Technically they're a different species. Brain has less density, is smaller, sloped forehead, no Neanderthal or Denisovan DNA. Multiple different skeletal differences. Also have DNA from a primitive hominid from a mere 35,000 years ago that no other group has.
The genetic distance of one European and another with no familial relation is almost 10x less than that between a parent and their own mixed race (e.g. African and European) child.
Edit: Sources incoming.... (note the below is not meant to be exhaustive, there are more sources and research out there to find if you look, but as with all things inconvenient to the egalitarian multicultural narrative, they are becoming harder to track down amid search engine delistings and a sea of complete nonsense hits.)
- Asian skull: https://files.catbox.moe/71j510.gif
- Caucasian skull: https://files.catbox.moe/jz3mnd.gif
- African skull: https://files.catbox.moe/ng6n0q.gif
Brain differences: https://files.catbox.moe/geiicd.gif
“The most noticeable difference, however, is the protruding jaw, a condition known as ‘prognathism,’ a trait found in apes and in ancient human fossil skulls, even those not from Africa. The considerable gap between the cheekbones (‘zygomatic arches’) and the indentation on the sides behind the eye sockets (‘post-orbital constriction’) indicate that the more massive jaw was serviced by powerful chewing muscles that passed through the gap.”
Prognathism is “the absence of facial flatness” or the protrusion of the upper and lower jaw into a more snout-like shape (Hanihara, 2000) and it can be measured:
Facial angle: https://files.catbox.moe/7z4cxp.gif
“by means of the facial angle, the slope of the face from the forehead to the jaws. [The illustration I’ll include here] is by Camper, who first used the concept. In his drawings, Camper gives the facial angle as 70° for the “Negro” (i.e., Congoids); [The pre-humans] H. habilis and H. erectus also have a facial angle of about 70°. An angle of 60° has been given for the Hottentots and Bushmen, and 66.6° for the Australian aborigines…. (Baker, 1974, p. 281); orangutans have a facial angle of 58°. Camper regarded a facial angle of 100° as the epitome of beauty (Etcoff, 1999, pp. 42-43); Sub-Saharan Africans have ‘remarkable prognathism.’ (Hanihara, 2000).”
“…[Another illustration] (Nature, Vol. 228) shows a comparison of the lower jaw (mandible) of an orangutan, a Negro, and a white. The rectangles illustrate the width and length of the jaws. The numbers are the percentages of the length to the width. When there is simian prognathism the jaw is long and narrow, as in the orangutan, and when the face is flat, as the white jaw is, the length is actually less than the width; as expected, the Negro jaw is in between the jaw of the orangutan and the jaw of the white.”
Jaw differences: https://files.catbox.moe/s47n67.gif
while Englishmen have a genetic distance of 236 from Near Easterners, who in turn have a genetic distance of 229 from Asian Indians, the genetic distance separating Englishmen and East Africans is 1,163 — from West Africans 1,487 — and from Bantus 2,288.
Genetic distance (two-axis map): https://files.catbox.moe/l4pwkv.gif
Genetic distance (table): https://files.catbox.moe/8qwm5g.png
(Source for two-axis map and table is (Cavalli-Sforza, 1994, p. 82).)
Technically they're a different species. Brain has less density, is smaller, sloped forehead, no Neanderthal or Denisovan DNA. Multiple different skeletal differences. Also have DNA from a primitive hominid from a mere 35,000 years ago that no other group has.
The genetic distance of one European and another with no familiar relation is almost 10x less than that between a parent and their own mixed race (e.g. African and European) child.
Edit: Sources incoming.... (note the below is not meant to be exhaustive, there are more sources and research out there to find if you look, but as with all things inconvenient to the egalitarian multicultural narrative, they are becoming harder to track down amid search engine delistings and a sea of complete nonsense hits.)
