AsiaFinest Forum
Ad: 123Designing.com

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

16 Pages V  « < 12 13 14 15 16 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Are Visayans from Indonesia?, My genome may indicate that.
Graham_Cracker07
post Oct 13 2011, 04:05 PM
Post #261


AF Pro
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 2,742
Joined: 17-October 06
From: Woodbridge, United States




This link seems more believable to me.

http://dioegenesartemis.blogspot.com/2011/...hilippines.html

Negrito= purple. Melanesian=dark red

It says:
Ilocanos- 2% Negrito, 3% Melanesian= about 5% Black Australoid (there may be other types of Australoid in the graph that I'm missing)
Tagalogs- 2% Negrito, 5% Melanesian= 7% Black Australoid
Visayans- 3% Negrito, 7% Melanesian= 10% Black Australoid

This makes sense to me because the Melanesian percentage increases the further South you go, closer to Melanesia. The Negrito percentage is relatively similar throughout because Negritos were scattered all over the Philippines.

So basically, the average Filipino is probably around 7% black according to this. The percentage of total Australoid (including Ainu, Veddoid, etc) may be higher.

The only thing that's throwing me off is the presence of orange in all Filipino population bars, even for the Negritos. But orange dominates the bar for "White Utahns." Doesn't make sense.

This post has been edited by Graham_Cracker07: Oct 13 2011, 04:12 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AnybodyKiller
post Oct 13 2011, 04:32 PM
Post #262


AF Addict
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 867
Joined: 12-September 09
From: Bay Area




QUOTE (Graham_Cracker07 @ Oct 13 2011, 04:05 PM) *
This link seems more believable to me.

http://dioegenesartemis.blogspot.com/2011/...hilippines.html

Negrito= purple. Melanesian=dark red

It says:
Ilocanos- 2% Negrito, 3% Melanesian= about 5% Black Australoid (there may be other types of Australoid in the graph that I'm missing)
Tagalogs- 2% Negrito, 5% Melanesian= 7% Black Australoid
Visayans- 3% Negrito, 7% Melanesian= 10% Black Australoid

This makes sense to me because the Melanesian percentage increases the further South you go, closer to Melanesia. The Negrito percentage is relatively similar throughout because Negritos were scattered all over the Philippines.

So basically, the average Filipino is probably around 7% black according to this. The percentage of total Australoid (including Ainu, Veddoid, etc) may be higher.

The only thing that's throwing me off is the presence of orange in all Filipino population bars, even for the Negritos. But orange dominates the bar for "White Utahns." Doesn't make sense.


And why are Japanese Ryukyun so different from other Asians?

I saw another graph like this here before, I'll try to look for it and post here if I find it.

EDIT: I also forgot to mention if you look at the Rosenberg2007 graph, MANY populations all over the world have 1-7% of "proto australoid" or "black australoid" frequencies. If you look at Cambodia it looks like about 5-7% as well.

This post has been edited by AnybodyKiller: Oct 13 2011, 05:31 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Graham_Cracker07
post Oct 13 2011, 06:52 PM
Post #263


AF Pro
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 2,742
Joined: 17-October 06
From: Woodbridge, United States




QUOTE (AnybodyKiller @ Oct 13 2011, 04:32 PM) *
And why are Japanese Ryukyun so different from other Asians?

I saw another graph like this here before, I'll try to look for it and post here if I find it.

EDIT: I also forgot to mention if you look at the Rosenberg2007 graph, MANY populations all over the world have 1-7% of "proto australoid" or "black australoid" frequencies. If you look at Cambodia it looks like about 5-7% as well.


Well of course, since Australoids went all over the world. But when you look at the charts for the Filipino groups, you can clearly see that there is Black Australoid ancestry via Negritos & Melanesians, not just the random Australoid blood that's found all over the world and in many different colors (Ainus for example)

Also, the Negrito element in the graphs is different from the Melanesian element. I'm not sure if it's even shown on the Rosenberg2007 graph. I'm not sure if Negritos are even Australoid. They look more like Africans than like Melanesians and other Australoids.

