This is true. Karate used to be written as Tang shou (唐手) in hanzi, meaning Chinese hand.

Genetically speaking, Japanese trace partial origins to Korea and culturally speaking from China. However, that still didn't stop them from raping both countries. As someone here already said, genetic origins/relations mean very little.

i dont think its more likely that chinese people went thousands of miles to japan rather than koreans who literally could walk over there. cuz some people are saying china influenced japan 100% and korea had no influence on japan at all whatsoever.

What a surprise

Next he'll be saying that Koreans were directly responsible for the Meiji Restoration.

people make it like theyre an entirely different ethnicity
most of their differences come from different geogrphaic location therefore over a many yrs
ethnically, they're the same if you dont count the minor intermixing amongst some locals (but not large enough to cause a dent in the population's racial makeup)

Oh, I'm not going to read all that...

Just read my post, which is the only one worth reading here anyways.
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D
why doesn't smiley faces appear on my post.

"Honest" bull$hitting requires ignorance of the subject on hand."
The Meiji Restoration is simply too well known for that.

even the emperor akihito admitted HIMSELF that japanese royalty have orginated from Korean blood!!!
so the japanese people who worshipps and considers deity are actually Korean!


http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_..._31/ai_83513671

http://english.people.com.cn/200112/24/eng...224_87391.shtml

On December 23, 2001, during his annual birthday meeting with reporters, the emperor, in response to a reporter's question, remarked that he felt a "certain kinship with Korea", and went on to explain his feeling as resulting from the fact that the mother of Emperor Kammu (736–806) was a descendant of Korean dynasty King Muryeong of Baekje as documented in Shoku Nihongi. The emperor also noted that Koreans who migrated to Japan in ancient times introduced important aspects of culture and technology to the country

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akihito

cant be bothered to read the other links but that would still only make emperor kammu half korean not full
edit: although dont people know about that anyway

Well, if you think about, there are huge discrepencies between japanese and korean phenotypic expressions as well. A lot of Japanese are small, dark, hairy, and generally possess weak facial structures, while koreans are virtually hairless, larger framed, single lidded eyes, and have lighter skin.
Behaviorally though, you guys are similar in the fact that you guys are both superbly violent and brutal.

But, these text sources are difficult to trust simply because you have to know how the experiment was conducted.
When they did it, what was their methodology, but most importantly, how large the pool was (10 people from each region ain't gonna cut it)? You have to ask those questions because they are integral to standard scientific method.

And there are a lot of tall S chinese too, I personally don't know one under 5'8," and I know quite few.

I don't know dude. With comments like these...



...anything's possible.

Now, I don't need to explain what the implication from that supapimp quote is, do I?

what? koreans and japanese probably have near the same percentage of double lid and single lid. and japanese can be just as light or lighter than koreans in some cases.

The Japanese have more mix of polynesians(Ainu) than Koreans. Polynesians in Korea, most likely the "Bear" in the Dangun legend, have been virtually wiped out by new Siberian immigrants from Manchuria.

and also i believe there was an immigration influx to southern korea from coastal China (Shandong, Jiangsu) before the Yayoi period(settlement of Japan by Koreans)?... many of these immigrants also settled in Japan...

Japanese and Koreans are realtive.It's true but there is an other relative.The Turks from Siberia, northern side of China and Mongolia.Probably they're relative of Japanese and Korean people.
Language smilar also Turkic(Altaic) grammer is exactly same.Also Some northeastern Turks have smilar face and body types with Korean and Japanese people.

Some American people say" Turks, Native Americans, Eskimos, Mayans, Incas, Aztecs, Mongolian, Japanese, Korean and Manchurians are physicaly smilar.Becouse Native Americans(including south and central America) came from Central and Northeast Asia.They have smilar tradition and religion.One of them Shamanism, Koreans, Turks, Mongolians and Native Americans have this religion."

I estimate that 70%-80% of Koreans are single-lidded. This is a guess and there's no scientific proof but just based on personal observation.

