Are uralids caucasoids?

[Martín Zalacaín]

From my experience in this forum, Agrippa is so used to disrespectful loudmouths that just throw in their nonsensical gibberish without presenting any proof of their claims, that he will not be offended with your attitude, so you can now go to sleep with a clear conscience.

[3rdEye]

Originally Posted by MisterSinister

Sigh... Blah, blah, blah.

I wouldn't be surprised if the various anthropological books you refer to are from the 1930's or earlier. It's a shame repeating old racial biology like a parrot. My suspicion is that you have never been to Finland.

Finns are classic "Europids", so are the Estonians and Karelians. This may come as a surprise.

Welcome to Finland.

Welcome to Stirpes, dear Parrot. Please behave if you want to stay for long. An old source isn't necessarily a bad source, and by the way why do you put Europids within quotation marks? Agrippa even defined what he meant by the term.

[MisterSinister]

Originally Posted by Seekers

Welcome to Stirpes, dear Parrot. Please behave if you want to stay for long. An old source isn't necessarily a bad source, and by the way why do you put Europids within quotation marks? Agrippa even defined what he meant by the term.

Seekers,
You resort to name calling after an unfortunate duplicate?

Old sources can be good unless they are biased or reflects the eras prevailing and often wrongful theories.
As in referring to the earth being flat does not make it right because it says so in the Bible.

And about parroting, I have NO idea why you moved my post which belonged to the thread
Racial Types of Finno-Ugrians, Baltisation and Eastbaltids
it gives a necessary background to why Agrippas claim is outdated.
However, the intrested may find it here
Shared Ethnic Minorities between Sweden and Finland "Racial biology and Finno Ugrians"


Gonzalvus:
"From my experience in this forum, Agrippa is so used to disrespectful loudmouths that just throw in their nonsensical gibberish without presenting any proof of their claims, that he will not be offended with your attitude, so you can now go to sleep with a clear conscience."

Please specify disrespectful. Am I a loudmouth because I have an opinion? Have you read my "non sensical gibberish" without "proof or claim" in the threads I referred to?

Pleas do so and then return with a comment.

[3rdEye]

Originally Posted by MisterSinister

Seekers,
You resort to name calling after an unfortunate duplicate?

Old sources can be good unless they are biased or reflects the eras prevailing and often wrongful theories.
As in referring to the earth being flat does not make it right because it says so in the Bible.

And about parroting, I have NO idea why you moved my post which belonged to the thread
Racial Types of Finno-Ugrians, Baltisation and Eastbaltids
it gives a necessary background to why Agrippas claim is outdated.
However, the intrested may find it here
Shared Ethnic Minorities between Sweden and Finland "Racial biology and Finno Ugrians"


Gonzalvus:
"From my experience in this forum, Agrippa is so used to disrespectful loudmouths that just throw in their nonsensical gibberish without presenting any proof of their claims, that he will not be offended with your attitude, so you can now go to sleep with a clear conscience."

Please specify disrespectful. Am I a loudmouth because I have an opinion? Have you read my "non sensical gibberish" without "proof or claim" in the threads I referred to?

Pleas do so and then return with a comment.

I call you Parrot, because you are the one who's behaving like one.

It's not up to you to make the final decision about where your posts belong. You can always appeal sensibly, if you have a good reason. But you're not allowed to spam Stirpes with the same content in all your favourite threads.

And I must say that I don't share your point of view about old and new. It seems to be old=false and new=true. This point of view of yours will in time become old - and according to your own rationale - false.

That piece closest to your heart, that you are so upset about me moving, doesn't debunk Agrippa in the least. I think it belongs where I moved it, you see, in identity issues.

Yes, you are a repetetive loudmouth. You didn't even present yourself before you declared war against the windmills.

[Carnyx]

Classic "Europids"? You mean a sort of ideal?

[MisterSinister]

Do not interpret your understanding of old and new as mine, since I obviously have not stated anything of what you write.

I'm sure that anyone who reads the post with an open mind can see that I TOTALLY DEBUNK AGRIPPA THERE.

Maybe it's something you don't want to see happen as you may subscribe to and support a negative and wrongful view of Finns.

Obviously I'm not the one deciding where my posts belong... It's someone who makes wrong decisions.

[3rdEye]

Originally Posted by MisterSinister

Maybe it's something you don't want to see happen as you may subscribe to and support a negative and wrongful view of Finns.

I just put it in a section where it wouldn't be off the subject. And it is clear to me who has negative and wrongful images, projected onto specific members of Stirpes.