This post has been edited by Graham_Cracker07: Oct 13 2011, 06:56 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AnybodyKiller
post Oct 13 2011, 09:30 PM
Post #264


AF Addict
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 867
Joined: 12-September 09
From: Bay Area




QUOTE (Graham_Cracker07 @ Oct 13 2011, 07:52 PM) *
Well of course, since Australoids went all over the world. But when you look at the charts for the Filipino groups, you can clearly see that there is Black Australoid ancestry via Negritos & Melanesians, not just the random Australoid blood that's found all over the world and in many different colors (Ainus for example)

Also, the Negrito element in the graphs is different from the Melanesian element. I'm not sure if it's even shown on the Rosenberg2007 graph. I'm not sure if Negritos are even Australoid. They look more like Africans than like Melanesians and other Australoids.



It differentiates Neo-Australoid "Red" (Indian Type) from Proto-Australoid "Dark Green" (Negrito/Melanesian Type), but not Melanesian from Negrito.. According to this study Many civilizations have Negrito/Melanesian type as well as Indian type.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...senberg2007.png
Basically look how many other populations carry "Dark Green" and "Red" frequencies. There are a lot, especially among southern Chinese.. But also in Europe and Africa. The point I'm trying to make is that a lot of populations have just as much melanesian frequency and Indian frequency as us. (Look at Italians, French and Russians as well.) We shouldn't be acting like it's something to be ashamed of.

This post has been edited by AnybodyKiller: Oct 13 2011, 09:41 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Graham_Cracker07
post Oct 13 2011, 09:50 PM
Post #265


AF Pro
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 2,742
Joined: 17-October 06
From: Woodbridge, United States




QUOTE (AnybodyKiller @ Oct 13 2011, 09:30 PM) *
It differentiates Neo-Australoid "Red" (Indian Type) from Proto-Australoid "Dark Green" (Negrito/Melanesian Type), but not Melanesian from Negrito.. According to this study Many civilizations have Negrito/Melanesian type as well as Indian type.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...senberg2007.png
Basically look how many other populations carry "Dark Green" and "Red" frequencies. There are a lot, especially among southern Chinese.. But also in Europe and Africa. The point I'm trying to make is that a lot of populations have just as much melanesian frequency and Indian frequency as us.


I dont think Negrito is included in the dark green of that graph because in this graph...
http://dioegenesartemis.blogspot.com/2011/...hilippines.html

Negritos & Melanesians have 2 distinct types. The dark red for Melanesians and the purple for Negritos. And you can tell just by looking at them that they're very different groups.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
trismegistos
post Oct 13 2011, 09:51 PM
Post #266


AF Pro
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 1,412
Joined: 3-March 09
From: Los Indios Bravos' Mu




It's all about the way they sampled a population whether that sample is really representative. Various factors could skew a result depending on the sampling and the methodology.

For e.g. somebody would use the Karafet study and would erroneously conclude that Filipinos are 50% (percent) Australoid. When Karafet only sampled the minority and indigenous groups both non-Negritos and Negritos. Karafet has a different objective and methodology and in the first place is not trying to determine the accurate Australoid percentage of Filipinos as a whole. The same can be said with the Hugo Pan Asian SNP consortium study.

We don't know exactly how these researchers sampled a particular ethnic group for e.g the Tagalog. Do they sample only the Rizal area where there are lots of indigenous groups called Remontados or Sinaunang Tagalog. Then, you'll have a higher proportion of Australoid admixtures than average.

This post has been edited by trismegistos: Oct 13 2011, 09:57 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Graham_Cracker07
post Oct 13 2011, 09:59 PM
Post #267


AF Pro
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 2,742
Joined: 17-October 06
From: Woodbridge, United States




QUOTE (trismegistos @ Oct 13 2011, 09:51 PM) *
It's all about the way they sample a population whether that sample is representative.

For e.g. somebody would use the Karafet study and would erroneously conclude that Filipinos are 50% (percent) Australoid. When Karafet only sampled the minority and indigenous groups both non-Negritos and Negritos.

We don't know exactly these researchers sampled a particular ethnic group for e.g the Tagalog. Do they sample only the Rizal area where there are lots of indigenous groups called Remontados or Sinaunang Tagalog. Then, you'll have a higher proportion of Australoid admixtures than average.


It doesn't say where the Tagalog sample is taken from, but it does say that the Visayan sample is from "Visayan-speaking colonists from West Mindanao."