- Asian skull: https://files.catbox.moe/71j510.gif
- Caucasian skull: https://files.catbox.moe/jz3mnd.gif
- African skull: https://files.catbox.moe/ng6n0q.gif
Brain differences: https://files.catbox.moe/geiicd.gif
“The most noticeable difference, however, is the protruding jaw, a condition known as ‘prognathism,’ a trait found in apes and in ancient human fossil skulls, even those not from Africa. The considerable gap between the cheekbones (‘zygomatic arches’) and the indentation on the sides behind the eye sockets (‘post-orbital constriction’) indicate that the more massive jaw was serviced by powerful chewing muscles that passed through the gap.”
Prognathism is “the absence of facial flatness” or the protrusion of the upper and lower jaw into a more snout-like shape (Hanihara, 2000) and it can be measured:
Facial angle: https://files.catbox.moe/7z4cxp.gif
“by means of the facial angle, the slope of the face from the forehead to the jaws. [The illustration I’ll include here] is by Camper, who first used the concept. In his drawings, Camper gives the facial angle as 70° for the “Negro” (i.e., Congoids); [The pre-humans] H. habilis and H. erectus also have a facial angle of about 70°. An angle of 60° has been given for the Hottentots and Bushmen, and 66.6° for the Australian aborigines…. (Baker, 1974, p. 281); orangutans have a facial angle of 58°. Camper regarded a facial angle of 100° as the epitome of beauty (Etcoff, 1999, pp. 42-43); Sub-Saharan Africans have ‘remarkable prognathism.’ (Hanihara, 2000).”
“…[Another illustration] (Nature, Vol. 228) shows a comparison of the lower jaw (mandible) of an orangutan, a Negro, and a white. The rectangles illustrate the width and length of the jaws. The numbers are the percentages of the length to the width. When there is simian prognathism the jaw is long and narrow, as in the orangutan, and when the face is flat, as the white jaw is, the length is actually less than the width; as expected, the Negro jaw is in between the jaw of the orangutan and the jaw of the white.”
Jaw differences: https://files.catbox.moe/s47n67.gif
while Englishmen have a genetic distance of 236 from Near Easterners, who in turn have a genetic distance of 229 from Asian Indians, the genetic distance separating Englishmen and East Africans is 1,163 — from West Africans 1,487 — and from Bantus 2,288.
Genetic distance (two-axis map): https://files.catbox.moe/l4pwkv.gif
Genetic distance (table): https://files.catbox.moe/8qwm5g.png
(Source for two-axis map and table is (Cavalli-Sforza, 1994, p. 82).)
Technically they're a different species. Brain has less density, is smaller, sloped forehead, no Neanderthal or Denisovan DNA. Multiple different skeletal differences. Also have DNA from a primitive hominid from a mere 35,000 years ago that no other group has.
The genetic distance of one European and another is almost 10x less than that between a parent and their own mixed race (e.g. African and European) child.
Edit: Sources incoming.... (note the below is not meant to be exhaustive, there are more sources and research out there to find if you look, but as with all things inconvenient to the egalitarian multicultural narrative, they are becoming harder to track down amid search engine delistings and a sea of complete nonsense hits.)
- Asian skull: https://files.catbox.moe/71j510.gif
- Caucasian skull: https://files.catbox.moe/jz3mnd.gif
- African skull: https://files.catbox.moe/ng6n0q.gif
Brain differences: https://files.catbox.moe/geiicd.gif
“The most noticeable difference, however, is the protruding jaw, a condition known as ‘prognathism,’ a trait found in apes and in ancient human fossil skulls, even those not from Africa. The considerable gap between the cheekbones (‘zygomatic arches’) and the indentation on the sides behind the eye sockets (‘post-orbital constriction’) indicate that the more massive jaw was serviced by powerful chewing muscles that passed through the gap.”