Are japanese around the same ratio?

what?! so are you saying that koreans have single eyelids and japanese dont? omg ive seen like 4 out of 5 japanese people with single eyelids, i met a lot. and i know a lot of japanese people, most of them have single eyelids. this goes to the same as koreans. ive seen a lot of single eyelids as well as double eyelids. dont bring that bs here. i have single eyelids, but my mom and my sister have double eyelids that are natural. so dont be saying that if you dont know. ive seen a lot of koreans with single eyelids and double eyelids. also ive seen a lot of japanese with single eyelids and double eyelids. so i guess youll have to take the "eyelids" thingy out of the discussion.

Most northern asians are single lidded. It's just that korean's have it at a seemingly higher rate.

But from personal observations such as a visits to LA k-town leaves the impression that almost all at least 9/10 korean's are single lidded, but what do you expect from a homogenous culture? In addition to that observation, my siblings and I myself personally don't have any double lidded k-friends, and between us we have roughly 10 of them. Don't worry, I wouldn't bring up the blepharoplasty thing, I ain't cheap like that.

Even if you do bar the "lid" thing, the resemblance between j and ks are not really spot on (aside from the "all look same" asian syndrome).

Look at Sonny Chiba, Ichiro, Takeshi Kaneshiro (despite being 1/2 chinese), Seto Asaka, those are the positive stereotypes of japanese looks.

For korean's, look no further than So ji Sub, his looks are very sterotypically korean, granted he looks much better than 95% of the korean population. (sp?)

Facial hair, facial structure, hair texture/amount, build, height, their is no consistency.

If Koreans and Japanese show "huge discrepencies" despite their similar genetic make up, how much discrepencies would you expect to see physically as well as characteristically between S and N chinese when their genetic make ups differ considerably?

I only posted the text source because it supports the works by the researchers I mentioned in my previous post.

It is ridiculous.

A lot of Koreans have double eyelids, including myself, toki, and ksurfergirl. As far as I know, double eyelids and curly hair are dominant traits, so even if the initial genetic mixture wasn't numerous, those traits would have gotten more and more common as time passed by. By time I mean thousands of years.

double eyelids are a dominant trait?

Koreans and Japanese share perhaps the closest genetic affinities, no doubt about it. But as I've said before in the past, it really doesn't matter, the Japanese are still a distinct identity and genetic similarities still didn't stop Japan from colonizing Korea later on in history. A similar analogy would be the Germans and the English. Due to migrations from Germany, almost all modern day Brits have German blood but they were/are still a different and distinct identity and it still didn't stop Hitler from attacking England.

so genetic similarities also didn't stop north korea from invading the south.

^
and it all started because of japan's brutal colonization of korea. that's why there is north and south korea

actually no. the japanese really had nothing to do with this. the establishment of ROK and DPRK was entirely the invention of the US Military Occupation force IN japan after the war. the US military had no experts or knowledge of Korea and erroneously classified korea as an "occupied" territory like okinawa or the japanese home islands instead of "liberated" territory like the phillippines or france or any other nation who fought the japanese. even the japanese never conceived of splitting korea, South and North Korea was an arbitrary invention of the americans who had no clue that they were casually slicing up a nation that had been a continuous homogeneous entity longer than China, Japan, or any nation in Europe. In fact in "Korea, Old and New" by Harvard professor Carter Eckert, there's a passage that decribes the fact that WHERE korea would be split was so unimportant to the Americans that it was basically left to a 20s year old lieutenant in Tokyo, who was clerk in Macarthur's command. This guy basically picked a line north of Seoul and picked the 38th parallel as demarcation. It's ironic that you'll get old timers in the US talk about how the US "bailed out" korea during the war when really the americans and russians lit the fuse for the entire thing.

