Nonphysical Racial Differences

 Nonphysical Racial Differences

Thomas Allen

In Making Sense of Race (2020), Edward Dutton presents some interesting information. Dutton shows that the differences in the races of humans go far beyond skin color and external features. Some of this information follows. This information is not grouped by type but is presented in the order that it appears in the book.

Diabetes. Turanians (East Asians) are more likely to have diabetes than other races (p. 10).

Prostate Cancer. Negroes are more prone to prostate cancer than other races (p. 10).

Donated Organs. A recipient of a donated organ is less likely to reject the organ if it comes from a person of the same race (p. 10).

Reaction Time. Negroes have the slowest reaction time, and Turanians (East Asians) have the fastest (p. 12).

Schizophrenia and Post-traumatic Stress. Negroes are more likely to suffer from schizophrenia and post-traumatic stress than are Turanians (East Asians) (p. 12).

Classroom Behavior. In the classroom, Negroes are the worst behaved, and Turanians (Asians) are the best behaved (p. 12).

Anxiety and Suicide. Turanians (East Asians) suffer from anxiety more than do Negroes and are more likely to suicide themselves than are Negroes (p. 13).

Influenza. Indo-Australians and Turanians are more likely to contract influenza than are Aryans and Negroes (p. 93).

Some More Racial Comparisons. The following is a comparison of averages of three races: Aryans, Turanians, and Negroes. This information is from a table on pages 105–107. Not included here are the numerical measurements in the table.

– Aryans have the largest brain, and Negroes, the smallest.

– Turanians have the largest endocrinal volume, and Negroes, the smallest.

– Turanians have the largest external head measurements, and Negroes have the smallest.

– Turanians have the most cortical neurons, and Negroes, the least.

– Turanians have the highest cranial capacity, and Negroes, the least.

– Turanians have the highest IQ, and Negroes, the lowest.

– Based on the number of times that all 21 accepted measures of civilization have been independently achieved, Aryans have four achievements, Turanians have one, and Negroes have zero.

– All the top 40 most important scientists between 800 BC and 1950 AD are Aryans.

– Of the scientists in the Dictionary of Scientific Biography, 98 percent are Aryans and 2 percent are Turanians; zero are Negroes.

– Adolescent female Negroes have the fastest skeleton development, and Turanians, the slowest.

– Negro babies began walking earlier than Aryan and Turanian babies.

– Negroes develop permanent teeth the earliest while Turanians are the last to develop permanent teeth.

– Negro women have their first pregnancy at a younger age than do Aryans and Turanians with Turanians last.

– A larger percentage of Turanians develop senility than do Negroes and Aryans with Aryans having the lowest percentage.

– Turanians have the longest life span and Negroes, the shortest.

– Negroes have the largest percentage of psychopathic personalities, and Turanians, the lowest.

– Turanians have the highest percentage of stable marriages, and Negroes, the lowest.

– Turanians are the most law-abiding, and Negroes, the least.

– Negroes have the highest rate of twins, and Turanians, the lowest.

– Negro males have the largest penises, and Turanian males, the smallest.

– A larger percentage of Negroes have AIDS than Aryans and Turanians, who have the lowest percentage.

Mental Instability. Turanians are higher in mental instability than are Aryans (p. 110).

Stereotypes. “75 percent of racial stereotypes have been found to be at least partially accurate and 50 percent completely accurate” (p. 161).

IQ. The average IQ of Aryans is 100. For, Turanians, the average IQ ranges from 85 (Pacific Islanders) to 105 (Northeast Asians). Negroes have an average IQ of 70, and Melanochroi have an average IQ of 84. Indo-Australians have an average IQ of 64 while Khoisans have an average IQ of 54. (p. 167.)

Personality. Hereditability (genes) accounts for 50 to 66 percent of a person’s personality (pp. 184-185).

Hybrids. Mixed-race people have a greater chance of suffering from mental illness, especially depression, which is significantly genetic in origin (p. 242).

Religion. Religiousness (the strength and rootedness of belief and collective practice) is about 40 percent genetic (p. 260). About religion, Dutton writes:

In Western societies, those who collectively worship a moral god are more likely to be married, less likely to be divorced, are more likely to have children, and more likely to have larger numbers of children. They have lower rates of physical and mental illness, live longer, are more likely to get over serious illnesses, and have lower morbidity. . . . [A]theism, and other deviations from traditional religious belief in modern populations, can be reasonably understood, therefore, as a mutation — and a harmful mutation at that. In line with this, atheism is associated with other markers of mutation such as autism, poor physical health, poor mental health, and being physically asymmetrical. Atheism may be associated with certain examples of deviant sexuality, something that would tend to reduce individual fitness (p. 262). 

