black African skulls anymore.
The change in general is that US Black skulls have moved to an intermediate position between Africans and Europeans, in part due to interbreeding with Whites, but also due to improvements in environment, especially nutrition. Researchers also suggest genetic changes in skull size for both US Blacks and Whites.

We really are smarter than our grandparents.
The implications of this are interesting. Truesdell notes that the changes in favor of more progressive features and against more archaic features in both Black and White skulls were “in part genetic.” What this means is that both Blacks and Whites have been preferentially (eugenically) selecting for more progressive facial features and against more archaic features.
As progressive facial features tend to have higher IQ’s and archaic features tend to have lower IQ’s, the result was eugenic selection towards more attractive features and higher intelligence. In Blacks, these changes have occurred since 1900, while in Whites, they have been going on since colonial times.
In slave society, there probably was not a lot of progressive selection going on. With liberation, Blacks were freer to choose partners who could make more money. Since 1900, Blacks have been practicing eugenic selection towards Blacks who look “Whiter” and are more intelligent. In earlier times, Whiter Blacks could probably negotiate better in White society and could possibly make more money. But Black positive selection for Whiter features continues to this day.
All of the race realist ranting about dysgenics grows very tiresome. Humans are intelligent creatures. It’s only logical that the evolution that drove us to this point is ongoing. Selection for better looking and more intelligent partners is a wise choice for any intelligent mammal, and we are the smartest of them all.
Another White racist lie is that the Black-White achievement gap has not moved in the past 40 years, since we noticed it and declared war on it. In fact, the B-W achievement gap has shrunk by 1/3 over the past 30 yrs and there is evidence the decline was related to spending on education. Obviously, given IQ realities, there is going to be a point of diminishing returns here.

References

Dickens, William T. & Flynn, James R. October 2006. Black Americans Reduce the Racial IQ Gap: Evidence from Standardization Samples. Psychological Science.
Jantz, RL. July 2001. Cranial change in Americans: 1850-1975. J Forensic Sci. 46(4):784-7.
Truesdell, Nicole D. May 2005. Secular Change In The Skull Between American Blacks And Whites. MA Thesis. Baton Rogue, LA: Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, Department of Geography and Anthropology.

This research takes a lot of time, and I do not get paid anything for it. If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a a contribution to support more of this valuable research.

Is Intelligence Important to Humans?

In the comments section, Patrick comments:

The notion that there is an evolutionary ladder is incorrect. There is no superior or inferior life-form. It is impossible for any particular race to be more evolved than any other race because there is no degree which to measure evolution and any measuring system someone could invent would be flawed.

And Lafayette Sennacherib responds:

I wonder if Patrick is making the point Noam Chomsky made in the opening pages of ‘ Hegemony or Survival’: that there is little evidence that ‘intelligence’ is an advantage by the evolutionary criteria of survival and increase of the species. Chomsky points out that, by these criteria, the cockroach is the most successful product of evolution.

Well, I would certainly agree with that, but that argument strikes me as senseless. Having dealt with smart humans and idiots and lots of humans in between, I am absolutely certain that intelligence is very important for humans.
I don’t even like to hang around with people who have fairly low IQ’s very much. I often do it and I’ve been doing it all my life, but I usually regret it and it has not been very satisfying over a lifetime. Not only are they boring, but the dumber someone is, typically the lower their morals are.
Dumb people cheat you, use you, rip you off, get you in trouble, start fights with you, vandalize your property, go through your stuff, damage your property, involve you in crimes, go to jail, beat their SO’s, drink and take dope to excess, eat worse than any wild mammal alive, refuse to exercise, and just generally act like retarded barn animals. When you challenge them on the damage or ripoffs they are doing to you and your stuff, they refuse to clean up their messes, pay you back, or even learn.
This last is so important. Dumb people just seem to be unable to learn too many things. I think it is probably because they do not want to, because they can definitely learn stuff they think is important. On the moral level, as far as I am concerned, way too many dumb people are just scumbags. Smarter people are generally way more morally evolved, at least in terms of having a personal relationship with them.
When you have whole neighborhoods full of dumbasses like this, there is a noticeable decline in many areas. Not only in the finer areas of life such as love of learning, art, culture, and whatnot, but in other areas.
Dumb people are ill-mannered and rude. They don’t keep promises. They borrow money and never pay it back. They have poor emotional control, scream and yell, fight, throw property around and get the cops called on them. They are always getting involved in retarded physical accidents due to their heedlessness.
Whole communities of dummies show a decline that is clear to anyone with open eyes to see. Prostitution, pimping, petty crime, gangs, graffiti, drugs, drug dealing, alcoholism and drug addiction, domestic violence, trash, trashed-out cars, homes and neighborhoods, wrecked schools, these are just some of the obvious evidences of decline.
If you could gauge the mean IQ of a city and watch its IQ decline, you would see all of these negative things increase. If you could raise the IQ of the city, you would see all of these things decrease and the more refined and civilized aspects of existence increase in tandem.
The notion that intelligence is irrelevant to the human species, either in micro or macro form, is seriously absurd.
In contrast to the racialists, I do not believe that IQ is fixed by our genes. Otherwise, our IQ’s would not have increased 22 points since 1930. Because IQ can be increased, I have hope that the ill effects on civilizational style of human low intelligence can be ameliorated. The fact that I am so convinced of the ill effects on our species of low IQ is one of the reasons that I am so serious about raising human IQ.