as for the OP. there's a couple of mistakes and outdated citations in the article. Scholars now indicate that the mass migrations to pre-medieval japan were from Paekjae (which is in SW Korea and close to japan), not koguryo (which encompasses what's now North Korea into Manchuria). As the article indicated, Korea was an established agricultural society 2500 years ago, and isolated from China, did serve to modernize not only japan, but its other neighbors as well. koguryo for example had extensive contact with the Khitan and other steppes people who would later develop into the manchus, mongols and other waves of conquerors of china. As paekjae did for the japanese, koguryo brought culture and organization to essentially barbarian people, taught them pottery, ironworking etc and essentially established their societies beyond small tribes and hunting/gathering and established the basis for greater development on their own

as the article indicates, both China and Korean texts make reference to pre-medieval "wa." in ancient chinese "wa" is an epithet for "dwarf." however, the japanese in this period traversed the seas in small junks, and their activites were so minor as to be limited to minor piracy and raiding along the eastern coasts of both countries. in fact, during this period, the japanese junks were unable to even establish solid trade routes to either country, which of course logically is the first order of business, if at all possible, for any maritime society. for these wa, military conquest of any part of korea or china wasn't even a possibility. no serious scholar in the US now believes that that migration between korea and japan could have been an issue of japanese conquest of korea. simply, the overwhelming amount of cultural colonization and racial mixing in japan indicated MASSIVE migrations, over several waves and the the indigenous japanese of the period were simply incapable of anything along these lines, when the most they could do was the occasional pirate raid onto minor coastal villages.

for most serious scholars in the US there's also little question that the koreans undertook a CONQUEST of japan. aside from the mongol invasion of japan MUCH later in japans medieval period, simply no nation... neither korea or china... considered anything to be gained from invading the barbarian wa islands to the east. however, following the fall of paekjae during the 3 kindoms period, there's significant archeological evidence (ranging from everything from particular paekjae pottery which took root in japan starting at that period, to korean burial mounds in kyushu, to metal working etc etc) indicates a massive forced relocation of koreans at the hands of OTHER koreans to japan. paekjae lost the war and were driven into the sea. but instead of perishing in the wasteland they "went native" with the indigenous population of japan. the fact that korean DNA is much more homogeneous than the japanese of course indicates that as the new civilization spread northward, these new people mixed with both wa and ainu populations to form the basis of medieval japanese culture, society and people

in the end however, regardless of how much korean culture and korean DNA is responsible for japan moving past its basically stone-age hunter/gatherer stage, there's no question that japan has developed largely on its own for the past 1300 years and has done an admirable job

According to the chart the Ainu are not Polynesian but pretty closely related to the Japanese.

By "Polynesians in Korea" do you mean original inhabitants related to the Ainu? Don't think there were ever any actual Polynesians in Korea.

What about the original inhabitants of Taiwan? Are they related to the Polynesians at all?



Dunno about Japan but personal observation in Korea can be a bit misleading cos double eyelid surgery is so popular!

I've heard that Ainu are north east Asian.

That's really interesting, especially the classification of Korea as 'occupied' territory. The Americans didn't know and didn't care about Korea, but don't forget the Japanese had conscripted Koreans to fight on their side so the Americans had some excuse to view them differently from countries like the Philippines.



I heard Koreans used to call Japanese 'wei nom'! Pirates in loin cloths with no shoes.

There are Turks in Siberia ? I'm skeptical about the 'Native American, Mayan, Incan, Aztec' part. They don't look like Koreans at all. Also, shamanism was very common in ancient times, so I don't think that's the best supporting point. Also, the Turkic relation is debatable.

Genetic relationship of populations in China by

J. Y. Chua,b, W. Huangb,c, S. Q. Kuangc, J. M. Wangc, J. J. Xud, Z. T. Chua, Z. Q. Yanga, K. Q. Lina, P. Lie, M. Wuf, Z. C. Gengg, C. C. Tang, R. F. Dud, and L. Jing,h,i

Results of their finding?

The phylogeny based on 30 microsatellites (Fig. 1A) revealed a clear distinction between southern and northern Chinese populations, although the number of Chinese populations included in this phylogeny is small. Three northern Chinese populations clustered with the Japanese and Korean as expected.

In Fig. 1B, two clusters for the northern populations are discernible. Altaic language-speaking Buryat, Yakut, Uyghur, and Manchu clustered with the Korean and Japanese, two language isolates but closely related to Altaic. Two Han populations, one from north China and the other from Yunnan, also contributed to this cluster (cluster N1). Another Altaic language-speaking population, Ewenki, formed a cluster (cluster N2) with Tibetan, Tujia, and Hui, all of which were originally derived from the northern populations though currently living in the western part of China (21).