Schizophrenia. Negroes are more prone to schizophrenia than are Aryans (p. 283).

Temporal Lobe Epilepsy. Negroes are twice as likely as Aryans to suffer from temporal lobe epilepsy (p. 284).

Skeleton. A person’s race can be identified solely from his skeleton with 80-percent accuracy (pp. 329-330).

Taste Sensitivity. Negroes have higher taste sensitivity than do Aryans and Melanochroi (p. 332). 

Ear Wax. Races differ in the smell and consistency of their ear wax. Turanians (East Asians) have white, dry, flaky ear wax that has only a slight odor. Aryans and Negroes have yellow, wet ear wax with a pungent odor although the ear wax of Negroes is darker, closer to orange, and has a stronger odor (p 333).

Sleep. Races differ in how they sleep. When they sleep, Aryans move more than Negroes. Aryans are three times more likely to have restless leg syndrome (legs shake during sleep) than Negroes (p. 335). The sleep quality of Negroes is far more variable than that of Aryans. Thus, Negroes develop fewer memories, especially fewer long-term memories than Aryans (p. 336).

Dreams. Negroes are more likely to have lucid dreams, i.e., are aware that they are dreaming, than are Aryans. Turanians (East Asians) are less likely than Negroes or Aryans to experience lucid dreams (p.337).

Dutton’s Making Sense of Race is an excellent book that is worth reading. It offers far more interesting information than is mentioned above.

Copyright © 2021 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More anthropology articles.

Fundamental Christians and Evolution

Fundamental Christians and Evolution

Thomas Allen

Fundamental Christians attack evolution, Darwinism, as a false science. Then, with a few exceptions, these same fundamental Christians resort to Darwinism to explain the origins of the species (races) of man.

With rare exceptions, fundamental Christians are Darwinists, evolutionists. All have the various races descending from Adam and Eve. Since nearly all fundamental Christians believe that the Noachian Flood was global and killed all mankind except Noah, his wife, his sons, and their wives, they believe that the species of man descended from Noah through his sons and their wives.

Consequently, like the Christian evolutionists, they ignore the biblical principle of according to its kind or after its kind, i.e., like begets like —at least so far as humans are concerned. Many believe in the fixity of every species except the human species. They reject Jeremiah’s teaching and believe that an Ethiopian can change his skin. Jeremiah declared the immutability of the races (species) of man when he said, “Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard his spots?” (Jeremiah 13:23a). The implication is no. Thus, Jeremiah testifies that fundamental Christians err when they maintain that all the species of man descended from Adam and Eve or from Noah through his sons and their wives.

According to the typical fundamental Christian, all the species of man descended from Noah’s sons and their wives. Nearly all of them hold that Noah’s sons were of the same race as Noah and his wife. Most seem to agree that Noah, his wife, and his sons were Aryans (Whites); nevertheless, whatever their race is, it is irrelevant for the purpose of this discussion.

However, some fundamental Christians teach that Noah’s sons’ wives were of different races than their husbands. Many believe that Shem’s wife was an Aryan  (Homo albus) and Japheth’s wife was probably Aryan, although a few believe that she was a Turanian (Homo luridus). Most of this school contend that Ham’s wife was a Negro (Homo niger). Since the great sin that brought about the Noachian Flood was miscegenation (v. People of the Flood by Thomas Coley Allen, 2008), that Noah’s sons’ wives were of different races than their husbands is highly unlikely. However, if Noah’s daughters-in-law were of different races, then their races had to evolve sometime between Adam and Noah.

Most fundamental Christians believe that Noah, his wife, and his sons and their wives were of the same race. The typical fundamental Christian believes that the Aryan and probably Turanian came from Japheth. From Shem came the Hebrews, who are Aryans, and the true Arabs, who are Melanochroi (Homo brunus). The Negro came from Ham. Fundamental Christians are fuzzy about the origin of the Melanochroi — probably because nearly all of them fail to recognize this species. Usually, they lump the Melanochroi of Africa with the Negro. They lump the Melanochroi of the Middle East with either Shem, i.e. the Aryans, or the Negro of Africa. About the Melanochroi of India, nearly all of them are silent. As for the Khoisan (Homo khoisanii) and Indo-Australian (Homo australis) species, they usually lump them with the Negro.