Lawrence Auster's View From the Right

For the first time, I am reading Lawrence Auster’s View From the Right. There is actually much interesting material here, and I am stunned to note that I agree with much of what he says. OMG! Does this mean that I am a closet reactionary? Dubious.
Auster is a racialist and paleocon. He hates modern feminism, multiculturalism, political correctness, illegal immigration, the whole insipid nine yards of Kool-Aid. In other words, when it comes to the insanity of the modern Western Left, he thinks like a sane human being instead of some weird programmed PC cyborg. For daring to think like a normal human, his fellow rightists, the neocons at Little Green Fascists, I mean Little Green Footballs, call him a NAZI.
Truth is, Auster is by no means a Nazi. Auster is Jewish, and contrary to the endless lies of most Jews, very few even self-hating Jews are actual Nazis. I figure your average Jewish self-hater would walk a mile to help a fellow Jew with a broken toenail. So much for Jewish “self-hatred.” Ethnocentrism runs deep in the hyperethnocentric culture of Jews, and Jewish culture takes a bite out of you that you never get back.
As we might expect, he’s a Zionist (that’s the Jewish part that he can never shake loose no matter how many times he goes to church), and a pretty nasty one too (once again rational considering his Far Right leanings). But it all makes sense considering his anti-Black racism and his sympathy for White separatism. What’s Zionism but White Nationalism for Jews? He’s just expanding his Zionist racism against Palestinians towards additional Others, like Blacks, a logical progression.
Anyway, Auster’s not about to heap it on the Jews. He’s basically a White nationalist, but he’s always unloading on the rest of them for their incessant (And moronic!) anti-Semitism. He’s recently hinted at White separatist sentiments, a degeneration typical of most all afflicted with White Nationalism Disease at some point or other.
He’s widely hated by the anti-Semites in the movement for not fessing up to the devious role da evil Joooz have played in forcing poor innocent Whites to act like masochistic and suicidal dumbfucks, but that’s to be expected.
Much of interest here.
Lots on Black crime! How I do love Black crime! I especially love the lurid and truly evil kind where the hot young and of course eternally innocent White chick goes off with the more or less societally acceptable Black dude but then ends up murdered in the most horrible and despicable way by the savage Black animal masquerading as upstanding member of society.
WN’s do have a nice take on this. The media ignores Black crime. Especially the most inflammatory Black crime of all, where the, you know, savage, ape, jungle, etc. Black missing link dudes kill hot White chicks in the most evillest and Ted Bundiest of ways. It’s sick, it’s fucked up, it’s sets box office records. It’s so horrible and awful, please give us some more.
The media, like, buries that stuff. I guess for fear of mass race riots. The WN’s are right, and this mini-epidemic is indeed buried.
Where WN’s are wrong and stupid as always is in thinking these animals only massacre White chicks. For every White girl cruelly murdered, probably 5-10 Black chicks are done in, often in an equally sadistic manner. But no one cares about Black females who die. They were invisible alive, so they are invisible dead, and their last terrifying moments are worthy of no more than a passing sigh before we Whites move on.
Auster has an interesting take on all this. Hot young White chicks are massacred by Black psychopaths because they are ho’s who stay out late unchaperoned and drink in bars and stuff. And, I guess, walk alone on the streets at 4 AM and other shameless ho-like stuff. Yeah.
I don’t understand this. Most White guys think the modern trend of young White women to act like ho’s is admirable in a utilitarian sense. But Auster is old, and I guess he can’t get it up anymore?
Cool article on how the Professional Liars in the meatpacking industry ruined a bunch of great paying jobs by hiring mostly illegals and destroying the unions. Go capitalism go!
Oh, and wages dropped 50% in meatpacking in 30 years. But falling wages are good for the economy. Go capitalism go!
ICE raided the scumbuckets, and they had to hire White people and stuff.
Turns out…whoa! There were lines around the block, and they stayed in business. Real Americans lined up 5 people strong for every opening for an illegal who got canned.
Despite all his noble obeisance to sanity, Auster wrecks it all by being an uber-dumbfuck when it comes to religion. Judaism is sort of horrible as a religion, but at least you get to be Chosen. There’s moronic stuff in there, but it’s all subject to Talmudic hedging, denying, second-guessing and backtracking. And you can always be Reform and believe in nothing but Chosenness and some God you can’t even define in 500 words or less.
So this brainy Jew leaves the ultimate intellectual’s religion behind for Christianity. No problem I guess.
But like a dumbass, he flies headlong into the stupidest Christianity of all, the fundamentalist Protestant kind. Effect is like some high-IQ guy who streaks down the street every day.
One of his obsessions on here is how Evolution never happened. If that you’re that dumb, you’re like someone with a weird sexual fetish. Keep it to yourself for Chrissake. But instead Auster spends half of his blog telling us how Evolution never happened. Which is like dancing around in the street and screaming what a dumbass you are.
He also spends a disturbing amount of of time casting doubt on the Out of Africa Theory, suggesting that the human races actually began separating many hundreds of thousands of years ago. He also suggests that we bred in with Erectus. These views are controversial to say the least. However, while not subscribing to the hard theory, I would suggest that some aspects of this theory may be possible: Scenario 3 (which I present as Coon’s theory):

Erectus 1 evolved into Race 1, Homo sapiens. This Homo sapiens migrated to the territories of the four other Erectus types and interbred with them. This produced four new sapiens strains–each containing “a bit of Erectus.”

He quotes blogger Mathilda who has made such things into her raison de etre. Mathilda is an otherwise great blogger, but on these issues, she is simply insane. Mathilda also spends a very large amount of time arguing that Southern Europeans have little or no Black in them.
This, along with opposition to Out of Africa and suggestions that racial differences are hundreds of thousands of years old, is creepy. Almost everyone arguing along these lines is some kind of a White racist, usually a virulent one. Matilda insists she is not one, but I’m very worried about her obsessions.
That Auster buys into all of this, along with Auster’s hostility towards Blacks, amply displayed on his blog, suggests that not only is Auster a racist, but he is one Hell of a nasty one too.
Auster is also afflicted with most of the usual trad Conservative obsessions. He hates homosexuals, and suggests that they are mentally ill. I don’t hate gays at all, but I have one gay male friend who thinks gays are screwed up in the head. I don’t think it’s homosexuality that makes them nutty but instead it’s acting feminine. Acting feminine is not normal, and men who act feminine are going to be punished by nature for this transgression by being unhappy and a little crazy.
He also really hates Islam. I have major issues about Islam myself, but he takes this way too far, suggesting that Muslims should be removed from the US. He says we need to attack Iran, and we also need to attack Pakistan now that the nukes are in danger of being seized by the Taliban.
He doesn’t think the Pope should be reconciling with Islam, which is just retarded of Auster. The less you dialogue with Muslims, the angrier they get. That’s why the loss of the Arab Christians is so tragic. The Arab Christians are our link between the Christian West and the Muslim Arab World.
Anyway, all around interesting read from a weird but sui generis mind.

The Birth of the Caucasian Race

An early European, possibly of the M173 line. He may somewhat resemble a Khoisan or Bushman.

An early European, possibly of the M173 line. He may somewhat resemble a Khoisan or Bushman. An early European, possibly of the M173 line. He may somewhat resemble a Khoisan or Bushman.

A reconstruction of a very early European, based on fragments found in caves in the Carpathian Mountains of Romania from 2002 on, offers a tantalizing glimpse at what early Europeans must have looked like.
He actually looks a bit like Richard Steele, boxing referee and possible throwback.
Previously, the oldest European skull was 30,000 years ago and was said to look like a modern European, with closest affinities to Finns.
As you can see, the White nationalists are furious about this.
The “White European” phenotype as we know it today did not come into existence until after 12,000 years ago, or maybe sooner.
Before that, European Caucasians resemble Arabs. For instance, a 24,000 year old Cro-Magnon European shows DNA similarities to Near East (Arabs or the Caucasus). A 23,000 year old Italian Cro-Magnon sample genetically resembles modern Middle Easterners from Palestine, Syria, Yemen and Iran.
Cro-Magnon was not The Original White Man. He was a Middle Easterner – an Arab-Iranian type.
The original Proto-Asians came out of Africa 65,000 years ago, probably descendants of the M168 line, although NE Asians are probably partly M89.
The original Caucasians did indeed come out of Africa about 40-45,000 years ago, probably descendants of the M89 line. Whites and Caucasians in general are probably a legacy of M89 and not M168.
M89 birthed M45, which are the Proto-Amerindians of 35,000 years ago, on the steppes and in the Mongolia-Siberia region. A child of M45, M173, were the first Europeans, and may be represented by this fellow. Later, M343, the real Cro-Magnon, appeared. It is a bit confusing whether Cro-Magnon is M173 or M343 or both.
The early genesis of the Caucasoid race involved a large injection of Asian genes from Mongolia, Siberia and East Turkestan. This occurred about 40-45,000 years and represents about 2/3 of the proto-Caucasian genetic line (Bowcock 1991). These proto-East Asians probably looked something like Aborigines or possibly Ainu. Modern NE Asians do not appear until about 9,000 years ago.
Before that, all Asians looked like Aborigines, Melanesians, or Ainus. As noted above, the modern European phenotype also only appears 10,000 years ago. So both modern Whites and modern East Asians only go back 10,000 years, to the Last Glacial Maximum. All humans had dark skin until 10,000 years ago. What birthed light skin? The glaciers.
For an analysis of this early process, which injected a lot of Proto-Asian genes into the Northern European Cro-Magnon line, see this early discussion on my now-banned blog:

Based on y-chromosome lineages, Atlantic and north European men (Cro-Magnon descendants) are related to N.E Asian men.
They all descend from haplogroup Q which arose in the north Himalayas and south Siberia 45,000 years ago, with one group branching off west eventually ending up in the Pyrenees, the Caspian sea and northern Scandinavia. The other group would go across east Asia and even to the Americas.