Populations of southern origin formed three clusters. In the first south cluster (S1), Blang, an Austro-Asiatic population, grouped with Deang, Aini, Lahu, and Dai, all sampled from the southwest part of Yunnan. This lineage then clustered with three populations from Taiwan (Paiwan, Atayal, and Yami), probably reflecting the origin of Taiwanese Aborigines and thus Polynesians from Southeast Asia. The fourth Taiwanese aboriginal population, Ami, forms a separate cluster with Han Chinese of southern origin living in the U.S. before they joined the previous cluster to form cluster S1. The second southern group consists of three Daic populations (Li, Dong, and Yao from Jinxiu) all from Guangxi or Hainan, two Hmong-Mien populations (She and Yao speaking Punu), Cambodian (a Austro-Asiatic population), Yi and Han from Henan (cluster S2). The second northern lineage (cluster N2) consists of mostly western populations derived from this southern group except Ewenki. Jingpo and Wa formed the third southern lineage (cluster S3). In this phylogeny, populations in East Asia can be divided into two groups: a northern group consisting of populations in cluster N1 and a southern group including all southern populations (clusters S1, S2, and S3) and the second cluster of northern origin (cluster N2).



So what did you find so ridiculous?

im sceptical too
some of these theories get out of hand in my opinion

well genetics doesnt mean anything then, since they all look very similar, the Chinese, Japanese, Korean.... but I had seen Japanese and Korean with very Southern looks too. And what about dark skin altaic people in Siberia? Some J and K are naturally dark. How can you explain that with genetics? And NK and SK have the same genes but that doesnt stop em forming two govs and having guns pointing at each other. And Japanese hate both SK NK. And look at us Chinese people, even tho we have genetic differences, but we except each other and form a nation call China. Anyway, thanks for the info and if genetics meant that much, Koreans and Japanese should join North China and be Northern Chinese. 2

southern traits appearing in some J & K can be explained by genetics for those areas were inhabited by southern people a long time ago(with korea possible, with Japan its fact), but they were displaced for the most part

of course

from east europe to siberia. also "siber" is a turkish tribe's name

genetics DOES mean a lot of things. you're talking about phenotypes (physical traits) not genetics (genotypes). there are variations in pehnotypes. but genetics is a different issue. don't get the two mixed up.

Remember what happened to the former Yougoslavia? The country worked quite well especially under the charismatic leadership of Gen. Tito. What happened to the country the moment the communism swept away ?
A civil war broke out. This is even more remarkable when you consider that the genetic makeup in the country is a lot closer than what you see now in China. The current regime in China would do anything to tie up the country together, but when CCP goes there is a good chance so does China.

Another issue that I want to deal with before I go is how genetic similarity hasn't resulted in peace among the genetically similar populations. A few chinese posters here have been pushing this issue as a means of discrediting the importance of genetics. Genetically encoded materials manefest themselves as visible and/or invisible traits. Some traits are obvious that everyone can see that there is no way a bastketball team made up of Southern chinese would be as competive as one made up of Northern Chinese. Other less obvious traits like determination, pioneership, competiveness or even the short term memory span which is related to consciousness are even more important than the physical traits but nonetheless related to genetics.

LOL! That is just about the most ignorant comment I've ever heard. FYI, Guangdong and Shanghai are among the best teams in Chinese basketball. Not to mention Yao Ming comes from Shanghai as well.

Where do the players come from? More specifically where does the genetic material comes from?

1600-2000 years ago is a long time. consider in comparison the norman invasion of england.

koreans should not stoop to petite sino centrism. i cringe when koreans mimick chinese.

it would be very difficult to show how these personality traits that you listed are affected by genetics... one trait that certainly has an important genetic component is intelligence/cognitive abilities, and in this area, southern Chinese are certainly competitive with northern Chinese (it's fairly well known that southern Chinese have greater mental agility compared to northern Chinese)...

