Question to spanish people

[BARBATVS]

You have a very strange idea of "superiority"... and definitely far from a Christian point of view, yet you claim to be a Christian.

Christians agree with God, and he burned fags alive in Sodom & Gomorrah heretic.
Let's say I said rapists should be imprisoned. Would you act indignant then? :-) "Oh, a Christian can't say that because that offends the rapists!" How come some sinners get a free pass and some don't? You hypocrite.

[Loki]

Christians agree with God, and he burned fags alive in Sodom & Gomorrah heretic.
Let's say I said rapists should be imprisoned. Would you act indignant then? :-) "Oh, a Christian can't say that because that offends the rapists!" How come some sinners get a free pass and some don't? You hypocrite.

You falsely assume a lot of things and attribute them to me that I haven't said.

[AlfonsoVIII]

Iberians existed before Germanic invasions. Visigoths are not the original Iberians. Neither are Vandals. I don't know if Celts were there as early as my ancestors but Celts were in the north, not the south and east of HISPANIA. The king of Spain now is not an original Iberian. He is of the Germanic invaders, but I don't hate his race nor any race anywhere.

Have you undergone a DNA test or something similar to affirm so strongly that you are 100% Iberian? I would say that 100% pre-Indo-European Iberian Spaniards don't exist.

This statue (if it appears; I don't know, since I'm not great with computers) of IMPERATOR AVGVSTVS shows his lips being bigger than typical Nordic lips, so Romans were not like Germanics. Thin lips keep more heat in. This is why blacks have the biggest lips. No need to trap heat in Sub-Saharan Africa. Augustus had lips like me, since both are Europeans racially natives to the Mediterranean with a warm climate. Hence lips being neither extreme of thin or thick, generally. Alexander the Great also had such lips, as depicted by ancient POMPEII people.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/55/a0...023e3b8122.jpg

Compare to typical Nordic or Germanic lips like:

https://www.newstatesman.com/sites/d...9885392369a3f3

Negroid lips:
https://ioneblackamericaweb.files.wo...ll&w=478&h=484

And all this comes down to the thickness of the lips or is there anything else?

Ancient Romans were descendants of ancient Italic peoples -Latins, Faliscans, Oscans, Umbrians, etc.-, who shared ethnic and cultural origin with ancient Celts -both people descended from the cultures of Central European Bronze, such as Urnfields and Hallstatt- and therefore Celts and Italics -and their descendants Romans- share important genetic and phenotypic features. Among the Romans the main paternal haplogroup was R1b-U152, the same as among the Gauls, the Helvecians and other Central European Celtic peoples; Similarly, blue and green eyes and blond and red hair were widespread among Roman patrician families, which usually used names such as Flavius ​​(blond) or Rufus (redhead). The same Emperor Augustus whom you mention was blond, just like Alexander the Great, whose paternal haplogroup was R1a, the main paternal haplogroup among Northern Slavs.

[BARBATVS]

You falsely assume my first question was not rhetorical, hence your not answering it in your response consisting entirely of equivocation. Step out of that smokescreen and be clear on the "plight" of rapist "rights" to not be offended by someone calling for their being punished. What should their punishment be? Can I offend them or not?

[Samnium]

Similarly, blue and green eyes and blond and red hair were widespread among Roman patrician families, which usually used names such as Flavius ​​(blond) or Rufus (redhead). The same Emperor Augustus whom you mention was blond, just like Alexander the Great, whose paternal haplogroup was R1a, the main paternal haplogroup among Northern Slavs.

You largely exagerate the lightness of patricians, roman patricians were west-looking and IMO probably similar to N.Italians/N.Central Italians in genetics that's all.

For the pigmentation of the emperors or the patricians we have a lot of doubt on a lot of people (if they were blonde or not for example) so I wouldn't say that "blue eyes" and "blond hair" were widespread, it's only you that are extrapolating upon a non-existent fact.

The only point that I agree with is that they were different from the plebeian that were predominantly from a mediterranean stock.

To end the debate, Proto-Italic tribes had already mixed with local people since a long time when Rome was created.

[BARBATVS]

You falsely assume a lot of things and attribute them to me that I haven't said.

