Would prehistoric humans have been considered negroid or australoid by modern standards?

[Homo Insapiens]

Based on skulls & reconstructions? What modern races do you think prehistoric humans would have resembled most physically? For me, I think it’s australoids, because they have the most physically archaic features of modern humans, but others may have other opinions.

[L.o.l.i.t.a]

Based on skulls & reconstructions? What modern races do you think prehistoric humans would have resembled most physically? For me, I think it’s australoids, because they have the most physically archaic features of modern humans, but others may have other opinions.

Obviously. And the people closest to the Africans who left Africa giving rise to the Eurasians and Asians are the /Jarawa/sentinels.

[Hoihey]

Ancient humans would have looked like SUBHUMAN BEASTS to modern folks! This was a time when genetic differences were enormous! Everyone in your clan looked like you, inbreeding was a huge concern, isolation was the norm, not the exception. You were far less similar to the tribe 1000 miles away from you as a modern Irishman is to a Chinaman. Tribes were tiny, a few dozen at most who stuck to their own, nations and collective societies were pure insanity at the time. Absolutely no sense of cooperation or unity or diversity if someone was from outside your clan you killed them lest they kill you. This and a tiny population allowed for diversity that makes arguing about modern ethnicities laughable: like arguing how fanatically different a German and a Dane look to modern folks. Countless ethnicities were born, 99% went extinct, the 1% that survived eventually cooperated and formed farming and pastoral settlements, eventually mixing to form modern ethnic groups.

[MechtoidAfalouHG]

Obviously. And the people closest to the Africans who left Africa giving rise to the Eurasians and Asians are the /Jarawa/sentinels.

Yeah but they didn’t look like that, the Jarawa and Onge have developed their own phenotype from adaptations after thousands of years of living on those small islands and being separated from everyone else for so long. The basal eurasians from which everyone comes from would have had a unique cro-magnoid phenotype that doesn’t really closely resemble any of the phenotypes of today. But the older phenotypes such as australoid would have certain similarities with them.

What we know as the modern sub Saharan negroid race is not as old as basal Eurasian, not even close. So we don’t really know for sure what these people coming out of Africa looked like. They were of course dark skinned but what did they look like metrically? We need skeletal remains

[JamesBond007]

Obviously. And the people closest to the Africans who left Africa giving rise to the Eurasians and Asians are the /Jarawa/sentinels.

It has been claimed — from the early 1900s-onward — that the first humans came from Africa (i.e., the “out of Africa” theory), from Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania [1]. So, the theory goes, all humans are ultimately Africans.

But is that true? We must doubt it. For one thing, ever since the Jew, Franz Boas and his many followers came to dominate anthropology, it has been political. Boas (he became popular beginning in circa 1900; by 1911 his bullshit theories were well-known and popular) was pushing his “Cultural Anthropology” crap as early as 1902. He was then vice-president of an organization he himself co-founded: the American Anthropological Association (AAA). Today, “Boasian anthropology” is a thing, and a powerful thing . Trivia: roughly half of the anthropologists in America today believe that “race is a social construct” even though they can examine human bones and see otherwise, e.g., they can see that the skulls of Blacks are very different from the skulls of Whites! It’s sad and disturbing.

Since anthropology is historically so political and so Jewish, you can’t believe the “out of Africa” claim. Just forget it.

And furthermore, as someone noted recently, negroes can be considered a different species than Whites: they have enough physical differences apart from Whites to make it so. Blacks could instead be called “advanced or sophisticated apes” who resemble humans but aren’t. Read about it below [2].

Anytime you have an activist Jew like Boas as a central figure in a scientific discipline, you’ve got trouble. But unfortunately for anthropology, it had several Jews as leading figures in the field: Boas, Claude Levi-Strauss, Ashley Montagu, Melville Herskovitz, Gene Weltfish. (Montagu wrote the bogus UNESCO statements on race in 1950 and 1951. UNESCO, a branch of the UN, was co-founded by a Jew named Rene Cassin).

Bottom line: the field of anthropology is so political and so Jewed that it must begin again. From scratch.

.

[1] “Homo habilis, probably the first early human species, occupied Olduvai Gorge approximately 1.9 million years ago” — Wikipedia, May 2021. Boas was also the founder of race denial: “Boas believed that the sweep of cultures, to be found in connection with any sub-species, is so vast and pervasive that there cannot be a relationship between culture and race.” — Wikipedia, May 2021. So, Western culture is not White, according to Boas. Even though it is White and has been since ancient Greece!


[2] “Blacks are unique in that when we arrived, they had no written language, no wheel, no architectural works, nothing at all that would indicate they live a human existence. Whereas literature and palaces and cities existed in almost every corner of the earth, from the Incas to the Indians to the Persians to the Chinese to Stonehenge to Ankar Wat in Cambodia — nothing existed in Africa.”

https://nationalvanguard.org/2015/03...s-arent-human/

— article “Blacks Aren’t Human


"Recently, two physical anthropologists reanalyzed Boas’s head-form data. They report that Boas — now considered the founding father of modern American anthropology — was wrong.“

“Penn State historian of science Robert Proctor says, ‘Boasians turned away from bones altogether.’ Or, as Skull Wars author Thomas states in an October 8, 2002, New York Times article reporting on the Sparks-Jantz paper: ‘Once we anthropologists said race doesn’t exist, we have ignored it since then.'”

What is a Jew? A human lying machine. Lie, lie, lie, in order to aid the paranoid Jews as a people. Old saying: “each time something big happens in the world, the Jew asks himself only one question: ‘is this good or bad for the Jews?'” Nothing else matters. They are navel-gazing, self-centered people.

https://news.psu.edu/story/140739/20...bones-and-race

[Universe]

It depends on what you mean by 'prehistoric'. If pre-out of africa migration humans existed today, they'd be classified as 'subsaharan african', but prehistoric means 'before written records' (3-4000 BCE) so Cro-Magnons, WHGs, Anatolian farmers etc are also prehistoric. Not to mention ancestors of East Asians, Native Americans, South Asians etc etc... so prehistoric people were diverse, unless by prehistoric you meant pre-out of africa migration (50-100,000 BCE). Then there were other 'humanoid' (non-Sapiens) lineages like Denisovans, Neanderthals, Erectus etc that died out.

[Universe]

Yeah but they didn’t look like that, the Jarawa and Onge have developed their own phenotype from adaptations after thousands of years of living on those small islands and being separated from everyone else for so long. The basal eurasians from which everyone comes from would have had a unique cro-magnoid phenotype that doesn’t really closely resemble any of the phenotypes of today. But the older phenotypes such as australoid would have certain similarities with them.

What we know as the modern sub Saharan negroid race is not as old as basal Eurasian, not even close. So we don’t really know for sure what these people coming out of Africa looked like. They were of course dark skinned but what did they look like metrically? We need skeletal remains

Khoisan split from the rest 150,000 years ago and they're still classified as Subsaharan/Black, or not? SSAs are diverse. I think pre-out of Africa migration humans would fit in that diversity. If they evolved around the equator they should've been black skinned too.

[Homo Insapiens]

Australian aborigines have the most phenotypically archaic appearance & skull & skeletal traits of modern humans, so I must assume that they come closest of modern humans to what prehistoric humans would have looked like before & not long after migrating out of Africa. Africans & Andaman Islanders appear to be very neotenized.

[Homo Insapiens]

https://analyseeconomique.wordpress....rle-section-2/

Check out the tables in this link

[Richmondbread]

No. We were always fully human and we came from the middle east, not Africa

Sent from my G9 PRO using Tapatalk