Prognathism is “the absence of facial flatness” or the protrusion of the upper and lower jaw into a more snout-like shape (Hanihara, 2000) and it can be measured:
Facial angle: https://files.catbox.moe/7z4cxp.gif
“by means of the facial angle, the slope of the face from the forehead to the jaws. [The illustration I’ll include here] is by Camper, who first used the concept. In his drawings, Camper gives the facial angle as 70° for the “Negro” (i.e., Congoids); [The pre-humans] H. habilis and H. erectus also have a facial angle of about 70°. An angle of 60° has been given for the Hottentots and Bushmen, and 66.6° for the Australian aborigines…. (Baker, 1974, p. 281); orangutans have a facial angle of 58°. Camper regarded a facial angle of 100° as the epitome of beauty (Etcoff, 1999, pp. 42-43); Sub-Saharan Africans have ‘remarkable prognathism.’ (Hanihara, 2000).”
“…[Another illustration] (Nature, Vol. 228) shows a comparison of the lower jaw (mandible) of an orangutan, a Negro, and a white. The rectangles illustrate the width and length of the jaws. The numbers are the percentages of the length to the width. When there is simian prognathism the jaw is long and narrow, as in the orangutan, and when the face is flat, as the white jaw is, the length is actually less than the width; as expected, the Negro jaw is in between the jaw of the orangutan and the jaw of the white.”
Jaw differences: https://files.catbox.moe/s47n67.gif
while Englishmen have a genetic distance of 236 from Near Easterners, who in turn have a genetic distance of 229 from Asian Indians, the genetic distance separating Englishmen and East Africans is 1,163 — from West Africans 1,487 — and from Bantus 2,288.
Genetic distance (two-axis map): https://files.catbox.moe/l4pwkv.gif
Genetic distance (table): https://files.catbox.moe/8qwm5g.png
(Source for two-axis map and table is (Cavalli-Sforza, 1994, p. 82).)
Technically they're a different species. Brain has less density, is smaller, sloped forehead, no Neanderthal or Denisovan DNA. Multiple different skeletal differences. Also have DNA from a primitive hominid from a mere 35,000 years ago that no other group has.
The genetic distance of one European and another is almost 10x less than that between a parent and their own mixed race (e.g. African and European) child.
Edit: Sources incoming....
- Asian skull: https://files.catbox.moe/71j510.gif
- Caucasian skull: https://files.catbox.moe/jz3mnd.gif
- African skull: https://files.catbox.moe/ng6n0q.gif
Brain differences: https://files.catbox.moe/geiicd.gif
“The most noticeable difference, however, is the protruding jaw, a condition known as ‘prognathism,’ a trait found in apes and in ancient human fossil skulls, even those not from Africa. The considerable gap between the cheekbones (‘zygomatic arches’) and the indentation on the sides behind the eye sockets (‘post-orbital constriction’) indicate that the more massive jaw was serviced by powerful chewing muscles that passed through the gap.”
Prognathism is “the absence of facial flatness” or the protrusion of the upper and lower jaw into a more snout-like shape (Hanihara, 2000) and it can be measured:
Facial angle: https://files.catbox.moe/7z4cxp.gif
“by means of the facial angle, the slope of the face from the forehead to the jaws. [The illustration I’ll include here] is by Camper, who first used the concept. In his drawings, Camper gives the facial angle as 70° for the “Negro” (i.e., Congoids); [The pre-humans] H. habilis and H. erectus also have a facial angle of about 70°. An angle of 60° has been given for the Hottentots and Bushmen, and 66.6° for the Australian aborigines…. (Baker, 1974, p. 281); orangutans have a facial angle of 58°. Camper regarded a facial angle of 100° as the epitome of beauty (Etcoff, 1999, pp. 42-43); Sub-Saharan Africans have ‘remarkable prognathism.’ (Hanihara, 2000).”
“…[Another illustration] (Nature, Vol. 228) shows a comparison of the lower jaw (mandible) of an orangutan, a Negro, and a white. The rectangles illustrate the width and length of the jaws. The numbers are the percentages of the length to the width. When there is simian prognathism the jaw is long and narrow, as in the orangutan, and when the face is flat, as the white jaw is, the length is actually less than the width; as expected, the Negro jaw is in between the jaw of the orangutan and the jaw of the white.”