Genetically encoded materials manefest themselves as visible and/or invisible traits. Some traits are obvious that everyone can see that there is no way a bastketball team made up of Southern chinese would be as competive as one made up of Northern Chinese. Other less obvious traits like determination, pioneership, competiveness or even the short term memory span which is related to consciousness are even more important than the physical traits but nonetheless related to genetics.
[/quote]

I'm not. As a matter of fact, I brought this issue as an response to a number of posters here claiming all chinese are equal.

Lol, do you think I go around searching about Chinese basketball players just to see whether or not they're of "southern" or "northern" origin? As a Northern Chinese, it's pretty damn insulting for a Korean to tell that some of my compatriots aren't as capable. This is just complete bull$hit.

Koreans on this forum try to make up a stereotype of them being generally tall compared to other Asians, but in reality, that's not the case. This reminds me, since the Japanese do have Korean ancestors, why are they known to be so short? They were referred to as the Wonu/Wo/Wa/etc. by Chinese and Koreans have their own derogatory names for them, yet they have Korean genes, no? And can also be considered to be "northern." So why...I wonder...

Somewhat subtle. For example, testosterone(genetically related) is related to short term memory which is in turn related to consciousness. So I'm putting forth my hypothesis based on the combined works of J. Rushton and Bernard Baars(the cognitive theory of consicousness) and a bunch of others.




Current academic wise, you can say that. Pretty much all of chinese in the West are from the southern part of China and Hong Kong does well in mathmatic portions of PISA but not in problem solving portions.
To my knowledge Northern china is less well developed compare to the south and hence limited opportunities in terms of quality education. I've read on the web that Hakka is of the northern origin and they are the most successful group among Chinese. I might be wrong on this issue about Hakka being a northen group but base on the sources I've read they are of the northern origin.

There's a chinese(from hong kong) poster with an id of "technite" who post regularly at Amren.com and this is what he said in his exact words.

Since you brought the subject up…here’s some interesting tid-bits….have fun!

The present reputation of the Chinese in America is based on the performance of Chinese who emigrated from Southern China, near Hong Kong/Canton.

But knowledgeable Southern-Chinese are not so impressed with themselves.

They say “We are not that smart, but just wait till the Northern Chinese (i.e. all under Communist China) get in gear. They are even smarter. After all, all of what is known as “Chinese Culture” was created in the North”.
-----end of his post-----

If your fellow compatriots aren't feeding such a "bull$hit" to millions of people around the world, I woudn't be posting such a bull$hit in the first place. Look around pal. You would be surprised how many chinese are discussing South/North differences on forums.



The Japanese are mixed with short native populations

I don't really give a damn about what one guy from HK thinks. The American-born Chinese can spread whatever stereotype they want, but this is not the issue here. You're stating as a fact, that "there is no way a bastketball team made up of Southern chinese would be as competive as one made up of Northern Chinese." I wasn't referring to stereotypes made by a bunch of idiots with inferiority complexes, I was just referring to your comment.



I was a bit defensive there, wasn't expecting an answer - pretty straight-forward anyway. 2

Japanese are decendents of the Chinese.

I'm not trying to insult anyone here and if you feel offended by my comment, I apologize.
The first time I heard about Northern/Southern Chinese was back in 1992 during the olympic games.
I was watching a basketball game between China and some other team and if I am remember correctly China was doing pretty badly. Desite their poor performance, the Cannadian commentator said that China has a great future in basketball because there are a good number of tall people in Northern China. Before that I didn't know anything about the dichotomy between Northern/Southern Chinese. So when I said "there is no way a bastketball team made up of Southern chinese would be as competive as one made up of Northern Chinese.", I was relying on the Canadian commentator's statement. You are specifically pointing at my comment but my guess is that my comment isn't too far from those of the professional coaches/scouts in NBA.

thats interesting...i didnt know southern Chinese had such a good opinion about their northern compatriots... actually there has always been some resentment of northerners by southern Chinese because historically northerners dominated government (ex. Qing Dynasty)... even today that still exists (ex. feelings of Taiwan Hong Kong and Shanghai towards Beijing)....