If Indian/Paki didn't had South India admixture, would they look Persian, Iranic?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fire Haired

it does Race and Ethnicity in the United States.

---

Nope, these are the race options on the census.

"White. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as "White" or report entries such as Irish, German, Scottish, Italian, Near Easterner, Arab, or Polish.

"Black or African American. A person having origins in any of the Black racial groups of Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as 'Black, African Am.' or provide written entries such as Kenyan, Nigerian, or Haitian."
"
American Indian and Alaska Native. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of North and South America (including Central America) and who maintain tribal affiliation or community attachment."

Asian. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian subcontinent including, for example, Cambodia, China, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, the Philippine Islands, Thailand, and Vietnam. It includes 'Asian Indian,' 'Chinese', 'Filipino', 'Korean', 'Japanese', 'Vietnamese', and 'Other Asian'."

Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or other Pacific Islands. It includes people who indicate their race as 'Native Hawaiian', 'Guamanian or Chamorro', 'Samoan', and 'Other Pacific Islander'."

Without south indians the rest of india would be white or anyway white-asian. Without indian and african slaves all of central asia would be white, so would most of middle east. Yes, arab type equals white, jew type equals white. It's the mixing with indians, africans and semetics where all the features westerners don't like as much come from. If you look back at any art you'll see actually that's how everything used to be, and not all that long ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Melonhead

Without south indians the rest of india would be white or anyway white-asian. Without indian and african slaves all of central asia would be white, so would most of middle east. Yes, arab type equals white, jew type equals white. It's the mixing with indians, africans and semetics where all the features westerners don't like as much come from. If you look back at any art you'll see actually that's how everything used to be, and not all that long ago.

---

What evidence do u have ur just going off of assumptions. The south asians i get sick of mentioning aust dna but their unque look at globe13 INdia is their native land they have lived there for over 30,00 years probably over 50,000. starting 5,000ybp there was a huge migration of white people out of northern Russian Yamna culture and they spread Indo iranian languages and Y DNA R1a1a1b2 Z93. Y DNa spread by Indo Europeans where did proto indo iranians ancestry orignate. And they were the biggest people group in central asai there where pretty much 100% white people living from the black sea to western china and central Siberia from 5,000-1,600ybp. Some groups like Scythian's might be more familiar. Most people would think this is crazy but it is true in the bronze and iron age most of central Asia was completely white and they remains with DNA that can tell hair color and eye color show they looked most like north western Europeans they had mainly blonde hair like Finnish but a good amount of red hair probably over 3% like British. They are not the natives of central asia.

And about the mid east what u are saying makes no sense u need to look at DNA. Europeans are apart of the same family as mid easterns and north Africans. Actulley Afgahn are more related to Europeans than Arabs aust dna proves it. Europeans main ancestors would have migrated out of Caucus, Antolia, Iraq-Iran area and settled in Europe over 30,000ybp. Europeans are the ones that changed in skin color that is why North African and arabs look like Afghans even though Afgahns are more related to Europeans. The genes associated with European pale skin exist in mid easterns and north africans at almost the same rate, All European palenss fair hair and eyes and red hair all originated in the mid east (Origin of European palness) they became much much much much more popular in Europeans ancestors. There is more dark skinned osuth asian admicture in Pakistan but besides that in the mid east very very little to non. And there is some east african admicture in southern Arabia but that all. I am going all off globe13 aust dna.

We know what the genes are for skin color, and we know where they come from. There's no "theory" here this is just fact. It was historical fact pretty much too, to anyone who isn't an afrocentrist, nationalist, or simply a complete moron and knew history well. But now we know the genes, we know where they came from, and we know it's true for sure. The skin genes are like permanent marker, they are multigenic and dominant so they don't wash out easy and just a little mixing makes for skin that's much darker.

I don't know why you have trouble with the idea it's not like I made it up. They don't call white people caucasian for nothing. All those J and G etc. people, and persians and iranians, are where white people come from in the first place. Mohammed was white, too, for that matter.