Huh? Don't misconstrue my words. I didn't say you're supposed to factor in ancestry/nationality when determining a phenotype, obviously... My point was, phenotypes are supposed to look the same, or very similar, and pointed out it's curious that your NW Euro/American examples all actually do look like one, homogenous, similar looking phenotype, while your examples from say Turkey, look completely different(to me anyway, and I'd be willing to bet a majority of people). The differences between your examples are not an issue of whether or not they look carbon copy, some look a good half a continent apart. If an animal taxonomist calls a Bengal tiger a Siberian tiger they lose their job, finding out where something is from is the entire point of anthropology.
Phenotypes should look the same, otherwise there's no point. If you classify someone who has say, 25% Atlanto-Med influence and 75% Nordic influence, and someone who has 75% Atlanto-Med influence and 25% Nordic influence both "Atlantid", there's literally no point of phenotypes because they then describe vastly different looking people, don't describe specific looks, don't predict ancestry/ethnicity, they're pointless. If you put all your Turkish and English Atlantid examples together in one thread without names and people are able to guess the Turks vs the English, there is no "Atlantid phenotype", it's meaningless.
"core of his phenotype is clearly Mediterranean" isn't very specific(actually nvm I don't want specifics/to hear something about "gonial angles" or whatever). Is the core of his phenotype clearly Mediterranean like the core of this Turkish chick is clearly Tronder? :laugh:
https://abload.de/img/65624458_391010264863c6jzl.jpg
Btw, I'm not even saying you're doing it wrong, as far as old anthropology goes(Coon also had both British examples and southern Euro examples of Atlanto-Meds for example, for his textbook plates, to me they look nothing alike but you guys do you, Coon also basically called southern Europeans wogs by suggesting Basques and most North Africans are the same Atlanto-Med race, Spaniards and Levantines the same Med race, when there is great differences in both looks and genetics between the two), you're probably doing it the right way and I'm just not looking at the right features or whatever. Maybe I'm too low IQ to notice such important features such as "gonial angles". I'm just curious why you think old anthropology is worth the toilet paper I wipe my ass with if it doesn't even a) predict ancestry, b) put actual fucking similar looking people on a phenotype textbook plate