View Full Version : Is craniometry scientific?
09-23-2009, 04:04 AM
I know many here like physical anthropology then, just wondering, is craniometry scientific?
Why not more accepted in scientific circles?
09-23-2009, 06:55 AM
Whether it's scientific seems to me to depend on what purpose it's used for (what kind of claims are made to interpret the measurements and are they really mandated by the data?) and whether the methodologies developed for it stand up to the test of scientific method as a whole.
09-23-2009, 08:24 AM
Craniometry was used to construct old style racial theories. The new ones are being mostly forged with the help of genetics.
09-23-2009, 11:20 PM
They're available now at familydnatesting. :p
09-23-2009, 11:42 PM
While craniometry could be considered an auxiliary science it should not be mixed up with phrenology which was quite en vogue till 1945. Not much difference to the Lombrosology of the late 19th century.
09-24-2009, 12:25 AM
Who cares? It's fun! :p
For me it has been a useful physiognomy tool. It has helped me predict quite accurately the behavior on some people based on some general craniometric characteristics :loco:
09-24-2009, 07:31 AM
Alright then! Classify me!
09-24-2009, 11:06 AM
Not really scientific, since there are no serious investigations proving its correctness, maybe due to the thinking it's old fashioned, discriminating and "nazi". However, due my personal observations as a person who pays attention to physical traits, mostly because I used to draw, I've noticed there are certain links between features and character. In fact there is a whole "science" called Physiognomy and it has something to do with craniometry.
I also know doctors use craniometry to describe some genetic diseases.
The Black Prince
09-24-2009, 01:15 PM
Craniometry is still researched by the use of multivariate statistics. The static race/subrace typology system was abandoned during the 1970's mostly. Although nowaday genetics does sometimes use the geographic terms Mediterranean or Nordic to asign a population it is not used in the way of static breed/race.
We now know that the human phenotype is more dynamic, not fully discontinue distribution of racial types, neither full dependant on clines.
That is the main research point nowadays.. how important are inherited traits/genes vs environmental adjusted traits vs mutation rate vs diet vs epi-genes, etc..
btw. here are some of the nowadays studies of craniometry involving multivariate statistics:
Climate Signatures in the Morphological Differentiation of Worldwide Modern Human Populations (http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/122580379/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0)
Contribution of genetics and environment to craniofacial anthropometric phenotypes in Belgian nuclear families. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19728541?dopt=Abstract)
S.L. Sankina, 2009. THE ETHNIC HISTORY OF MEDIEVAL NOVGOROD (BASED ON CRANIOMETRIC DATA). Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia, Volume 37, Issue 2, June 2009, Pages 119-134
And concerning all the typologies.. its fun to do.:thumb001:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.1 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.