Message from @TheEternalSearcher 𐠊𐠔
Discord ID: 697187154920603777
> I am not deconstructing the reality of race but your conception of it.
You haven't deconstructed any conception at all you have done is say that there are groups are close to being white or that you can break down whites into more groups within the category.
> This begs the question of how exactly your categorization works. It's not as simple as with color.
Like you said "categorizing by phenotype, genotype, and also geography, linguistics, history". It is not simple but it does not mean the categories are not there
> What may be insurmountable is the fact that there are peoples who, for whatever reason, don't know entire color families but have twenty names for shades of green
And?
> You already saw it here, some people admitted to Christian Arabs being "honorary whites".
Do you know what that means? They are admitting to the fact that these **people are not white** but since these Arabs maintained Christianity in there heavily Islamic homeland's they are gotten the "honorary" status.
> If some tribe has no concept of redness, can we say red has a mind-independent existence? Hardly. In that, colors are different from ethnic groups.
And? It is still a category and there is no shit lib tier arguments that will change that. @AH-64
@Mac I'll get back at you tomorrow. Don't have the time for a proper response rn.
Will watch
Bro I love Masaman. Good Stuff on Genetics
Same
I'll concede Malta is mediterranean. I must've misremembered or been confused because of Fst maps
I'll make sure to look up stuff for Cyprus again just to be sure I'm not talking nonsense
People are confusing Genetic cluster maps, admixture and haplogroups for all being the same thing and its very annoying. If we were to use haplogroups to determine what someone is then we would have to say that the pastoralists of Central west Africa are white since most of their haplogroup is R1B
I'm aware haplogroups aren't good for determining race, just migration patterns
And I know there are downsides to Fst but I must've gotten it mixed up nonetheless
By the way Uralics are more than 99%<European Caucasoid and less than 1%>Mongoloid, most of their Asiatic populations is dying out, so in my opinion is better to include all of them.
@Mr. Nessel Masaman posted a graph showing Cypriots something around 50-60% Euro admixture. I dont know where he got that from, Ill have to ask him his source for this.
Uralics are pretty heterogeneous so I'd have to look into them.
As in Uralics are a set of peoples
I'd expect admixtures etc. to vary
I remember some youtuber who is Cypriot Greek who had a lot of jewish ancestry. Was interesting
I believe that most of the non Euro admixture in cyprus actually isnt due to phoenician but instead from Neolithic Anatolians/Caucasus peoples.
They have like 4 Asiatic groups with 20.000 population in total and a lot of them have russian admixture.
Neolithic Anatolians would be basically white
@TheEternalSearcher 𐠊𐠔 Very small
I'd expect most of Cyprus' admixture to come from it being a trade hub since the bronze age
fair number of it is yes
but not the bulk
I don't Remember the number exactly I must look it up
Regarding Anatolians I'd like to look up eventually if the Hittites were white
I remember hearing Anatolian farmers descended from the Natufians
Was that revised or what
Anatolian farmers were originally from the fertile crescent and were pushed north by the Semites.
Correct
So they're not from Iran like the Z93 arrow implies
Sumerians were probably anatolian farmers or closely related to them
Aren't Sumerians a language isolate
Nvm Elamites
Yes, but that is not means much
@Mr. Nessel @TheEternalSearcher 𐠊𐠔 Interesting thing is that Dravidians are just like Indo Aryans, invaders from the west, not indigenous, originally they were farmers from Iran possibly related to Elamites. the Indigenous peoples are Veddoids.
I thought Dravidians are native to India and got displaced by Indo Aryans in the North
I'm sure they're related somehow to population in Iran somehow

