Originally Posted by
The Blade
Whether you consider something a stabilized blend, particularly common phenotype, etc. is irrelevant.
According to you many blends don't exist simply 'cause some anthropologist didn't write about them or didn't notice them in particular quantity. Lame logic - whether you like it or not, mixes of Dinarid/Alpinid, Iranid/CM, Mediterranean/Armenoid, Dinarid/CM, etc. all can be observed in reasonable frequency among certain groups.
I am not illiterate and most people here know it well.
Your habit of denying the existence of blends of certain phenotypes is funny, on the other hand.
Again, no anthropologist had the time and chance to visit all parts of the world, so as to give a name to all possible variants of mixed phenotypes within a certain race and between different races, too.
Many of them did visit several regions and coined some specific terms.
Based mostly on this some internet experts described certain mixes of the types mentioned by Coon, Lundman, Biasutti, Günther, Deniker, etc. And they didn't even use numbers which is fine because of borders changing, migrations and later mixing between phenotypes in each state and so on and so forth. Not to mention that in some European states (Russia, Scotland, England, to name a few) different phenotypical proportions exist between upper, middle and lower classes and this has been mentioned by anthropologists and confirms history.
The shittiest source some people here rely on is Richard McCulloch and The Racial Compact. The only worse thing are the delusions of others denying the existence of 80% of phenotypes in a certain area.