caucasoid, *******, mongoloid?

Question

there are five main races
caucasoid
*******
mongoloid
capoid
australoid
what are the pacific islanders (such as samoans), hispanics/latinos, and indians (from india) a blend of?

Answer 1

So-called "hispanics" are either Caucasian or Mongoloid.

Answer 2

Hispanics can be caucasoid, mongoloid, ******* or of mixed race. Read a bit more, ignorant.

Answer 3

Races aren't so compartmentalized as you make them seem. They're regions in a genetic spectrum where the population density is significantly higher than the between areas. But never let anyone con you with the moronic notion that race doesn't exist. It does, even if there aren't any sharp discontinuities between the races. Red exists, and you never confuse it with yellow, even though red graduates into yellow through an intermediate color: orange. Just as color exists and it isn't "all one kind of light," so too does race exist. The breeds of hominid extant today aren't all alike.

Hispanic is a misleading term, and so is Latino. They usually refer to a hybrid people whose ancestry is part European and part Amerindian (with the latter usually being predominant). They aren't Spanish: there merely speak the language of the Spanish. They aren't Latins, they merely speak a language related to Latin - Spanish is a romance language. The correct term for them is Mestizo.

The race you usually regard as "Asian" actually began with a hybridization of caucasians and an aboriginal Asian race, about 20,000 years ago. The hybrids back then were the progenitors of the modern (glossier, smarter, and better-looking) Asian race. The aboriginal Asian still exists, however: they're called Yoyoi Asians, and they are rather dog-faced and evil-looking.

The Asiatic hybrids chased the Yoyoi away from the best parts of Asia, and some of the Yoyoi came into North America to find a new place to live. That's where the Amerindians came from.

When they arrived, however, they found migrating caucasoid groups already here, and there was a very protracted race-war, thousands of years long, in which the early White settlers lost and mostly became extinct.

Twelve thousand years later, Whites returned to North America and turned the game around, reconquering the continent and settling it.

Now the Mestizos are on the march again, coming up from Mexico into formerly White-held lands: California, Arizona, Texas, New Mexico, Utah, Colorado... How far will they go before the White race can again rally? No one knows.

Answer 4

Mongoloid defines the Asian race. I thought the main races had been finally defined as three.

Answer 5

Researchers in the early 20th centuary classified the Malay and American races as branches of the Mongolian, leaving only the Caucasian, Mongolian, and Ethiopian races. Further explication in the early and mid twentieth century, arrived at three primary races:

* *******
* Caucasoid
* Mongoloid or Sinoid

with a small number of less widespread races.

The most widely referenced 20th century racial classification, by American anthropologist Carleton Coon, divided humanity into five races:

1. Caucasoid race
2. Congoid race
3. Capoid race
4. Mongoloid race
5. Australoid race

Coon assigned even some populations on sub-Saharan Africa to a broadly defined Caucasoid race, leading to charges that peoples with recorded ancient civilizations were being defined out of the black race, in order to depict the remaining "Congoid" race as lacking in culture.

Coon and his work were widely accused, even at the time, of obsolete thinking or outright racism, but some of his terminology continues in use to a lesser degree even today, even though the "-oid" terms now have offensive connotations, perhaps because his liberal opponents who de-emphasized the significance and definability of race, naturally did not introduce any superseding classification to drive them out of use. In addition to references in legitimate scientific discussion, Coon's macro-racial classification, as well as his detailed list of European "subraces", is popular with racist groups who agree with the existence of distinct racial types, and is widely reproduced on "white nationalist" websites.

In Blumenbach's day, physical characteristics like skin color, cranial profile, etc., went hand in hand with declarations of group moral character, intellectual capacity, and other aptitudes. The "fairness" and relatively high brows of "Caucasians" were held to be apt physical expressions of a loftier mentality and a more generous spirit. The epicanthic folds around the eyes of "Mongolians" and their slightly sallow outer epidermal layer supposedly bespoke a crafty, literal-minded nature. The dark skin, relatively sloping craniums and other common traits among "Ethiopians" were taken as wholesale proof of a closer genetic proximity to the other great apes, even though the skin of chimpanzees and gorillas beneath the hair is whiter than the average "Caucasian" skin, that the thin lips characteristic of "Caucasians" are actually closer in form to the lips of lower primates, that "high foreheads" can be seen in orangutans and some monkey species, and that the straight and relatively profuse body hair of Europeans is considerably more "ape-like" than the sparse, tightly curled body hair of "Ethiopians". By Coon's day, group physical characteristics were, for the most part, unhitched from assessments of group character and aptitude, and, since then, those maintaining the mere reality of physical group traits are often suspected of carrying the old malign racism.

Charles Darwin, in his book dealing with the origins of race from 1871, The Descent of Man, noted the great difficulty naturalists had in trying to decide how many "races" there actually were (Darwin was himself a monogenist on the question of race, believing that all humans were of the same species and finding "race" to be a somewhat arbitrary distinction between groups):

Man has been studied more carefully than any other animal, and yet there is the greatest possible diversity amongst capable judges whether he should be classed as a single species or race, or as two (Virey), as three (Jacquinot), as four (Kant), five (Blumenbach), six (Buffon), seven (Hunter), eight (Agassiz), eleven (Pickering), fifteen (Bory St. Vincent), sixteen (Desmoulins), twenty-two (Morton), sixty (Crawfurd), or as sixty- three, according to Burke. This diversity of judgment does not prove that the races ought not to be ranked as species, but it shews that they graduate into each other, and that it is hardly possible to discover clear distinctive characters between them.

Answer 6

this is ridiculous. its not that those categorizations are just politically incorrect, but they are scientifically completely out-dated. humans are not divided by races specified only by color of skin or a location of ancestry. some universities offer anthropology 101 classes, or even a class on the history of anthropology or ethics of anthropology would be really good for you. it helped me!

Answer 7

Considering that Asians take lots of pictures, wouldn't that make them Polaroid?

Answer 8

the Indians and Arabs are same race as Jesus and his crowd

Answer 9

their mama and papa.

Answer 10

whogivesaripoid