So it seems like that's a pretty normal population sample. But that sample did have the highest Negrito & Melanesian components out of the lowland groups sampled.

and I dont think Negrito groups were included in the Tagalog, Ilocano, and Visayan samples because there are separate samples for Negrito groups: Agta, Ati, Ayta, and Mamanwa. By looking at those graphs, I was able to determine which color represents the Negrito component (purple)

This post has been edited by Graham_Cracker07: Oct 13 2011, 10:05 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
austronesian0sai...
post Oct 14 2011, 12:41 AM
Post #268


AF Geek
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 120
Joined: 14-February 11




I'd be hesitant to group the Negritos with the austroliods. so far, it seems like it is the denisovan groups that have the distinctive australiod/ainu look. the Negritos, who don't have denisovan DNA, don't really look like australiods, and are much more similar to Africans and andanamese.

Archaic admixture is being ignored in this discussion when it is extremely relevant. It's pretty easy to see the neanderthal influence in western Eurasians. their projecting noses, heavy brow ridges, slim faces, beards and light skin may Be an inheritance from the neanderthal.

The Ainu seem to have come from the same Y-Dna line as west Africans. the Africans have no brow ridges and no beards. somewhere along their journey the Ainu picked up phenotypes from another group. it was probably someone related to Neanderthals and the denisovans. it's beginning to look like many parts of the multiregional model were correct. The Ainu may only look similar to austroliods and western eursians because theY
interbred with a similar archiac hominid in the past.

This post has been edited by austronesian0sailor: Oct 14 2011, 01:02 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ocrapdm
post Oct 14 2011, 04:04 AM
Post #269


AF Guru
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 3,134
Joined: 15-December 06
From: Philippines, China, Spain




QUOTE (moppom @ Oct 13 2011, 11:29 PM) *
I see - but while that blog does confirm your opinion, it also conflicts with other evidence which others posted.

I can definitely agree that a lot of pinoys exhibit some australoid characteristics. But not 35%.

If you can get more than just this one guys blog it migt be more convincing - because other blogs say differently. And given that they're just blogs, i dont really know which one is more trustworthy.


That may be "JUST A BLOG" - but see, the data there comes from the Pan-Asian consortium. This is the largest study on autosomal DNA done to date, so this is the one to believe.

Actually, Southeast Asian characteristics might actually be one spectrum of the Australoid race!

The frequencies are repeatedly shown online, so there is NO DOUBT at all that Southeast Asians including Pinoys have NEGRITO genes. The ONLY question here is HOW MUCH.

QUOTE (moppom @ Oct 14 2011, 03:46 AM) *
Weird because ocraps blog suggests 35% australoid but others suggest only small %s.

I dont really know what to believe, but i think its clear that quite a few pinoys exhibit some features not too distant from the ainu.

only a few pinoys have chinese blood (like 1% i think i read) - and no i dont believe ocrap is 1 of them lol, but thats another story.


The 65% East Asian is not Chinese (obviously), but Austronesian. The Original Yueh-Austronesians could've been light-skinned and could've resembled modern-day East Asians before they ventured into Taiwan and started mixing with all the Australoids there like crazy. 35% is really a large amount, ya know.

The Pinoys who have Chinese blood is estimated to be 20-25%* of the population by various sources. Not entirely fanciful, considering that AUSTIN CRAIG's survey of Luzon people revealed that a staggering ONE-THIRD of all LUZONIANS ARE Mestizo de Sangley (that is, Chinese Mestizos).

* In comparison, 40-50% of Thailand's population have ethnic Chinese ancestors, including their king and many prime ministers - much like the Philippines, too, where 10 of the 15 Philippine Presidents are of Chinese descent.

The number of pure Chinese is another thing, but it's definitely NOT 1% as the government would like it to appear. MORE LIKE 5-10%, considering that the Chinese are present in every province in the Philippines, doing business and trade with the locals.

This post has been edited by ocrapdm: Oct 14 2011, 04:07 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ocrapdm
post Oct 14 2011, 04:19 AM
Post #270


AF Guru
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 3,134
Joined: 15-December 06
From: Philippines, China, Spain




QUOTE (Graham_Cracker07 @ Oct 14 2011, 05:05 AM) *
This link seems more believable to me.

http://dioegenesartemis.blogspot.com/2011/...hilippines.html

Negrito= purple. Melanesian=dark red

It says:
Ilocanos- 2% Negrito, 3% Melanesian= about 5% Black Australoid (there may be other types of Australoid in the graph that I'm missing)
Tagalogs- 2% Negrito, 5% Melanesian= 7% Black Australoid
Visayans- 3% Negrito, 7% Melanesian= 10% Black Australoid

This makes sense to me because the Melanesian percentage increases the further South you go, closer to Melanesia. The Negrito percentage is relatively similar throughout because Negritos were scattered all over the Philippines.