Indeed, there were movements in the other direction too – from Northern Europe back to Siberia. An ancient line of Europeans called Orcadians (named after barren islands in the north of Scotland) went back to Siberia at some point and contributed significantly to the genetic line of the Yakut, a Siberian grouping that is now only 6% Caucasian. The Yakut as ancient Scotlanders? Incredible.
The other 1/3 of the line was an early African (Bowcock 1991), maybe a Proto-Caucasian African out of South Africa (see below). Out of the Proto-African and Proto-Asian mixture was birthed the Proto-Caucasian.
The African phenotype was not Bantuoid because modern Blacks do not appear in Africa until about 12,000 years ago.
I have always wondered what these folks looked like, and this is an interesting part of our heritage.
In the Amren article linked above, commenter JPT is not correct that Whites are on our way to being a different species. Caucasians, Blacks and East Asians are still fairly closely related.
The furthest apart are Blacks and Aborigines. If anyone is evolutionarily on their way to becoming a separate species or subspecies, it is the Aborigines and the Papuans of New Guinea. The distance between them and Africans is greater than the distance between any two human groups.
It might be interesting to see what happens if they mate. I am pretty sure that they can mate successfully, but it might be interesting to see if their couples are less fertile than others. As genetic distance increases, infertility does too because you are moving closer and closer to separate species. I know that Europeans and Aborigines can mate successfully, as there has been a ton of this going on since the first White invaders attacked (I mean landed on) Australia several hundred years ago.
Speaking of Aborigines, yes, they are very different, but they are not Homo Erectus as many say. They are fully human. Homo Erectus lives to this day in large numbers in San Fransisco.
What follows is reconstruction of the genesis of the early Caucasians.
First of all, a line descended from the original M1 line out of Africa arose in Southwest Asia in the Levant (Israel, Palestine, Lebanon and Syria). This line had come out of Africa via Somalia to Yemen and Arabia 40-45,000 years ago.
It’s known that they went back to Africa, but it was always thought that they went back the same way that they came, via the Red Sea. Instead, they moved out through the Sinai and into North Africa to become the Proto-Berbers. This same line moved into Europe via the same Mediterranean route, this time along the Northern Mediterranean. These folks indeed may have been related to the fellow pictured above.
The most succinct summary of the Proto-Caucasians is found here.The actual birthplace of the Proto-Caucasians was in the Caucasus, as one may expect. A figurine has been found in the Don River area of southern Russia dating from 45,000 years ago. It is thought that this is a remnant of this earliest Proto-Caucasian culture.
Proto-Caucasian Man came out of the Caucasus 39-52,000 years ago. One went west to Europe, possibly resulting in the fellow above and N. Africa (this is the line out of the Levant described above) and other east to NE Asia, probably the M89 line described above, and this in part explains Caucasian affinities of Koreans, North Chinese, Mongolians, etc.
There were also further returns to North Africa from Caucasus and India 30,000 years ago. It appears that the birthing grounds of the Caucasian Race were in the Caucasus, the Middle East, India and North Africa. The highly modern East Indian and North African Berbers – both diverse groups of Caucasians – may be the remains of the earliest proto-Caucasians.
It is interesting to postulate on what the proto-Caucasians who moved out of Africa via the Red Sea 42,000 years ago looked like. No one knows. However, curiously, 36,000 years ago a new line arose in South Africa. It looked like a Caucasian, specifically like Cro-Magnon and other Late Pleistocene cave man types in Europe.
No one knows what happened to this line, but this proto-Caucasian in South Africa 36,000 years ago could have moved up to the Rift Valley area and then to Arabia to give rise to the Caucasians. Keep in mind that by the time that Africans moved out of Africa, only 2 lines left.
At 65,000 YBP (years before present) an incredible 40 different lines had already evolved separately in Africa, and they were all quite different. Only two of these 40 diverse lines left Africa. The rest stayed and birthed the tremendously diverse African race of today.
It’s often said that the Khoisan-Bushmen of Southwest Africa are the most ancient living people. However, recent research shows that this is wrong. The most ancient humans are from East Africa, specifically from around Kenya and Tanzania.
This includes the Masai (thought to be originally from the Sudan), the Sandawe (a Khoisan type in northern Kenya), the Datog (similar to the Masai, and probably also originally from the Sudan), and the Burunge and Gorowaa, both of whom came from Ethiopia recently.
The African Eve, the first human, was probably a Northeast African or East African. Man probably originated in Ethiopia or Sudan, close to the Rift Valley that transformed the first men from apes and watered the fields of the long line of Homo that ended in ourselves.
From a dead link discussing Tishkoff’s findings:

Sarah Tishkoff of the University of Maryland and a team of coworkers reported genetic analyses of more than 600 living Tanzanians from 14 different tribes and four linguistic groups. They analyzed mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) the tool of choice for tracing ancestry because it is inherited only through the mother as part of the ovum.
The number of mutations that have accumulated in mtDNA is a rough measure of the time that has passed since that lineage first appeared.
The owner of the first modern human mtDNA (by definition, a woman) is often referred to as “Eve,” although many women of that time are likely to have shared similar mtDNA.
Genetic diversity
Tishkoff and her colleagues chose to investigate East African peoples for specific reasons. The number of linguistic and cultural differences is unusually high in the region, as is the variation in physical appearance – East Africans are tall or short, darker-skinned or lighter-skinned, round-faced or narrow-faced, and so on.
This observation suggested that the genetic composition of the population is highly diverse, and as expected, the team found substantial variation in the mtDNA.
In fact, members of five of the lineages showed an exceptionally high number of mutations compared with other populations, indicating that these East African lineages are of great antiquity.
Identified by tribal affiliation, these are: the Sandawe, who speak a “click” language related to that of the Bushmen of the Kalahari desert; the Burunge and Gorowaa, who migrated to Tanzania from Ethiopia within the last five thousand years; and the Maasai and the Datog, who probably originated in the Sudan.
The efforts of the University of Maryland group reflect a substantially larger database and more certain geographic origins for its subjects than earlier mtDNA studies.
Further, the work by Tishkoff’s team reveals that these five East African populations have even older origins than the !Kung San of southern Africa, who previously had the oldest known mtDNA.
“These samples showed really deep, old lineages with lots of genetic diversity,” Tishkoff says. “They are the oldest lineages identified to date. And that fact makes it highly likely that ‘Eve’ was an East or Northeast African. My guess is that the region of Ethiopia or the Sudan is where modern humans originated.”