Thus, fundamental Christians have a multitude of evolutionary occurrences. If Noah’s family are Negroes, then Ham’s family has bred true, if the Khoisans, Indo-Australians, and Melanochroi usually lumped with the Negro are ignored. Japheth’s descendants evolved into two species: the Aryan and the Turanian. Shem’s descendants also evolved into two species: the Aryan and Melanochroi.

However, if Noah’s family are Aryans, some of the descendants of Shem and Japheth have bred true; others have not. Ham’s descendants have not bred true; they have evolved into the Negro and probably the Khoisan and the Indo-Australian. Some of Japheth’s descendants have bred true as Aryans while others evolved into Turanians. Likewise, some of Shem’s descendants have bred true as Aryans while others evolved into Melanochroi. Why some of Japheth’s and Shem’s descendants remained Aryans and others evolved into other species is not explained.

If the fundamental Christians are correct about the origins of the species (races) of man, only a few generations are needed for one species to evolve into another species. If they are correct, why have no new species of man evolved in the last few centuries? Sufficient time has passed for new species to appear in the last thousand years, but they have not. Why have they not? Fundamental Christians do not explain. If the fundamental Christians are correct, new species (races) should be appearing frequently. (Racial crossing results in racial mongrels, hybrids, and not in new races.)

While fundamental Christians deplore evolution, they resort to it when it is needed to support their doctrine — although most would deny using evolutionary principles. Some may haggle over details, such as, they believe in microevolution, but reject macroevolution. (The difference between the two is the starting point and the time required for one species to change into another species. Microevolution usually starts at the family or genus level and requires only a few generations for one species to change into another species. Macroevolution starts with the first single-cell living entity and requires many generations for one species to change into another species. Both deny the immutability of a species, i.e., according to its kind or after its kind — like begets like. Consequently, they call Jeremiah a liar.) Thus, the fundamental Christian’s disagreement with the orthodox evolutionist is not one of principle, but the starting point and the time involved for a species to change to another species.

Copyright © 2020 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More religious articles.

People of Africa

People of Africa

Thomas Allen

    Many people mistakenly believe that all Africans are Negroes except the late arriving Aryans of southern Africa. A result of this misconception has resulted in the claim that Negroes created the ancient civilization of Egypt. The people who created the ancient Egyptian civilization were the Mizraim, an Aryan nation, who arrived in Egypt around 3200 B.C.
    Five of the six races, species, of humans inhabit Africa. They are the Khoisan (Homo khoisanii), Negro (Homo niger), Melanochroi (Homo brunus), Aryan (Homo albus), and Turanian (Homo luridus). The Khoisans are the original inhabitants of Africa; they originated in Africa probably around 75,000 years ago. Next came the Negroes, who appear in Africa between 55,000 and 40,000 years ago. Following them were the Melanochroi, who arrived around 35,000 years ago. Next came the Aryans, who probably began arriving around 7500 B.C. with more substantial numbers arriving shortly after 1500 B.C. These later Aryans are the ancestor of most Aryans of North Africa. Finally came the Turanians, who landed in Madagascar starting in the first century A.D. with substantial settlements by 1100 A.D. Most Madagascan Turanians are from these settlers.
    The following map, which is based on Carleton Coon’s map,[1] shows the approximate areas inhabited by Khoisans, Negroes, Melanochroi, Aryans, and Turanians around 1500 A.D. During the last 500 years, the major changes that have occurred has been the area inhabited by the Khoisans has greatly contracted as Negroes encroached from the north and Aryans from the south. Also, large numbers of Melanochroi from British India were imported into the British colonies of East and South Africa. Along with a significant number of these later Aryans, a significant number of these Melanochroi still inhabit South Africa.