For clarification, my assumption was GIVING YOU THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT that you were against rapists like most people.
Since you say my gracious assumption was false, you are unwittingly saying that you are actually a defender of rapists. :-)
Most libtards never whine when certain sinners are treated with contempt, but they put faggots on a pedestal as if they are better than zoofags who get consent by body language form the dog they let penetrate them. In one case you lie about which gender you are meant for, and in the other you lie about which species you are meant for. Same shit. Now stop running away and answer the questions, or all shall see you are a coward. Notice how a bunch of degenerates give you support because you support the abomination. You have the majority but I have the truth. The majority is on a bandwagon to hell. The herd mentality makes you feel warm, doesn't it? It's gonna get a lot warmer, and a lot hotter!

[BARBATVS]

To AlfonsoVIII:

"Have you undergone a DNA test or something similar to affirm so strongly that you are 100% Iberian?"

DNA is interpreted, and interpretations are subjective. Let's say there's a gene that makes a nose big. Someone says that this is the Jewish gene, as if only Jews can have big noses. Keep in mind that in every race you have some with exaggerated or watered-down features. Not all Germans are tall, for instance. Also, only a handful of people in a race are genetically examined entirely to see patterns, not all of the members of a race, so the results are skewed by the selection of the premises.
I don't trust the establishment's interpretations. I don't let them do the thinking for me. Free-thinking is good. As for the Iberian race, they don't even have someone they consider racially an original Iberian in order to prove it is original Iberian DNA, do they?
Logic is good enough for me, in that I am not a Berber comparing myself to them.
I am not Germanic, comparing myself to them.
I am not a Celt, comparing myself to them.
I am not Roman (at least mostly, comparing myself to Italians like Sylvester Stallone and Giuliani.)
I am not Greek, comparing myself to them.
I am not Phoenician, comparing myself to the Lebanese who apparently have a lot of Phoenician blood.
I am not a Gypsy, as those are Indians.
I am not a Jew since I'm white though I tan, while Abraham was from Ur in Sumeria, and Semitic noses are different than mine.
I am not a Berber, comparing myself to Cheb Khaled.
I assume Carthaginians were Berbers.
I am none of these people known to have entered Iberia, so I must be of the natives. That's the best explanation with no decent rival.

"I would say that 100% pre-Indo-European Iberian Spaniards don't exist."

That's like saying that no Anglo-Saxons today lack Viking blood. Vikings invaded Britain but that doesn't mean their blood has to be in every single descendant of the British.
Here in Cambodia, the Thai and the Vietnamese have invaded gradually over the generations, yet you can clearly see three main races: light-skinned, basically white Siamese, dark Kmai (Khmer) and the in-between Vietnamese, with some who are mixed. People tend to marry within the same culture and sharing the same language, and culture is passed down by family, and a race is a big family so races tend to have a shared culture.

"And all this comes down to the thickness of the lips or is there anything else?"

Lips are a better indicator than hair because hair is far more subject to change.
The fact that Romans were remarking at the colour of barbarians' hair and height means the typical Roman was not so tall and not so reflective of light. Were the Romans you assume were blond described as taller than the average Roman? I bet not.
Also noses can be compared though lips are a better way to differentiate northern from southern as explained already.
Romans or Italics tend to have big eyes. I don't, which is evidence I am not a Roman.
There's more, and you can see for yourself what to compare.

"Ancient Romans were descendants of ancient Italic peoples -Latins, Faliscans, Oscans, Umbrians, etc.-, who shared ethnic and cultural origin with ancient Celts -both people descended from the cultures of Central European Bronze, "

A race is a big family, and of course Nordics, Celts, Iberians, Italics, Greeks are all Aryans or Caucasians. Whatever you want to call it.
But zooming into the general race are more specific races, or less extended families. That's the issue here.

"Among the Romans the main paternal haplogroup was R1b-U152, the same as among the Gauls, the Helvecians and other Central European Celtic peoples;"

I heard we share about 98 percent of DNA with chimps which is not due to common descent but because God wanted creatures resembling us somewhat (I did a post in the atheism section of this website proving macro-evolution impossible.) Since we can find many similarities to apes, finds of similarities between barbarians and Romans is not saying much.

"Similarly, blue and green eyes and blond and red hair were widespread among Roman patrician families, which usually used names such as Flavius ​​(blond) or Rufus (redhead)."

You speak of eyes but the words themselves do not. FLAVIVS can be interpreted to refer to brilliance, like glory. Golden in modern English can refer to old age. "Old is gold." You may as well argue that FLAVIVS being the name of a Roman proves he was associated with wisdom via old age as if his parents wanted him to be a sage. RVFVS reminds me of the name Esau in the Bible based on: "And the first came out red, all over like an hairy garment; and they called his name Esau."
RVFVS might also refer to his skin being red like when someone blushes. I get red when I exercise hard, when usually I am brown from tanning unintentionally since I have almost always lived in tropical places.
Germanics tend to have less melanin and therefore the blood under their skin makes their skin look more red but of course northern Europeans like them are not the only ones who can have such skin.