For more links between the Tutsi – Masai types and the original Europeans, see the following early discussions (here, here, here) from my previous (now shut down) blog. It’s a bit hard to get your head around, but if you think hard, you can start to understand it.
I spent months trying to figure out exactly what this guy was saying, and I think I have it now. His intriguing comments strongly suggest that the earliest Cro-Magnon ancestors were derived from populations that are now the East African Masai, Tutsi, etc:

Masai and Tutsi are doliocephalic and orthaganus. Tutsi and Masai Central African types are quite low skulled, like the original Cro-Magnons were. Also MtDNA retrieved from a Cro-Magnon in Europe was found to belong to haplogroup *N, which directly and immediately descends from L3, which originated in Sub-Saharan Africa.
Some of its clades went south and then east onto Australasia, while the northern clade went to the Middle East and gave birth to *N, and other clades went to West Africa and south.
It’s the northern subclades of L3 that gave birth to *N (like l3a1) that are the most closely related L3 members, and Sub Saharan Africans are closest to *N bearing Cro-Magnons, as they are their most immediate and closest ancestors.
It would be interesting to see if the Tutsi and Masai have any of these northern subclades of L3, as they are more closely related to Cro-Magnon *N than any other MTDNA lineage in the world.
What I cant get my head around is the overlap in identical SNP clusters (Caucasoid) between populations of predominantly different patrilineal and matrilineal ancestry. e.g. e3b Ethiopians (also predominantly indigenous African on mtDNA) and r1a/I1a Norwegians.
R1a and Ia descend from K, which arose in the Middle East, and e3b descends from YAP, which arose in Uganda. The nearest ancestor of R* and I* and J* Europeans/Middle Easterners with E3b Ethiopians is the M168 male, which is the ancestor of all other modern humans, so they share as little as possible recent ancestry.
On mtDNA East Africans are predominantly L3, which is the direct ancestor of mtDNA N*, which is the original Middle Eastern Caucasoid mtDNA marker, which has been retrieved from 2 European Cro-Magnon specimens too. I wonder if East Africans have northern subclades of L3, as they would be the most closely related L3 subclades to N*.

See below. They do look like White people, don’t they?

An example of a Dinka, an example of what I call a West Sudan Elongated Desert Adapated African. This man is a negotiator for the SPLA, the Sudanese People's Liberation Army.
An example of a Dinka, an example of what I call a West Sudan Elongated Desert Adapted African. This man is a negotiator for the SPLA, the Sudanese People’s Liberation Army.

A Masai man. The more I look at this guy, the more I think he looks like our 36,000 year old Caucasian guy reconstructed at the start of the post. Or am I hallucinating?
A Masai man. The more I look at this guy, the more I think he looks like our 36,000 year old Caucasian guy reconstructed at the start of the post.

More Dinka West Sudan Elongated Desert African phenotypes.
More Dinka West Sudan Elongated Desert African phenotypes.

Another West Sudanic type, from an old anthropological textbook, back in the days when race still existed and we could still discuss phenotypes and whatnot. You know, before the Cultural Marxist dickwads took over?
Another West Sudanic type, from an old anthropological textbook, back in the days when race still existed and we could still discuss phenotypes and whatnot.

A Tutsi, possible ancestors of the original proto-Caucasians. Note the Caucasoid appearance.
A Tutsi, possible ancestors of the original proto-Caucasians. Note the Caucasoid appearance.

Another Tutsi. I must say they are handsome folks. Hey WN's, say hello to Grandpa!
Another Tutsi. I must say they are handsome folks.

Yet another Tutsi. I can't get over how much these Africans look like Caucasians or Whites in facial structure.
Yet another Tutsi. I can’t get over how much these Africans look like Caucasians or Whites in facial structure.

Eastern Desert Elongated Africans, possible progenitors of the Caucasoids, look like Caucasians. One argument is that this is due to inbreeding with Caucasoids. In fact, they are pure Africans. See the chart.
Eastern Desert Elongated Africans, possible progenitors of the Caucasoids, look like Caucasians. One argument is that this is due to inbreeding with Caucasoids. In fact, they are pure Africans. See the chart.

Another chart showing the African purity of the possible proto-Caucasoids of Africa. Take home point: Caucasian appearance is not due to Caucasoid interbreeding; it's de novo.
Another chart showing the African purity of the possible proto-Caucasoids of Africa. Take home point: Caucasian appearance is not due to Caucasoid interbreeding; it’s de novo.

References

Bowcock, AM, Kidd, JR, Mountain, JL, Hebert, JM, Carotenuto, L, Cavalli-Sforza, LL and Kid, KK. February 1, 1991. Drift, Admixture, and Selection in Human Evolution: A Study With DNA Polymorphisms. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 88(3): 839–843.
Cabrera, Vicente M, Maca-Meyer, Nicole, González, Ana M, Larruga, José M, Flores, Carlos. 2001. Major Genomic Mitochondrial Lineages Delineate Early Human Expansions. BMC Genetics 2:13
Hellenthal G, Auton A, Falush D. 2008. Inferring Human Colonization History Using a Copying Model. PLoS Genetics 4(5).
Wade, Nicholas. 2006. Before the Dawn: Recovering the Lost History of Our Ancestors. East Rutherford, New Jersey, USA: Penguin Group.

This research takes a lot of time, and I do not get paid anything for it. If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a a contribution to support more of this valuable research.

Lamark Vindicated?

Lamarckian genetics has been discredited by modern science. The fact that this tripe was promoted for decades by Communists, mostly by Stalin, is a slap in the face to the Left and shames a Left that claims to be based first and foremost on science. Lamarckian genetics said that behavioral traits acquired during life would be passed on the kids.
If the giraffe kept stretching his neck to eat leaves on trees, he might actually stretch his neck out in real life. This life-acquired stretched out neck would then be encoded in the giraffe’s genome and this would be passed on to future generations of giraffes, and would eventually result in a giraffe with a very long neck, as we have today.
As I noted, it’s non-arguable fact that acquired traits are not passed on. However, take a look at this:

“Brain structures change with stress and are affected by early-life stress in animal models,” said Rockefeller University neuroendocrinologist Bruce McEwen. “Now there are beginnings of work on our own species. The Evans paper is an important step in that direction.”
McEwen also noted that, at least in animals, the effects of stress produce changes in genes that are then passed from parent to child. Poverty’s effects could be hereditary.

It’s not quite Lamarckian, but it’s getting there. The article suggests that growing up in poverty actually damages kids’ brains due to stress. The stress causes actual genetic changes of an unknown nature, and this changes may be passed on to offspring. New research suggests that this may indeed be the case.
At least with Hispanic US citizens, often children of immigrants (often illegal aliens), they appear to experience little or no stress.
They don’t worry about anything, do not appear depressed, and seem happy, cheerful, or at least carefree. Anxiety is either absent or at a low level. I see much more visible stress, neurosis, anxiety, depression, etc. in the much wealthier and more intelligent White community up in the mountains where I spend much of my time.
At least here in California, many of the Hispanic poor seem to have low stress levels. Obviously this is not the case for all poor people, but it does raise questions.

The Peopling of the Philippines

Repost from the old site. Updated April 2, 2012.
The peopling of the Philippines is a bit better understood than the peopling of Indonesia described in my another post. At least we know that most of the Philippines was first settled long ago by Negritos.

An Aeta Negrito woman of the Philippines. The Aeta live mostly in Northern Luzon. White Nationalists and Afrocentrists both insist that these folks are Black people, but they are very distant from African Blacks. White people are much closer to Blacks than these Negritos. Genetically, these people resemble the Filipinos they live with.Their skulls resemble other Australoid types such as Papuans and Aborigines. Genetically, they are classed as Asians. They are part of the Southeast Asian Major Race. Their minor race is known as the Philippines Negrito Race. It includes the Ati, Aeta and, strangely, the Palau of Micronesia.

