New sub-forum: Cromagnoid

[Señor Malo]

I really beleive that a Cromagnonid sub forum needs to be created.Honest.

[Menydh]

Done.

Please, suggest in this thread other threads and discussions which should be moved to the Cromagnoid sub-forum.

[Señor Malo]

Great! Now I can write my book March of the club-bearers cavemen

No, seriously speaking, I think cromagnonid is a sub racial type just as are alpinids, nordids and mediterranids, no reason for not granting them a sub forum.

[Breydel]

its a good idea, although almost all european types one way or the other can fall in to the wider cromagnoid spectrum

[Señor Malo]

Originally Posted by Waarnemer

its a good idea, although almost all european types one way or the other can fall in to the wider cromagnoid spectrum

In that case; is there really a cromagnonid racial type? what is the difference between "[sub]racial type" and "spectrum"?

[Menydh]

Also, if all other types are evolutions from Cromagnoid, shouldn't we assume then that Cromagnoid traits are little evolved traits?

[Breydel]

Originally Posted by Mynydd

Also, if all other types are evolutions from Cromagnoid, shouldn't we assume then that Cromagnoid traits are little evolved traits?

no. what is called cromagnoid today is non-comparable with the original brunn type. In fact almost all europids share some degree of robustness with that original paleo type. and even so if cromagnoids are the way they morphological are constructed then it is because evolution didn't had to intervene (adaptation). robustness is in fact nothing more than non gracilization that interfered together with civilization, it has been successfully demonstrated that nurture plays the most important role in the gracilization of the facial phenotype so lowlands and coastal regions will by definition be more open to gracilization then the inner land, so we get differed phenotypes but largely same genotypes like we have with berids and atlantomediterranids in sardinia and spain

[Menydh]

I said litte evolved, not non evolved. I should have said less evolved. I was refering just to phenotype traits however.

And yes, apparently the genotypes predate the formation of modern phenotypes.

[Agrippa]

Originally Posted by Waarnemer

no. what is called cromagnoid today is non-comparable with the original brunn type. In fact almost all europids share some degree of robustness with that original paleo type. and even so if cromagnoids are the way they morphological are constructed then it is because evolution didn't had to intervene (adaptation). robustness is in fact nothing more than non gracilization that interfered together with civilization, it has been successfully demonstrated that nurture plays the most important role in the gracilization of the facial phenotype so lowlands and coastal regions will by definition be more open to gracilization then the inner land, so we get differed phenotypes but largely same genotypes like we have with berids and atlantomediterranids in sardinia and spain

One can argue for phenotypical variation because of environmental influences with good reason, but a typical Berid and a typical Atlantomediterranid from Sardinia are simply two different racial types, actually being separated by different evolutionary paths since thousands of years.

In the inner lands those who lost, were pushed back and had to adapt to unfavourable conditions live, so they both kept more primitive traits because of their status and adapted in a typical way to that environment as well. The combination resulted in the typical retreat area variants of reduced character. Of course, if this racial tendency being combined with environmental factors, you have a serious accumulation of effects with extreme results.
Robustness with large size usually survives under better circumstances and if the positive selective pressures are important.

[Breydel]

Originally Posted by Agrippa

One can argue for phenotypical variation because of environmental influences with good reason, but a typical Berid and a typical Atlantomediterranid from Sardinia are simply two different racial types, actually being separated by different evolutionary paths since thousands of years.

