QUOTE (SabaiSabai @ Dec 27 2011, 03:58 PM)

The problem with trying to group every race into only 3 groups Caucasoid, Negrito, Mongoloid is that it does not account for the variations of each type. Let alone if these people were to mix at any one point in history.
I agree.
I think Mongoloid should just refer to the "Oriental looking" Asians who adapted to Siberia's ice age. They would be the following:
- East Asians (Chinese, Japanese, Koreans)
- Altaic nomads (Mongols, Tungusic, Turkic before miscegenation with whites/Semitics)
- some Southeast Asians (Vietnamese, some Khmers, some Filipinos) Though Southeast Asians who look more Mongoloid probably got mixed with Han Chinese.
- Eskimos, Chukchi, and other Arctic natives
The other group would be the proto-Mongoloids who are actually the ancestors of Mongoloids. They just didn't adapt to an ice age climate. They are:
- Polynesians
- Ainu
- Taiwan Aborigines
- original Southeast Asians (the ones that aren't Negritos; Negritos are a different race.)
- original Austronesians before miscegenation with Mongoloids
Though it should be mentioned that Mongoloids and proto-Mongoloids have mixed with each other so there would obviously be an overlap. A lot of people throughout southern China, Taiwan, Southeast Asia, and even Japan are a mix of both.
Non-mixed Mongoloids would be the ones who look stereotypically Mongoloid. (slanty/squinty eyes, pale to light brown skin, etc.)
The proto-Mongoloids have bigger eyelids and darker skin. In America, they would get labeled as "Mexican" which is why I think Aztec natives had more in common with Polynesians than with the Mongoloids who crossed the land bridge into Alaska.
Likewise, the world "Caucasoid" is too abstract as well. I doubt most people would have problems differentiating a Semitic Arab from a white Europid. Europid and Semitic should be given their own categories. As for India, they are a mix of various races.
Negroid is already divided into other categories. (Capoid and Congoid)
I would categorize race as follows:
- Mongoloid
- proto-Mongoloid
- Amerind
- Negritos/Melanesian
- Australian Aborigine
- Europid
- Semitic
- Capoid
- Congoid
QUOTE (SabaiSabai @ Dec 27 2011, 03:58 PM)

"According to a research study done by the Hôpital Saint-Louis in Paris, France: "the comparison of the Vietnamese with other East Asian populations showed a close genetic relationship of the population under investigation with other Orientals", with the exception of seven unique markers. These results, along with remnants of Thai enzyme morphs, indicate a dual ethnic origin of the Vietnamese population from Chinese and Thai-Indonesian populations.[18] A 2001 HLA study headed by laboratories at the Mackay Memorial Hospital in Taipei (Taiwan) classifies the Vietnamese people in the same genetic cluster as the Miao (Hmong), Southern Han (Southern Chinese), Buyei and Thai, with a divergent family consisting of Thai Chinese and Singapore Chinese, Minnan (Hoklo) and Hakka.[19]"
In this point I agree that Khmers will never look as mongoloid/oriental as Viets.
I agree.
Vietnam got their Oriental Mongoloid mixture from East Asians who migrated south. The original people of Vietnam were Negritos who later got displaced by proto-Mongoloids. Vietnam has the most East Asian mixture so they end up looking the "most Oriental" of all the Southeast Asians.
QUOTE (SabaiSabai @ Dec 27 2011, 03:58 PM)

But Khmers looking more mongoloid than austronesians? lol you must be joking right? They look about as mongoloid as sri lankans people do.
It depends. I have seen Khmers and Filipinos of both groups. They are both mixed.
QUOTE (AChanh @ Dec 28 2011, 01:25 PM)

that is not what i meant. but it's true. you can look it up. scientifically, through genetic research, mankind originated in africa. The oldest human remain was found in africa. Everyone now can trace their genes back to Africans.
Yes we are all the same we and have a common ancestry of those first humans that left the african continent. Like it or not, it's the most scientific fact we have on the origin of mankind. It's not the belief of some cult or some theories. It's science
so for those who patronizes the dark skin people and believes only lights are beautiful, just remember that we are all originally dark, the color of our ancestors ("ours" as in mankind today).
Yes but the ancestors of non-African races left Africa about 100,000 years ago. The races spend the next tens of thousands of years adapting to their unique environments in isolation from each other. Tens of thousands of years is obviously not enough to be different species but it is enough to be different sub-species (aka race and breed). In other words, human races are like breeds of dogs.
Different breeds of dogs have unique strengths and weakness. The same can be said of human races. I don't think it's a coincidence that some races are more likely to succeed in a specific field while other races have a better chance with other fields.
Obviously this does
NOT mean I think every individual of a race is the same. I am just talking about averages. For some reason, most people are statistically challenged.