There is also another Negrito race in the Philippines – the Mamanwa Philippines Negrito Race. The woman and child above are both Mamanwas. The woman has the typical woolly hair, but the baby has the wavy, Veddoid-like hair seen in many Mamanwas.
The Mamanwa are a group of Philippine Negritos from northeastern Mindanao that are very different from all of the rest of the Negritos in the area. They live in Surigao del Sur in northeastern Mindanao, especially near Mount Hilong-Hilong.
They are thought to be the last remains of the original Negritos to move into the Philippines. There are considerable differences in stature and blood proteins between the Mamanwas and the other Negritos, and they may represent separate migrations.
Excellent photos of modern-day Mamanwas, a group of only 5,000 or so people, can be seen here. I cannot help but notice the resemblance to the Veddoid people of India and Sri Lanka and the Senoi of Malaysia. A few have woolly Negrito hair, but look at how many have the wavy Veddoid hair.
The Mamanwa language seems to be in good shape, judging by the figure that only 7% of the Mamanwa can read and write in their second language. Most Philippine Negrito languages are in bad if not terrible shape; the Mamanwa probably benefit from isolation in the jungle.
Here is a linguistics text on Mamanwa. This called a “text”, in this case a “text” of Mamanwa. It means it is a snippet of Mamanwa, with English translation usually written interlineally so we can see not only what the text means, but what the parts of each word mean too, as even the words are divided into morphemes and translated as best they can be.
The text in most primitive groups usually has to do with myths, legends or stories of the ethnic group, rather than stories about day to day behavior. In this case, it is interesting that the Mamanwa, the oldest Negritos on the Philippines, have a story about the time of their ancestors, when the Mamanwa were “like children”. I guess this means that the early Mamanwa had not reached a very high level of civilization.
Sometimes these stories seem silly or boring to me, but usually they have a lot of meaning for the group who tells them.

Unlike many other places where the Negritos seem to have died out or transcended to other forms, in the Philippines they still exist in a relatively pristine form, even if they are going extinct, culturally, linguistically and probably racially.
Although some give the Negrito population at as low as 32,000, I say that there are 119,606 Negritos left in the Philippines, most of whom are still speaking Negrito languages, based on my estimate from here. The total Negrito population, including those who have given up on their native languages, is not known. They are found throughout the archipelago in various types.
They long ago lost their original languages and now speak Austronesian languages related to the Austronesian settlers who began arriving 5,000 years ago. Philippine Negritos have bred in heavily with standard-issue Filipinos such that the Negritos are now closer to Filipinos than to any other group.

A Dumagat Negrito woman from northern Luzon with her family. The hair at first looks like the Afro a kinky-haired African can grow, but it is actually woolly and not kinky. Dumagat is a generic name for speakers of many Negrito languages in northern Luzon.

On the other hand, Filipinos do not seem to have much Negrito in them. Genetically, we can see only tiny traces of the original Negritos in the Filipino genome. Similar traces can be seen in Micronesians and probably in Malays and Indonesians. These traces range from .02 to .11% – truly minuscule.
Anthropologically, Filipino skulls look SE Asian. Nor do Filipinos look Negrito. In appearance they resemble other Austronesians like Taiwanese aborigines, Indonesians and Malays.
While Philippines Negrito genes look Filipino, Negrito skulls look Australoid, clustering with Aborigines, the Ainu, Tamils, Aborigines, the Sakai of Malaysia, Papuans, Melanesians and Fuegian and Pericu Amerindians.
The Negritos have long been a small group in the Philippines, and the other Filipinos have long dwarfed them in population. Hence, a small amount of inbreeding quickly produced many Filipino genes in Negritos but few Negrito genes in Filipinos.

A Manobo, possibly an Agusan Manobo, man in traditional dress. Most Manobos today wear Western clothing. Some, like the ones who live near the Mamanwa in Surigao del Sur in northeast Mindanao, live off the forest and are being badly affected by deforestation. The Agusan Manobo have at least 2% Negrito genes, the highest level reported for any non-Negrito Filipino group in the Philippines.
Traditionally, the Manobos are considered to be among the Nesiot Austronesians. 54% of Agusan Manobo can read and write in their native language, which has 60,000 speakers. That is a pretty impressive figure for such an isolated group.
A very difficult linguistics paper on Agusan Manobo is available here. It deals with a subfield called discourse analysis, something I never studied and hence don’t really understand very well.
It analyzes language at the discourse level – beyond sounds (phonology), parts of words (morphology), words (lexicology), and sentences (syntax). It analyzes narratives and tries to locate patterns and truths about the way that humans use language to make narratives and tell stories. Believe it or not, the rules and patterns of language work at the narrative level too.
The Agusan Manobo allowed husbands to have multiple wives, common in many primitive cultures. This was usually relegated to those men who had the most money. In this tribe, only women can be religious leaders, which is interesting and resembles the Kalash of Pakistan. The Druze of Lebanon and Israel also have many female religious leaders. I think this is a great idea as I have been worshiping females all my life.

Some Filipino populations, such as the Manobos, described above, that have a somewhat higher level of Negrito genes, but even that level is very small, around 2%. The Manobos live scattered all through Mindanao, but some of the Agusan Manobo live next to the Mamanwas in Surigao del Sur and clearly there has been some interbreeding.

A cute Dumagat Negrito girl trying to read a book. Looking at her hair and features, she is clearly heavily mixed in with Filipino.

Most Filipinos have few if any Negrito genes. There are some Filipinos with Negrito ancestry, and this is readily observable in their woolly or kinky hair and very dark complexion.

A full-grown Ati woman. The Ati live on Panay Island, where they number about 1,500. Their language is still alive. I actually think she is attractive. She’s definitely cute in a child-like way anyway. Note the classical woolly hair of the Philippine Negritos. This is not the same hair as the kinky hair of US Blacks. Other Negritos in the Andaman Islands have peppercorn hair like the Bushmen of Africa.

There are many photos in the older literature of Filipino-Negrito half-breeds, and there is probably still some interbreeding going on. There is a lot of discrimination against Negritos in the Philippines.

A photo of a Negrito man, an Ati from Negros Island, from an anthropological text published around 1916. This text had many photos of mixed Negrito-Filipino types. The Ati of Negros have apparently gone extinct.

On Luzon there is a regular festival in honor of the local Negritos. Almost everyone at the festival is a non-Negrito. A few Negritos wander around the crowd begging and are treated with contempt and ridicule by their non-Negrito brethren.

In a sign that the Negritos may be getting treated better in the Philippines, Juliet Chavez, a Dumagat Negrito, recently won a beauty contest. She is not bad looking.

One of my Filipino contacts told me that the best description of the Filipino attitude towards Negritos is that they do not even exist.
The Philippine Negritos are related to the first groups out of Africa 60-70,000 years ago. They left via the Horn of Africa, got on boats and crossed over to Yemen, then went on boats or walked along the shore along the Indian Ocean to Iran, Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka, Burma, Malaysia, Laos, Thailand, Vietnam, the Philippines, New Guinea, Indonesia and Australia.

The journey taken by early man out of Africa 70,000 years ago. It makes the most sense to think that people migrated along the coast, especially in desert regions. Today in Oman, almost all towns are located along the coast.
There were widespread mangrove forests all along this route back then, though most of them have since died out. There’s plenty to eat along the coast, and the weather is much milder. A journey inland through deserts by such primitive people may have been deadly. Probably the first people undertaking this epic voyage, to which we are all indebted, were the Negritos.