So basically, the average Filipino is probably around 7% black according to this. The percentage of total Australoid (including Ainu, Veddoid, etc) may be higher.

The only thing that's throwing me off is the presence of orange in all Filipino population bars, even for the Negritos. But orange dominates the bar for "White Utahns." Doesn't make sense.


One things for sure - rural and urban Filipinos have varying frequencies. East Asian component is definitely HIGHER among urbanites, whereas Australoid component is definitely HIGHER among the provincianos.

"Black Australoid"?? Why the term "black"? embarassedlaugh.gif

The orange bars there could reflect why Australoids themselves look kinda Caucasoid. embarassedlaugh.gif

There's a legend about blond-haired and light-skinned people dwelling among Mangyans (Negritos-Unat hybrid) in Mindoro though.

QUOTE (trismegistos @ Oct 14 2011, 10:51 AM) *
It's all about the way they sampled a population whether that sample is really representative. Various factors could skew a result depending on the sampling and the methodology.

For e.g. somebody would use the Karafet study and would erroneously conclude that Filipinos are 50% (percent) Australoid. When Karafet only sampled the minority and indigenous groups both non-Negritos and Negritos. Karafet has a different objective and methodology and in the first place is not trying to determine the accurate Australoid percentage of Filipinos as a whole. The same can be said with the Hugo Pan Asian SNP consortium study.

We don't know exactly how these researchers sampled a particular ethnic group for e.g the Tagalog. Do they sample only the Rizal area where there are lots of indigenous groups called Remontados or Sinaunang Tagalog. Then, you'll have a higher proportion of Australoid admixtures than average.


Tagalog as a whole refers to the inhabitants of Bulacan, N Ecija, Zambales, and CALABARZON. Of course Remontados do NOT at all reflect Tagalogs. They aren't Sinaunang Tagalog either, for the latter term reflects the inhabitants of Taal town in Batangas.

The Karafet study itself indicated that even Ivatans have significant Australoid - so we can deduce that the Australoid among Pinoys originated from as north as Taiwan when they were still Proto-Filipinos. And if Ivatans themselves have large Australoid - then how much more other Filipinos who love more south and therefore have more commerce with the Australoids, right?

QUOTE (Graham_Cracker07 @ Oct 14 2011, 10:59 AM) *
It doesn't say where the Tagalog sample is taken from, but it does say that the Visayan sample is from "Visayan-speaking colonists from West Mindanao."

So it seems like that's a pretty normal population sample. But that sample did have the highest Negrito & Melanesian components out of the lowland groups sampled.

and I dont think Negrito groups were included in the Tagalog, Ilocano, and Visayan samples because there are separate samples for Negrito groups: Agta, Ati, Ayta, and Mamanwa. By looking at those graphs, I was able to determine which color represents the Negrito component (purple)


The Visayan there is from the Chavacano speaking populations of Zamboanga, explaining the large European component (~2%) there, compared to the Tagalog and Ilocano (~0.5%). Although other Asians like Han Chinese also get 2% European....

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ocrapdm
post Oct 14 2011, 04:26 AM
Post #271


AF Guru
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 3,134
Joined: 15-December 06
From: Philippines, China, Spain




QUOTE (austronesian0sailor @ Oct 14 2011, 01:41 PM) *
I'd be hesitant to group the Negritos with the austroliods. so far, it seems like it is the denisovan groups that have the distinctive australiod/ainu look. the Negritos, who don't have denisovan DNA, don't really look like australiods, and are much more similar to Africans and andanamese.

Archaic admixture is being ignored in this discussion when it is extremely relevant. It's pretty easy to see the neanderthal influence in western Eurasians. their projecting noses, heavy brow ridges, slim faces, beards and light skin may Be an inheritance from the neanderthal.

The Ainu seem to have come from the same Y-Dna line as west Africans. the Africans have no brow ridges and no beards. somewhere along their journey the Ainu picked up phenotypes from another group. it was probably someone related to Neanderthals and the denisovans. it's beginning to look like many parts of the multiregional model were correct. The Ainu may only look similar to austroliods and western eursians because theY
interbred with a similar archiac hominid in the past.


Australoids can be grouped into two peoples: the CAUCASOID-looking and the AFRICOID-looking.

CAUCASOID-looking includes the Papuans, Melanesians, Ainu (and Proto-Ainu), Veddoid, and Australian Aboriginals
AFRICOID-looking includes the Negritos, Orang Asli, and Andamanese islanders.