You have not ruled out alternative interpretations to your taking the glory of Rome for your own people akin to blacks claiming Egypt just because there was a Nubian dynasty or two, the exception to the rule. They have a better argument than you, thus far, since Nubians did indeed rule Egypt for a time until Assyrians took them down. Later, Greeks ruled Egypt, so you have the other extreme where some may claim Egyptian leaders were always white.

"The same Emperor Augustus whom you mention was blond, just like Alexander the Great, whose paternal haplogroup was R1a, the main paternal haplogroup among Northern Slavs."

Using some of DNA to extrapolate onto the whole of the race is like using a"big nose gene" to say "therefore Jewish." With DNA claims, I'd have to take the establishment at its word, but I don't want to be gullible. Without having all members of every race genetically examined entirely, your claims will be argument from ignorance fallacies. You (we) don't know enough to make those claims.
Alexander the Great was not exactly blond, but like an Asiatic lion which has black hair with blond.

Asiatic lions were closest to Greece. Here is a picture of one with blond hair but also black:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...iatic_Lion.jpg

Egyptians, Romans and Greeks were known to have used dyes sometimes, which might explain Alexander having hair not common at all in the Greek race. I read he even may have used henna when he got to the east of the Persian Empire he conquered. Maybe he wanted to stand out among others, which is also why generals have marks of distinction. Maybe he was trying to look like a lion. You have Greeks showing themselves in the fur-coats of lions after all.
This is a modern representation of Heracles in the lion mane:

https://www.sculpturegallery.com/top...les_Lion_3.jpg

Then ancient evidence:

https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/...20170708223159


Aléxanthros ho Mégas was Macedonian, and that makes him Greek as much as a Cretan is Greek. After barbarian invasions such as from Celts and much later, Hungarians, you had the northern parts of Greece more like Germanics and Slavs than southern Greece, while Crete, being isolated from those invasions in general, preserved the true Greek look better. Here is a modern Cretan with the same type of hair as the Great one's:
http://www.greece-is.com/wp-content/.../08/7053-1.jpg

That's black hair mixed with blond, just like the POMPEII depiction of Alexander shows.

Guess he didn't dye it, but had it along with black hair just like an Asiatic lion.

[BARBATVS]

PS

More Roman Emperors, and how you can interpret the Latin to fit an agenda or whim:

1. COMMODVS meaning "advantageous," or "timely" which MUST MEAN he was born when Rome defeated Parthia or some other menace.
2. CLAVDIVS means "Lame." Oh, look at that! He must have been unable to walk all his life.
3. HADRIAN means of the Adriatic, huh? Must mean he was born there or drowned there.
4. VESPA is in VESPASIANVS apparently, and the former refers to a wasp, so he must have gotten the name after his mom got stung on her pregnant belly on a Tuesday afternoon at five o' clock sharp!
5. NERVVS apparently means penis, so he must have been gifted by the gods!

See? These are as sound as the "His name means red so he had to be a redhead even though Romans are known throughout the ages to have black hair" types of arguments.

[AlfonsoVIII]

You largely exagerate the lightness of patricians, roman patricians were west-looking and IMO probably similar to N.Italians/N.Central Italians in genetics that's all.

For the pigmentation of the emperors or the patricians we have a lot of doubt on a lot of people (if they were blonde or not for example) so I wouldn't say that "blue eyes" and "blond hair" were widespread, it's only you that are extrapolating upon a non-existent fact.

The only point that I agree with is that they were different from the plebeian that were predominantly from a mediterranean stock.

To end the debate, Proto-Italic tribes had already mixed with local people since a long time when Rome was created.

It seems that you take it for granted that I said that these features were majority among the patricians; I only said that they were widespread, enough not to be considered something strange.

It is a fact that blond and red hair and light eyes were not something strange or unknown among the Roman patricians, although they were not common.

[Samnium]

It seems that you take it for granted that I said that these features were majority among the patricians; I only said that they were widespread, enough not to be considered something strange.

It is a fact that blond and red hair and light eyes were not something strange or unknown among the Roman patricians, although they were not common.

Again, I repeat : there isn't any sufficient scientific proofs to say that, you certainly can't rely on ancient writers for that since they contradict themselves.

The only fact that you can see is that phenotypically they were different from plebeian, that's all.