It is generally accepted that Negritos or pre-Negritos probably arrived in the Philippines 30,000 years ago. Findings in caves on Palawan include a 22,500 year old skull called Tabon Man. The skull most resembles modern-day Ainu and Tasmanian people – hence, the Tabon Man people were an Australoid or Aborigine-type people. They were not Negritos.
However, there is also a fragment of a human tibia bone dated 47,000 years ago, so Negritos or pre-Negritos must have been present in the Philippines nearly 50,000 years ago. These caves show habitation going back, some say, 50,000 years.
Finds at the Tabon Caves are interesting in that giant tortoises and even elephants are found there, animals that have since died out on the Philippines.
At other sites, boars, deer, giant and pygmy elephants and rhinoceros have been found. Presently, large mammals are rare to lacking on the archipelago, a common characteristic of islands.
Some archaeologists believe that an even earlier man was present on the Philippines up to 250,000 years ago. This “Dawn Man” is thought to be related to Peking Man and Java Man, that is, he is a variety of Homo Erectus. No bones of this man have been found, but that has not prevented archaeologists from strangely speculating about his appearance.
Dr. Otley Beyer, an American anthropologist, is the one who postulated the existence of Dawn Man.
But findings at Tabon Cave date back at most 50,000 years, not 250,000 years.
Nevertheless, there are what some say are human artifacts in the Cagayan Valley on Luzon dating back 500,000 years, so Otley may have been onto something. Other reports indicate these tools date back 800,000 years, in the range of Java Man.
Others investigating similar sites in the Philippines question whether or not these are really tools, but even these people describe their own clear human artefactual finds as Acheulean and Lower Paleolithic.
These inhabitants must have been Homo Erectus, and were probably related to Java Man and possibly to Peking Man. Acheulean dates from 100,000 to 1.8 million years ago, and Lower Paleolithic spans from 120,000 to 2.5 million years ago. Clearly, the use of these terms by these Cagayan doubters means that even they feel that Homo was in the Philippines at least 120,000 years ago.
Palawan is at the very far end of the Philippines near Indonesia.
Indonesia has been inhabited by Homo derivatives for 2 million years. The theory is that Palawan was at one time connected to Borneo, and early man came to the Philippines via this land bridge.

A Batak Negrito woman of Palawan Island, possibly related to some of the first Negritos to show up in the Philippines. The Palawan Batak number 2,041, and about 1/2 the population speak the language. Note the woolly hair. Parts of Palawan near Tabon Cave are still pretty sparsely populated. Although Tabon Cave is now right on the seashore, it used to be 25-30 miles inland. Only 10% of Philippine archaeological sites have been dug up, and many of those are being looted.
All artifacts and bones have to be shipped out of the Philippines to more developed countries to be analyzed and then shipped back, since the Philippines, with its semi-feudal capitalist model, lacks the modern facilities to analyze artifacts. This is the one great thing Mao did for China – he built a modern country. Mao’s achievement is best seen in comparisons like this one. This blog supports the NPA in the Philippines.

The caves of Tabon show evidence of jar burial connected with the Plain of Jars in Laos and other sites in Sri Lanka. This is probably a Negrito culture in Sri Lanka and Laos.
The Negritos probably came to the Philippines from Malaysia, where they existed 50,000 years ago, down the Malay Peninsula, over to Borneo and up to Palawan in the Philippines, then to the rest of the islands. A map of land bridges in the area 50,000 years ago is here.
Today, the Negritos are known as Ati, Aeta, Agta, Arta, Atta, Alta and Ita, among other names. The word appears to be not their own name for themselves but an appellation placed on them by the surrounding Filipinos. In Austronesian languages, a word like ita often means “black”.

Aeta kids in the Philippines. Some of them look almost like Aborigines. The girl on the far right has a lot of Filipino blood based on her hair and features. The cute girl on the second to left is very heavily admixed with Filipino blood.

They practiced a Stone Age culture up until modern times.

A Pugot Negrito hunter of Southern Luzon with a small deer he has killed, in a photo from a travel guide in 1987. Note that he is clad only in a loincloth. They live around Quezon Province south of Manila and speak a language called Southern Alta, which has about 1,000 speakers.

Today, their lands have been invaded and stolen by non-Negrito Filipinos, and the Negritos labor as peasants on the lands of the Filipinos. Many are unemployed, and cultural collapse is evident. Marriages are unstable, domestic abuse is common, drunkenness is omnipresent, and watching pornography is a pastime. The languages are in a state of Language Death.
In the past few decades, there have been quite a few murders of Negritos by Filipino settlers. There have been few, if any, prosecutions for these crimes.

The Tiruray of Cotabato in Southern Mindanao . They are also known as the Ata and the Upland Bagobo. They may be related to Negritos, but they are clearly quite mixed. Traditionally, they are considered to be part of the second wave of Nesiot Austronesians from Taiwan. They are quite dark.
Being short and dark is an advantage in very hot climates. Dark skin avoids skin damage from UV waves and prevents the destruction of folic acid in the woman’s body during pregnancy, lack of which kills a high percentage of fetuses. Being short enables one to dissipate heat more quickly in a very hot climate. A large body quickly overheats in such a climate.The Tiruray language is in excellent shape. All 50,000 Tiruray speak it, and the literacy rate in Tiruray is 49%.

After the Negritos, two more possibly Australoid groups came to the Philippines, both poorly understood.
Traditional Philippine anthropology says that the Australoid-Sakais came first, and then the proto-Malay. It’s possible that it may have been the other way around, if their arrival in the Philippines mirrored their arrival in Australia.
My working of events reverses the traditional model and postulates that the proto-Malay appeared first, and then the Australoid-Sakais. The proto-Malay were short and very hairy – were they related to the Ainu? It is not known if they were Australoid or not. The nature of the proto-Malay is completely unclear.
A very hairy and early Asian seems to imply someone related to the Ainu. The proto-Ainu were in Thailand 18,000 years ago as the Jomon, when they got on boats and moved up to Japan. In Malaysia, the proto-Malay are the product of Austronesians from Taiwan breeding in with Veddoid Senoi.
It is not known if the proto-Malay described in the peopling of the Philippines are the same people as those in Malaysia, but these people do not seem to be hairy at all.
It seems more logical that the proto-Malay described here may have been the same Murrayan Jomonese-Ainu who came to Australia 15,000-20,000 years ago, possibly from Thailand, later mixed with the Carpinterians, and went on to become the Aborigines. As the Philippines is on the way from Thailand to Australia, it’s conceivable they could have moved into the Philippines along the way.
Australoid-Sakais were the next group to come to Philippines after the proto-Malay. The Sakais are the same as the Senoi in Malaysia.
The Senoi are the subject of the most flagrant yet little known anthropological frauds of our time – the Senoi Dream Theory fraud. A discussion goes beyond the scope of this post, but this exhaustive site fills in all the blanks.
They seem to be a part-Veddoid group with links to the Veddoids of India and Sri Lanka. They also seem to have some roots in Southern China 5,000 years ago. It appears that whatever movements brought them to Malaysia may have carried them over to the Philippines. The Sakai mixed in heavily with the Negritos.
It is quite possible that this is the same group as the Carpinterian Australoids who left India 10,000-15,000 years ago and went to Australia to mingle with the Murrayan Australoids and become the Aborigines. As the Philippines is on the way from southern India to Australia, it’s conceivable they could have stopped by the Philippines along the way.
All of these early Australoid groups – the Sakai, the proto-Malay and the Negritos – seem to have left little trace on the Filipinos of today.
The next group to come to the Philippines were the Nesiots. Some say the Nesiots were Austronesians from Taiwan; others say they came from Indonesia. Wherever they came from, their ancestors are the Tboli of Mindanao, Apayaos, Gaddangs, Ibanags, Lumad and Kalingas of Northern Luzon; the Tagbanuas of Palawan; and the Bagobos, Manobos, Mandayans, Bukidnons, Tirurays and Sabanuns of Mindanao.