Perhaps we can add here "ASIAN-looking Australoids which includes Southeast Asians...

All of them have Haplotypes C, D, and K.

Mamanwa, a Negrito group in Mindanao, have Denisova genes. A LOT OF Negritos are also genetically close to Australian Aboriginals.

Some White supremacists even claim that Australian Abos are Homo erectus. They have the lowest IQ rankings, btw, at around 45.

________________________

NEW GENETIC-VIEW OF THE PEOPLING OF THE PHILIPPINES

"This model depicts (a) an early divergence of an African (represented by Yoruba) and Asian/Australasian populations. These mix with first Neandertals and then (for the Australian/New Guinea/Mamanwa populations) with Denisova-like people. Later (b), after the initial habitation of the Philippines by the ancestors of Mamanwa, a population like Andamanese Onge pushes into the islands, mixing with the ancestors of New Guinea and Australian populations. Later still , a population ancestral to today's Chinese people* mixes with Philippines and other Southeast Asian people."

* Could've been the Yueh-Austronesians.

Btw, MANOBO and MAMANWA are also partly Denisova.

This post has been edited by ocrapdm: Oct 14 2011, 04:30 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AnybodyKiller
post Oct 14 2011, 10:54 AM
Post #272


AF Addict
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 867
Joined: 12-September 09
From: Bay Area




QUOTE (ocrapdm @ Oct 14 2011, 04:26 AM) *
Australoids can be grouped into two peoples: the CAUCASOID-looking and the AFRICOID-looking.

CAUCASOID-looking includes the Papuans, Melanesians, Ainu (and Proto-Ainu), Veddoid, and Australian Aboriginals
AFRICOID-looking includes the Negritos, Orang Asli, and Andamanese islanders.

Perhaps we can add here "ASIAN-looking Australoids which includes Southeast Asians...

All of them have Haplotypes C, D, and K.

Mamanwa, a Negrito group in Mindanao, have Denisova genes. A LOT OF Negritos are also genetically close to Australian Aboriginals.

Some White supremacists even claim that Australian Abos are Homo erectus. They have the lowest IQ rankings, btw, at around 45.

________________________

NEW GENETIC-VIEW OF THE PEOPLING OF THE PHILIPPINES

"This model depicts (a) an early divergence of an African (represented by Yoruba) and Asian/Australasian populations. These mix with first Neandertals and then (for the Australian/New Guinea/Mamanwa populations) with Denisova-like people. Later (b), after the initial habitation of the Philippines by the ancestors of Mamanwa, a population like Andamanese Onge pushes into the islands, mixing with the ancestors of New Guinea and Australian populations. Later still , a population ancestral to today's Chinese people* mixes with Philippines and other Southeast Asian people."

* Could've been the Yueh-Austronesians.

Btw, MANOBO and MAMANWA are also partly Denisova.


IQ is a much better indicator of social status than "innate intelligence", But I'd rather not get into a debate about it embarassedlaugh.gif
IQ and Social Status

IQ tests must be updated every 10 years or so due to the Flynn Effect, which states that environmental factors such as education, nutrition, test familiarity etc. cause the average IQ scores of populations to increase over time.

Negritos are not one population (Just stumbled on this)

This post has been edited by AnybodyKiller: Oct 14 2011, 11:26 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
austronesian0sai...
post Oct 14 2011, 12:09 PM
Post #273


AF Geek
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 120
Joined: 14-February 11




QUOTE (ocrapdm @ Oct 14 2011, 04:26 AM) *
Btw, MANOBO and MAMANWA are also partly Denisova.


and they look quite distinct from africans.



compare him to this papuan.

they look very similar

http://youtu.be/Uf_Day6tghM?t=21m11s


I've seen pictures of "Negritos" in the philippines that look like Indian people, and some with blond hair. I'd assume those are the ones with Denisovan genes.

This post has been edited by austronesian0sailor: Oct 14 2011, 12:14 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Graham_Cracker07
post Oct 14 2011, 12:46 PM
Post #274


AF Pro
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 2,742
Joined: 17-October 06
From: Woodbridge, United States




but then there are some Negritos that look African-descent.







But I think it's a rare look nowadays.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
moppom
post Oct 14 2011, 01:13 PM
Post #275


AF Fan
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 87
Joined: 10-October 11




QUOTE (ocrapdm @ Oct 14 2011, 04:04 AM) *
That may be "JUST A BLOG" - but see, the data there comes from the Pan-Asian consortium. This is the largest study on autosomal DNA done to date, so this is the one to believe.