Jaw differences: https://files.catbox.moe/s47n67.gif
while Englishmen have a genetic distance of 236 from Near Easterners, who in turn have a genetic distance of 229 from Asian Indians, the genetic distance separating Englishmen and East Africans is 1,163 — from West Africans 1,487 — and from Bantus 2,288.
Genetic distance (two-axis map): https://files.catbox.moe/l4pwkv.gif
Genetic distance (table): https://files.catbox.moe/8qwm5g.png
(Source for two-axis map and table is (Cavalli-Sforza, 1994, p. 82).)
Technically they're a different species. Brain has less density, is smaller, sloped forehead, no Neanderthal or Denisovan DNA. Multiple different skeletal differences. Also have DNA from a primitive hominid from a mere 35,000 years ago that no other group has.
The DNA difference index is greater between Subsaharan blacks and Europeans than it is between humans and apes.
Edit: Sources incoming....
- Asian skull: https://files.catbox.moe/71j510.gif
- Caucasian skull: https://files.catbox.moe/jz3mnd.gif
- African skull: https://files.catbox.moe/ng6n0q.gif
Brain differences: https://files.catbox.moe/geiicd.gif
“The most noticeable difference, however, is the protruding jaw, a condition known as ‘prognathism,’ a trait found in apes and in ancient human fossil skulls, even those not from Africa. The considerable gap between the cheekbones (‘zygomatic arches’) and the indentation on the sides behind the eye sockets (‘post-orbital constriction’) indicate that the more massive jaw was serviced by powerful chewing muscles that passed through the gap.”
Prognathism is “the absence of facial flatness” or the protrusion of the upper and lower jaw into a more snout-like shape (Hanihara, 2000) and it can be measured:
Facial angle: https://files.catbox.moe/7z4cxp.gif
“by means of the facial angle, the slope of the face from the forehead to the jaws. [The illustration I’ll include here] is by Camper, who first used the concept. In his drawings, Camper gives the facial angle as 70° for the “Negro” (i.e., Congoids); [The pre-humans] H. habilis and H. erectus also have a facial angle of about 70°. An angle of 60° has been given for the Hottentots and Bushmen, and 66.6° for the Australian aborigines…. (Baker, 1974, p. 281); orangutans have a facial angle of 58°. Camper regarded a facial angle of 100° as the epitome of beauty (Etcoff, 1999, pp. 42-43); Sub-Saharan Africans have ‘remarkable prognathism.’ (Hanihara, 2000).”
“…[Another illustration] (Nature, Vol. 228) shows a comparison of the lower jaw (mandible) of an orangutan, a Negro, and a white. The rectangles illustrate the width and length of the jaws. The numbers are the percentages of the length to the width. When there is simian prognathism the jaw is long and narrow, as in the orangutan, and when the face is flat, as the white jaw is, the length is actually less than the width; as expected, the Negro jaw is in between the jaw of the orangutan and the jaw of the white.”
Jaw differences: https://files.catbox.moe/s47n67.gif
while Englishmen have a genetic distance of 236 from Near Easterners, who in turn have a genetic distance of 229 from Asian Indians, the genetic distance separating Englishmen and East Africans is 1,163 — from West Africans 1,487 — and from Bantus 2,288.
Genetic distance (two-axis map): https://files.catbox.moe/l4pwkv.gif
Genetic distance (table): https://files.catbox.moe/8qwm5g.png
(Source for two-axis map and table is (Cavalli-Sforza, 1994, p. 82).)
Technically they're a different species. Brain has less density, is smaller, sloped forehead, no Neanderthal or Denisovan DNA. Multiple different skeletal differences. Also have DNA from a primitive hominid from a mere 35,000 years ago that no other group has.
The DNA difference index is greater between Subsaharan blacks and Europeans than it is between humans and apes.