A Tboli tribal from South Cotabato Province in Southwest Mindanao. These people are said to be proto-Malays who arrived even before the Austronesians who came to the Philippines 5,000 years ago. No one really knows where these proto-Malays came from. Some say they came from Indonesia, but that seems dubious. Perhaps genetics can sort all this out.
The Tboli language is in excellent shape, with 95,000 speakers, and there are 10,000 Tboli monolinguals. Tboli is spoken freely and everywhere by the group. Their literacy rate in Tboli is 50-60%, excellent for such a small language.
This document, Figurative Uses of ‘Breath’ in Tboli, is a linguistics text dealing with the field of Semantics, or the meaning of words. It’s easily readable by any reasonably educated reader of this blog, and you might find it interesting to dip into it.
In Tboli, one may combine the noun “breath” with 53 different adjectives and verbs to create different expressions of emotions, characteristics, or new verbs. Lengun nawa – “coffin breath” – worry, anxiety – is a cool example. More at the link.

The first wave of Nesiots came 5,000 years ago. They were tall and thin, and had light skin, deep set eyes, aquiline noses and thin lips. It is common to say that these people were part-Caucasian, but there is little evidence of this. Some of the Mangyan of Mindoro today do look somewhat Caucasian.

An Igorot of Luzon. They have a distinctive appearance that most Filipinos can recognize. These are among the last groups of Austronesians out of Taiwan. These people are also known as Bontoc, and speak two different languages, Central Bontoc and Northern Kankanay. Together these groups number 110,000. Note the terraced rice fields. Rice cultivation was brought to the Philippines by the Austronesians when they first arrived maybe 5,000 years ago from Taiwan.
Some Bontoks look quite Negrito – the woman in this photo obviously has Negrito blood.
An Alangan Mangyan woman from north-central Mindoro.The language has 7,694 speakers and is in good shape. Some say these people may be related to Negritos, but that is not proven. I have a friend on Mindoro who says she likes the Mangyan but prefers not to deal with them when they come into Calapan City where she stays sometimes. Asked why not, she said it is because they smell bad.
They live pretty primitive lives via slash and burn agriculture in the jungles of Mindoro, but maybe they don’t bathe all that much. They come into the cities now and then to buy stuff. The men, even today, are often clad only in a loincloth.

A second wave came later. They were shorter, bulkier and darker, with thick lips, wide noses and heavy jaws. As these groups are also related to the Sea Dayak of Borneo and the Batak of Sumatra anthropologically, and the Paiwan Taiwanese aborigines genetically, it seems strange to say that they came from Indonesia.
They were probably ancestors of the Paiwan who came to Indonesia and the Philippines by boats. Ancestors of the Batak later went on to populate Polynesia and from there Micronesia. I call the group made up of Sea Dayak, Sumatrans, Balinese and the Paiwan the Island SE Asian Race.
From 700-2,300 yrs ago, the last wave of Austronesians came from Taiwan, and these are the present day Pinoys. This group, traditionally called Malays, is almost exclusively related to the Ami aborigine tribe of Taiwan. An initial group of these Ami came 1,900-2,300 years ago and formed the primitive, headhunting groups in the Luzon hill tribes. These tribes include the Igorots, Ifugaos , Bontoks and the Tinggians or Tinguians.
Another group of Ami came from 700-1,900 years ago, and includes the Visayans, Tagalogs, Ilocanos, Bicolanos and Kapampangans. This group was much more advanced than the earlier group, and actually used an alphabet. The overwhelming majority of Filipinos today are related to this last group.
900 years ago, a large wave of southern Chinese came to the Philippines on boats and totally mixed in with the Ami-Filipinos.

Beautiful little Filipina girls. This is a classic Filipino phenotype.

Present-day Filipinos are mostly related to the Ami of Taiwan who came 700- 2,300 years ago, with heavy Southern Chinese admixture from the Chinese who came 900 years ago. The ancient Southern Chinese portion has totally mixed in to the point where we cannot see it genetically anymore, but it is there and can be seen by plotting Filipinos with Southern Chinese and noting that they plot quite close together.
More recently, there has also been some mixing with Chinese, but most Filipinos do not show evidence of this recent mixing. About 20% of Filipinos do have recent Chinese ancestry though.
Tales that the Filipinos are part-Australoid or heavily mixed with Negrito, very common beliefs among racists, racialists and amateur anthropologists on the Internet, are all in error, at least based on genetics or skull measures. The notion that Filipinos are part-Australoid is based on looking at their faces and noting that their faces appear somewhat Australoid.
This older anthropological method of dividing up groups into racial types a la Carleton Coon has fallen completely out of favor in recent years.

An old photo of Tagalogs on Luzon from the early part of the 20th Century. Some Filipinos are quite dark. Even these people are probably mostly Chinese people from Taiwan.

The Filipinos are first and foremost a Southern Chinese people, genetically related to the far Southern Han Chinese from around Hong Kong and the aboriginal Taiwanese tribe, the Ami.

A cute Ami girl from the Ami tribe of Taiwanese aborigines. Modern-day Filipinos, excepting some tribals, are extremely close genetically to the Ami of Taiwan, such that one can easily posit a Filipino-Ami subgroup. The most parsimonious conclusion is that most Filipinos today are derived from a large group of Ami who traveled via boat from Taiwan to the Philippines from 700-2,300 years.
There has since been a large infusion of Chinese to the Philippines. Many Filipinos in and around Manila claim recent Chinese ancestry. The Ami and other Taiwanese tribes were headhunters even as recently as the 1930’s. During the Japanese occupation, they were a perennial headache to the occupiers.
They had a tendency to behead the local Hokko Chinese (the mainland Chinese who came to Taiwan starting in the 1600’s). In one incident related in Time Magazine from the 1930’s, 100 Taiwanese aborigine women committed suicide en masse as their village was attacked by Japanese colonists, screaming that if their men warriors were killed defending the village, they would die too.

Map of Taiwanese aborigines showing the location of the Ami on the east coast of the island. The Ami were perfectly positioned to colonize much of island SE Asia.

Recent research shows some intriguing suggestions of closer link between Ami and the rest of the extra-Taiwanese Austronesian languages than between extra-Taiwanese Austronesian and the non-Ami Taiwanese languages. Austronesian is a vast family, but all of the main branches but one are on the island of Taiwan.

All extra-Taiwanese Austronesian languages form one vast family. There are cognates between such unexpected languages as Tagalog and Hawaiian, showing that the two peoples are related. The very deep diversity in Taiwanese Austronesian indicates that the Taiwanese languages have been evolving on the island for a very long time.