[MisterSinister]

Originally Posted by Seekers

I just put it in a section where it wouldn't be off the subject. And it is clear to me who has negative and wrongful images, projected onto specific members of Stirpes.

I love the members of the Stirpes community so there I'd like to share what I know with them.

[Agrippa]

Originally Posted by Carnyx

Classic "Europids"? You mean a sort of ideal?

To put it that way:
Classic Europid are those forms which dont deviate from the Europid standard trait combination(s) too much.

To put it into context, a classic wolf is also characterised by certain traits which a half wolf-dog breed might lack. As do deviations caused by directional breeding way from the typical form.

Classic Europid traits are f.e. orthognathy, straight or bird-like profile, strong relief of the face, prominent and (worldwide standards) narrow nose, a juvenile to mature growth type and body build etc.

Classic Europid forms are Aurignacoid and Cromagnoid, from the new formations Taurid could be considered so, even if being brachycephalic, since all other traits are even strongly Europid in character.

You can compare with here:
Racial Types of Finno-Ugrians, Baltisation and Eastbaltids

The Corded examples are classic Europids, the shown Comb-Ceramic people's reconstructions clearly aren't, they deviate in an infantile and even Mongoloid direction.

Most of this deviations were not present in the past or only as a small minority element, whereas in most European and other clearly Europoid dominated regions classic Europid traits were predominant. So being classic Europid is rather the standard for Europid populations, being not is the deviation. There can be more clearly and extreme Europid tendencies too though - so inside of the classic Europid spectrum some were going further in the direction Europid specialisation is about, others not. F.e. in general Nordid, Dalofaelid, Mediterranid and Dinarid is more clearly Europid than a reduced-infantile Alpinid, though inside of the Alpinoid spectrum, there are huge differences from classic Europid Alpinids to deviating forms as well. Baltisation in general is a deviating trend with the Eastbaltid (to be distinguished from more generalised Westbaltid/Baltid forms) and Lappoid forms being the extreme in the European spectrum (going in a Mongoloid, Borealised, direction).

Classic Europid traits are also characterised by being raciall progressive, even though there are others (f.e. Mongoloid) forms of racially progressive tendencies:
Racially progressive tendencies in Homo sapiens

[Carnyx]

So where are (average) Finns in the middle of all this?

[Agrippa]

Originally Posted by Carnyx

So where are (average) Finns in the middle of all this?

Simple put, in Finland for the most part its a simple thing with two extremes:
Nordid-Cromagnoid (Dalofaelid, Westbaltid mainly) vs. Eastbaltid-Lappoid.

The average Finn is closer to the first than to the second I'd say, but the latter tendency is in Finland stronger than in most other European areas but other North-East European ones, so making it, probably more than other European regions, a country of extremes (very mature-progressive and strongly Europid vs. less so...).

[MisterSinister]

Originally Posted by Agrippa

Simple put, in Finland for the most part its a simple thing with two extremes:
Nordid-Cromagnoid (Dalofaelid, Westbaltid mainly) vs. Eastbaltid-Lappoid.

The average Finn is closer to the first than to the second I'd say, but the latter tendency is in Finland stronger than in most other European areas but other North-East European ones, so making it, probably more than other European regions, a country of extremes (very mature-progressive and strongly Europid vs. less so...).

Yack, yack, yack...

I promise you Agrippa, that during my travels in Germany I have seen far more people with marked chinbones and mongoloid traits and weird looking people with strange and exotic looks than ever in Finland!

So in my opinion, that is a country of extremes.

Welcome to Finland...

[MisterSinister]

"The Corded examples are classic Europids, the shown Comb-Ceramic people's reconstructions clearly aren't, they deviate in an infantile and even Mongoloid direction. "

Whoaaa!
This has to be backed up with facts!
Please, show me your source of reconstruction.
You must have one to make this bold statement.

[Gavril]

Caucasoids or not, are Uralids Nationalists?

[Kalevi]

Originally Posted by Faustas

Caucasoids or not, are Uralids Nationalists?

Are Atlantids Nationalists? Are Bambutids Nationalists?

Doesn't make that much sense, does it?

[Carnyx]

Originally Posted by Kalevi

Are Atlantids Nationalists? Are Bambutids Nationalists?

Doesn't make that much sense, does it?

Actually it does. We have no care for part time anthropologist hobbyists Europids if they are not Nationalists because this is what this place is for. Is that so important whether Uralids are Caucasoids or not?