In the inner lands those who lost, were pushed back and had to adapt to unfavourable conditions live, so they both kept more primitive traits because of their status and adapted in a typical way to that environment as well. The combination resulted in the typical retreat area variants of reduced character. Of course, if this racial tendency being combined with environmental factors, you have a serious accumulation of effects with extreme results.
Robustness with large size usually survives under better circumstances and if the positive selective pressures are important.

the pushed back theory is that provable? i can't imagine something like that being observed inconsideration of what would physical be needed to push one group of people to unfavorable positions is highly questionable and will have as outcome theories you support. my enumeration is of a much more realistic caliber

[Agrippa]

Originally Posted by Waarnemer

the pushed back theory is that provable? i can't imagine something like that being observed inconsideration of what would physical be needed to push one group of people to unfavorable positions is highly questionable and will have as outcome theories you support. my enumeration is of a much more realistic caliber

Look at the original and primary distributions of the variants in questions first, about the correlations with those racial tendencies I pointed out in various threads and consider the fact that your theory is not realistic since you stated environmental influences being the PRIME factor and genetic ones being UNIMPORTANT if following your post, which is absurd for such traits which are highly heritable, especially certain proportions and morphological peculiarities.

[Breydel]

Originally Posted by Agrippa

Look at the original and primary distributions of the variants in questions first, about the correlations with those racial tendencies I pointed out in various threads and consider the fact that your theory is not realistic since you stated environmental influences being the PRIME factor and genetic ones being UNIMPORTANT if following your post, which is absurd for such traits which are highly heritable, especially certain proportions and morphological peculiarities.

not true, it’s a fact that there is no genetically difference between berid or atlantomediterranid spaniards. do you think a nordid from sint pietersburg has genetically more in common on one hand with one from the netherlands than on the other with a baltid from the same city? two i never said unimportant, but again fact is phenotypes change without considerable shifts in genotypes all the time, it’s a proven fact that generations change in phenotype (becoming more brachycephalic or vise versa) without an interfering in genotype but simply because of adaptation to environmental factors its inherent variability

[Agrippa]

Originally Posted by Waarnemer

not true, it’s a fact that there is no genetically difference between berid or atlantomediterranid spaniards.

How can you say that with the little knowledge we have? If you refer to y- and mtDNA haplogroups alone, well, that says little, because those markers are older than the racial types are and most of the specialisation being meant happened later. Furthermore Aurignacoid and Cromagnoid variants mixed over and over again, selective pressures formed the modern racial types primarily by partly using already present Aurignacoid (Nordid, Mediterranid, Orientalid, Indid) or Cromagnoid (Dalofaelid, Palaeatlantid, Berberid, Berid and all reduced forms) trait combinations which were further sorted and newly adapted.

do you think a nordid from sint pietersburg has genetically more in common on one hand with one from the netherlands than on the other with a baltid from the same city?

Most likely, the ancestors who brought those traits had, but if not assuming a "pure line" going down from those who brought the traits to those carrying it now, its rather unlikely, because they all mixed with locals. Some bloodlines and local populations kept traits, in others new were selected out of the variation or mixture. But genetic means heritable, it doesnt need to be associated with genes which had no function, were not or not as important for a racial specialisation.

A good example are bloodgroups, which selection follows own rules which can go against the racial specialisation. F.e. there could be two Nordid populations, one living in an area in which certain plagues were of great importance. From an immunological point of view the bloodgroup B was advantageous then, so even minimal admixture, even if it was just one in thousand who had B originally, could led to a spread of bloodgroup B. Still, all other traits of Nordid character, if not being selected with for specific reasons, could be kept more or less.

So we would have two groups of Nordid people, but one being altered by selective pressures, having now much higher frequencies of B than the other group, which a) had no variants of B at all or at least b) not situation in which B was selected. But that means just a physiological adaptation or genetic mixture which didnt resulted in a dillusion of the Nordid type, just in a local alteration as long as the basic racial traits stayed like they were.

two i never said unimportant, but again fact is phenotypes change without considerable shifts in genotypes all the time, it’s a proven fact that generations change in phenotype (becoming more brachycephalic or vise versa) without an interfering in genotype but simply because of adaptation to environmental factors its inherent variability

But this potential adaptability has limits and this limits are narrower than your suggestion from above. Just study the variation and inheritance of nasal shapes and you can clearly distinguish basic Mediterranid and Berid along genetic lines. Same goes for various other Mediterranid or Berid traits respectively which have a high factor of inheritance and being not easily altered without GENETIC CHANGE for which its unimportant how small it might be in comparison to the whole genome as long as its about genetically determined traits of adaptive and racial significance.