In fact, I was able to construct a compact race called that I called the South China Sea Race, composed of Filipinos, the Ami of Taiwan and the Guangdong Han, a shorthand for the Southern Chinese of Guangdong Province, Hong Kong and the Taiwan Strait.

The ancient proto-Ami descendants of the Filipinos were the speakers of Austronesian ancestor language of all the Philippines, the Sama-Bajau languages and Gorontalo-Mongondow languages. They also founded the Zabag Empire and it’s successor Lusung Empire, ancient small kingdoms in the Philippines. There were ancient Yue Kingdoms in Guangdong that were originally founded by the Ami of Taiwan.
There have been complaints in the comments section at the end of the post that Filipinos and Hong Kong Chinese do not look much alike. I do not know Asians very well, and to me Southern Chinese from around Hong Kong have darker skins and more SE Asian features than any other Chinese that I have encountered.
Apparently, Hong Kong Chinese and Filipinos can be readily discerned by those in the know. However, some say that when they are in Hong Kong, they have a hard time telling the Filipinos from the Hong Kong natives. They says the only way they can tell them apart is by talking to them.
But my racial classification is not based on phenotype – it is based on genes and genes alone. Check the Capelli and Chu papers linked at the end of the piece for evidence linking first the Filipinos to the Ami, and then the Hong Kong Chinese to the Ami.
The Chinese in this area have some of the world’s highest recorded IQ’s of around ~105. Oddly, the Filipino IQ is only 86, but there is a tremendous amount of malnutrition in the Philippines, and the population is poorly educated as the semi-feudal state spends almost nothing on schooling the people.
Filipinos I have known of no more than average intelligence show typical Asian traits of behavioral inhibition, calmness, shyness, self-consciousness and even a degree of introversion in the females along typical Asian time preference and providence (willingness to work hard today in the interest of possible rewards at some unknown future time).
Improvidence is typically associated with lower IQ’s, while increased providence is associated with higher IQ’s, so it is interesting to see that the Filipinos, with a relatively low IQ of 86, have behavioral attributes of higher-IQ groups.
I have been completely stunned by the highly developed math skills of Filipinos who have only at best average intelligence. Asian intelligence is highly weighted towards math and visual intelligence. All of these things add weight to the notion of Filipinos being a Southern Chinese people.
India, with a national IQ of only 81, has developed an amazing high tech and call center economy. Call centers are moving to the Philippines, where, if anything, English skills are better than in India. I think that the Philippines shows good potential for IT, based on better than expected math skills. Lack of behavioral disinhibition and good time preference ought to be good traits in the Filipino labor force.
Like many people who evolved in the tropics, Filipinos are sunny, happy and seemingly carefree. They love to laugh, sing and party. In this way they resemble Thais, Cambodians, Laos, Malays, Polynesians, Micronesians, Melanesians, Indonesians, Caribbeans and even Africans.

Typical Filipinos of today. Note the easy smiles and carefree faces. Poster is from a government contraception campaign, badly needed in this overpopulated land.

The Philippines may have a better future in the modern economy than many think.
This blog does support the armed Maoist insurgency waged by the New People’s Army in the Philippines, but that is really the subject of another post.

References

Bulbeck, D., Rainer, D. Groves, C., Raghavan, P. 2003. “The Contribution of South Asia to the Peopling of Australasia” and the Relevance of Basel’s Naturhistorisch Museum to the Anthropological Collection to the Project Aims. Bull. Soc. Suisse d’Anthrop. 9(2):49-70.
Capelli, C., Wilson, J.F., Richards, M., Stumpf, M.P.H., Gratrix, F., Oppenheimer, S., Underhill, P., Pascali, V.L., Ko, T.M., and Goldstein, D.B. 2001. A Predominantly Indigenous Paternal Heritage for the Austronesian-Speaking Peoples of Insular Southeast Asia and Oceania. American Journal of Human Genetics 68:432-443.
Cavalli-Sforza, L. L., P. Menozzi, A. Piazza. 1994. The History and Geography of Human Genes. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Chu, J. Y., Huang, W., Kuang, S. Q., Wang, J. M., Xu, J. J., Chu, Z. T., Yang, Z. Q., Lin, K. Q., Li, P., Wu, M., Geng, Z. C., Tan, C. C., Du, R. F., and Jin, L.. 1998. Genetic Relationship of Populations in China. Proceedings of the National Academy of the Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS) 95:11763-11768.
Gaillard, Jean-Christophe and Mallari, Joel P. 2004. The Peopling of the Philippines: A Cartographic Synthesis. Hukay: Journal of the University of the Philippines Archaeological Studies Program. 6:1-27.
Harihara, S., Saitou, N., Hirai, M., Gojobori, T., Park, K. S., Misawa, S., Ellepola, S. B., Ishida, T. and Omoto, K. 1988. Mitochondrial DNA Polymorphism Among Five Asian Populations. American Journal of Human Genetics 43:134-143.
Headland, Thomas N. 2003. Thirty Endangered Languages in the Philippines. Work Papers of the Summer Institute of Linguistics, University of North Dakota Session 47.
Jablonski, N. and Chaplin, G. 2000. The Evolution of Human Skin Coloration. Journal of Human Evolution.
Miller, Jeanne and Helen W. Miller. 1978. Mamanwa [language texts].‭ In Evan L. Antworth (ed.), Folktale Texts, 80-90. Studies in Philippine Linguistics, 2(2). Manila: Linguistic Society of the Philippines and Summer Institute of Linguistics.
Omoto, K. 1984. The Negritos: Genetic Origins and Microevolution. Acta Anthropogenetics 8(1-2):137-47.
Omoto, K., Ueda, S., Goriki, K., Takahashi, N., Misawa, S., and Pagaran, I. G. 1981. Population Genetic Studies of the Philippine Negritos. III. Identification of the Carbonic Anhydrase-1 Variant With CA1 Guam. American Journal of Human Genetics 33(1):105-111.
Porter, Doris. 1977. Figurative Uses of ‘Breath’ in Tboli.‭ Studies in Philippine Linguistics 1(1):148-50.
Schumacher, Ronald L. 1986. Stative Verbs at Peak in Agusan Manobo Narrative Discourse.‭ Studies in Philippine Linguistics 6(1):80-93.

This research takes a lot of time, and I do not get paid anything for it. If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a a contribution to support more of this valuable research.

Moronicans, Continued.

The evidence, no fossil record needed.
I was hoping we were sort of evolving some more sense about this stuff, but I guess not.
Particularly horrifying figures: Only 39% of Americans believe in evolution. A majority of Republicans (!) do not believe in evolution. Only 74% of Americans with postgrad degrees believe in evolution. An incredible 14% of Americans with postgrad degrees (From where? Moron U.?) are unable to associate Charles Darwin with evolutionary theory. Question was what scientific theory is Darwin associated with. Maybe it’s time we start revoking some of these “postgrad degrees.”
Unsurprising findings: The more you go to church, the dumber you are (the less likely you are to believe in evolution). Regular church-going seems to prolong life at the same time as it shrinks the brain. And the more education you have, the less stupid you are (the more likely you are to believe in evolution).
It’s too bad that fundamentalist Protestantism in the US has drawn a line in the sand at evolutionary theory. The Catholic Church, more flexible than one might think, has said that belief in evolution is compatible with Catholic doctrine. This shows that Christianity and evolutionary theory are compatible. I don’t believe Jesus uttered a word on the subject of evolution, did he? Case closed.
Hat tip to the Inductivist, an interesting, albeit rightwing blog.