Actually, Southeast Asian characteristics might actually be one spectrum of the Australoid race!

The frequencies are repeatedly shown online, so there is NO DOUBT at all that Southeast Asians including Pinoys have NEGRITO genes. The ONLY question here is HOW MUCH.


Like i already said, i believe pinoys are part australoid - what i dont believe is the 35%...i think there should be another survey done before you confirm it.



QUOTE
The 65% East Asian is not Chinese (obviously), but Austronesian. The Original Yueh-Austronesians could've been light-skinned and could've resembled modern-day East Asians before they ventured into Taiwan and started mixing with all the Australoids there like crazy. 35% is really a large amount, ya know.

The Pinoys who have Chinese blood is estimated to be 20-25%* of the population by various sources. Not entirely fanciful, considering that AUSTIN CRAIG's survey of Luzon people revealed that a staggering ONE-THIRD of all LUZONIANS ARE Mestizo de Sangley (that is, Chinese Mestizos).

* In comparison, 40-50% of Thailand's population have ethnic Chinese ancestors, including their king and many prime ministers - much like the Philippines, too, where 10 of the 15 Philippine Presidents are of Chinese descent.

The number of pure Chinese is another thing, but it's definitely NOT 1% as the government would like it to appear. MORE LIKE 5-10%, considering that the Chinese are present in every province in the Philippines, doing business and trade with the locals.



hmm id trust the government statistic over your own opinion lol.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
manchuwok
post Oct 14 2011, 02:09 PM
Post #276


AF Geek
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 195
Joined: 23-August 11




The Philippines is sort of like Puerto Rico in that you can be white as white looking like you came strait out of Spain and yet have cousins or even siblings who look black or black mixed. Phenotypically you may display zero black mix but if you have nappy haired cousins on both sides of the family and your sister is brown skin and has a ghetto booty you damn strait you have african genes running in the family.

One of my cousins in the Philippines look white as white like he came strait out of Korea, but his sister looks like she came strait out of Samoa with the dark skin and round nose. How can this be possible? it really isn't atypical.

This post has been edited by manchuwok: Oct 14 2011, 02:11 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AnybodyKiller
post Oct 14 2011, 02:58 PM
Post #277


AF Addict
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 867
Joined: 12-September 09
From: Bay Area




QUOTE (manchuwok @ Oct 14 2011, 02:09 PM) *
Phenotypically you may display zero black mix but if you have nappy haired cousins on both sides of the family and your sister is brown skin and has a ghetto booty you damn strait you have african genes running in the family.

embarassedlaugh.gif "ghetto booty" part made me lol.

On a serious note. I don't think we've given enough credit to phenotype variation also.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
austronesian0sai...
post Oct 14 2011, 03:34 PM
Post #278


AF Geek
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 120
Joined: 14-February 11




QUOTE (Graham_Cracker07 @ Oct 14 2011, 12:46 PM) *
but then there are some Negritos that look African-descent.







But I think it's a rare look nowadays.


Those are the groups that don't have Neanderthal/denisovan genes. I'd bet.

While the southern "negritos" do.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ocrapdm
post Oct 16 2011, 04:30 AM
Post #279


AF Guru
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 3,134
Joined: 15-December 06
From: Philippines, China, Spain




QUOTE (moppom @ Oct 15 2011, 02:13 AM) *
Like i already said, i believe pinoys are part australoid - what i dont believe is the 35%...i think there should be another survey done before you confirm it.

hmm id trust the government statistic over your own opinion lol.


LOL. That 1% was carried-over from the American era.

Not really my opinion. It's from Kaisa Foundation.

And either way, someone who has at least some knowledge about the country can tell that it definitely isn't as low as 1%.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
pommop
post Oct 16 2011, 03:26 PM
Post #280


AF Geek
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 224
Joined: 5-September 11




QUOTE (ocrapdm @ Oct 16 2011, 04:30 AM) *
LOL. That 1% was carried-over from the American era.

Not really my opinion. It's from Kaisa Foundation.

And either way, someone who has at least some knowledge about the country can tell that it definitely isn't as low as 1%.



what is kaisa foundation?

and how do you know it was carried over from the american era? :O

where do you get all these "facts" from?

blogs? lol
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

16 Pages V  « < 12 13 14 15 16 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 24th October 2014 - 10:08 AM