[Breydel]

Originally Posted by Agrippa

How can you say that with the little knowledge we have? If you refer to y- and mtDNA haplogroups alone, well, that says little, because those markers are older than the racial types are and most of the specialisation being meant happened later. Furthermore Aurignacoid and Cromagnoid variants mixed over and over again, selective pressures formed the modern racial types primarily by partly using already present Aurignacoid (Nordid, Mediterranid, Orientalid, Indid) or Cromagnoid (Dalofaelid, Palaeatlantid, Berberid, Berid and all reduced forms) trait combinations which were further sorted and newly adapted.

over eighty procent of all european autosomal dna is of clear upper paleolithic lineage, gracilization came in general with agriculture and domestication of animals, and so i repeat, in the lose of robustness nutrition plays the most important role in the structure of the facial phenotype. together with that is very clear that mediterranoid types arose from regional cromagnoid ones as supported by schreiner “There is no evidence to contradict the possibility that during the long period of the Upper Palaeolithic and the Mesolithic a transformation of certain skull forms of Upper Palaeolithic type in the direction of the Nordic type may have taken place, in that the skulls have got a more delicate structure and a higher and narrower face. The Danish cranial finds from the Maglemose and Ertebølle Periods in recent years indicate that such a transformation really has taken place in certain regions” later he goes on about a considerable contribution from the eastern mediterranean, but he didn’t had the enjoyment of genetics so he basically was on the right track

Most likely, the ancestors who brought those traits had, but if not assuming a "pure line" going down from those who brought the traits to those carrying it now, its rather unlikely, because they all mixed with locals. Some bloodlines and local populations kept traits, in others new were selected out of the variation or mixture. But genetic means heritable, it doesnt need to be associated with genes which had no function, were not or not as important for a racial specialisation.

A good example are bloodgroups, which selection follows own rules which can go against the racial specialisation. F.e. there could be two Nordid populations, one living in an area in which certain plagues were of great importance. From an immunological point of view the bloodgroup B was advantageous then, so even minimal admixture, even if it was just one in thousand who had B originally, could led to a spread of bloodgroup B. Still, all other traits of Nordid character, if not being selected with for specific reasons, could be kept more or less.

So we would have two groups of Nordid people, but one being altered by selective pressures, having now much higher frequencies of B than the other group, which a) had no variants of B at all or at least b) not situation in which B was selected. But that means just a physiological adaptation or genetic mixture which didnt resulted in a dillusion of the Nordid type, just in a local alteration as long as the basic racial traits stayed like they were.

very unlikely that is. convergent evolution on the other hand is much more reasonable and again suported by among others lundman. there is not even evidence for some sort of homogeneous proto nordic/mediterranoid population that would have served as a source for all similar developments and spreads, polyphyletic plays a role, there can be no other way

But this potential adaptability has limits and this limits are narrower than your suggestion from above. Just study the variation and inheritance of nasal shapes and you can clearly distinguish basic Mediterranid and Berid along genetic lines. Same goes for various other Mediterranid or Berid traits respectively which have a high factor of inheritance and being not easily altered without GENETIC CHANGE for which its unimportant how small it might be in comparison to the whole genome as long as its about genetically determined traits of adaptive and racial significance.

what do you think causes mutations? environmental changes do, and nutrition is among them. if alpinization can cause such changes from a certain base and if it’s a proven fact that nutrition plays a role in the lose of robustness and if genetics don’t find any substantial difference within populations as those on sardinia.. so again; the pushed back theory is that provable? i can't imagine something like that being observed inconsideration of what would physical be needed to push one group of people to unfavorable positions is highly questionable and will have as outcome theories you support. my enumeration is of a much more realistic caliber