Does hair and eye color have any importance in classification?

[Kouros]

Is proper classification based entirely on facial structure, nose shape, cephalic index etc. (quantitative features) or should a classification account for qualitative features such as eye/hair color and whatever other features that don't lie on a continuum (butt chin or whatever)?

Also what is +CM used for? To signify robustness?

And can a significant change in just a single quantitative feature represent a new or different race/taxon? For example if someone is low vaulted vs high vaulted vs medium vaulted while keeping all other features constant.

[Veslan]

Is proper classification based entirely on facial structure, nose shape, cephalic index etc. (quantitative features) or should a classification account for qualitative features such as eye/hair color and whatever other features that don't lie on a continuum (butt chin or whatever)?
Yes pigmentation matters. It shows Nordid or UP influence. People saying "Depigmented X" are just retards who don't know what they are talking about.

Also what is +CM used for? To signify robustness?
Yes, especially when we can't be sure from what type of CM an individual inherited robustness (and when we are sure it's not from Alpines).

And can a significant change in just a single quantitative feature represent a new or different race/taxon? For example if someone is low vaulted vs high vaulted vs medium vaulted while keeping all other features constant.
Yes it can.

[Kouros]

Yes pigmentation matters. It shows Nordid or UP influence. People saying "Depigmented X" are just retards who don't know what they are talking about.
Can you give an example of, let's say, standard alpine and a lighter colored alpine with the exact same quantitative features and tell me how we would classify the latter? Like is it nordo-alpine?


Yes it can.
Example here also would be great.

[Veslan]

Can you give an example of, let's say, standard alpine and a lighter colored alpine with the exact same quantitative features and tell me how we would classify the latter? Like is it nordo-alpine?
Subnordid with Alpine predominance. (CI: 85.8, FI: 81.4, NI: 63.5)
https://antropologia-fizyczna.pl/images/typologia/michalski/al-3434343.jpg
Standard Alpine (CI: 85.6, FI: 82.1, 66)
https://antropologia-fizyczna.pl/images/typologia/michalski/hl-30943043904309.jpg

Both of these Swiss men have wide face, narrow nose and brachycephaly (actually the Nordid-influenced Swiss has higher CI...). The first man has hovever Blond hair, so he is definitely Nordid admixed.


Example here also would be great.
Dinarics for an example have always flat occiput, so if you have curved occiput, you are not a pure Dinaric.

[Kouros]

bamp

[Kouros]

bump

[Token]

Is proper classification based entirely on facial structure, nose shape, cephalic index etc. (quantitative features) or should a classification account for qualitative features such as eye/hair color and whatever other features that don't lie on a continuum (butt chin or whatever)?
The typologic system of past-century Anthropology relies entirely in measurements, or do you think it is possible to know the pigmentation of a skull by looking at it or using a calipher? Now we can do it with the helps of genetics but even so we can just guess based in particular genes that can or not emerge in the phenotype of a individual, in the past it was not possible. The indexes is what defines a type, pigmentation is important in Anthrobards among people that don't know what the fuck they are talking about.

[Token]

Also what is +CM used for? To signify robustness?
Yes, at least how most amateurs use it, just like they use Alpine for anyone who is overweight or Berid for ugly people.


And can a significant change in just a single quantitative feature represent a new or different race/taxon? For example if someone is low vaulted vs high vaulted vs medium vaulted while keeping all other features constant.
No, a change in one feature while retaining others of a specific type means that the individual's phenotype is influenced by another distinct type.