    The Negro is the primary human species inhabiting Africa. The racial types of Negroes found in Africa are Sudanese (True Negroes, Nigritians), Palaenegroes (Forest Negroes), Pygmies (Negrillos, Twides), Nilotes (Nilotic Negroes), Nilo-Hamites (Negro-Hamites), Bantus (Kaffirs), and Negro Malagasy.
    Sudanese are found predominately along the Guinea coast of West Africa from Senegal to Cameroons. They are a principal type in the countries along the Guinea coast from Gambia to Cameroons, and in southern Mali and Burkina Faso (Upper Volta). Included among the Sudanese are the Ashanti, Felup, Hausa, Ibo, Krus, Mandingo (Malinke, Bambara, Dyula, Kassonke, Soninke, (Jallonke), Mossi, Sara, Serer, Songhai, Toucouleur (Tacuror), and Wolof.
    Palaenegroes live in the interior forests of west and central Africa. Included among the Palaenegroes are the Balunda and Batoka.
    Pygmies are found predominately in the equatorial forests of Africa. They live in Cameroon, Central African Republic, Congo, Zaire, Rwanda, Burundi, and Zambia, but are only a minor part of the populations of these countries. Included among the Pygmies are the Bambutis, Batwa, and Babinga.
    Bantus are found predominately in central and southern Africa. They are a principal type in Zaire, Zambia, Angola, Tanzania, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, South Africa, and other countries of southern Africa. They are also found in Uganda, Kenya, Cameroon, and Gabon. Included among the Bantus are the Eastern Bantu (Buganda, Bunyoro, Chaga, Karagwe, Kikuju, Luyia, and Rwanda Rundi), the Western Bantu (Bassa, Bemba, Duala, Fang [Pangwe], Kuba, Luba, Lunda, Mbala, Soko, Songo-Meno, Teke, and Tetela), and the Southern Bantu (Herero, Ndebele [Tebele], Shona, Shoto, Tsonga, Tswana, and Zulu).
    Nilotes are found predominately in the upper Nile valley and adjacent lands from Khartoum to Lake Kioga and the northeast shores of Lake Victoria. They are a principal type in eastern Sudan and much of Uganda. Included among the Nilotes are the Abaka, Abukaya, Anuak, Beir, Belanda, Dinka, Jaluo, Kamasia (El Tuken), Latuka, Lendu, Luba, Madi, Mittu, Moru, Nuer, Shilluk, and Wira.
    Nilo-Hamites are found predominately in east and east central Africa. They are a principal part of the population of Kenya, Uganda, and northen Tanzania. Included among the Nilo-Hamites are the Lotuko, Lumbwa, Kipsigis, Masai, Nandi, Suk, Teso, Toposa, and Turkana.
    Negro Malagasy are found predominately in Madagascar and account for a majority of the island’s population. They include the Antankarana, Antandroy, Bara, Betsileo, Betsimisaraka, Sihanaka, and Mahafaly).
    Tables 1 and 2 describe six racial types of Negroes: Sudanese, Negro Malagasy, Bantu,Nilote, Nilo-Hamite, and Palaenegro. Excluded is a description of the pygmy[2].

    

    Next to the Negro in importance is the Melanochroi.  Three racial types of Melanochroi are found in Africa; they are the Saharan-Hamites (Moors, Saharan-Berbers), Eastern-Hamites (Ethiopians), and Egyptians.
    The Saharan-Hamites are predominately found in and around the Sahara Desert. They are a principal type in central and southern Morocco, central and southern Algeria, Mauritania, northern Mali, Niger, northern Chad, and southern and central Libya. Included among the Saharan-Hamites are the Bale, Fulas, Mangbattus of Chad, Niam-Niam (Zandeh) of Chad, Shluh of Morocco, Tibbus (Tedas) in the Fezzan, Tibesti, and Tuaregs of the Sahara.
    Eastern-Hamites are predominantly found in the countries between Egypt and Kenya and east of the Nile River. They are a principal type in eastern Sudan, Eritrea, Ethiopia, and Somalia. Included among the Eastern-Hamites are the Agau, Amhara, Barabra (Nubians), Bejas, Beni-Amer, Berberine, Bilins, Bisharin, Bogos, Danakil (Afar), Ethiopians, Falasha (black Jews), Gallas, Hadendoas, Kafacitos, Saho, Sidamo, Somali, and Wata.
    Egyptians are found predominately in Egypt where they are a principal type. They include the Fellahins.
    Table 3 describes three racial types of Melanochroi found in Africa. They are the Saharan-Hamite, Eastern-Hamite, and Egyptian.

    In the Maghreb is the Aryan racial type Southern Mediterranean. Southern Mediterraneans are predominately found in Morocco and Algeria from the southern slopes of the Atlas Mountains northward to the Mediterranean. They include the Berbers of Tunisia and Cyrenaica, sedentary tribes of Jebel Nefuse of Libya, the Kabyle, Mzab, and Shawia of Algeria, and the Riffian of Morocco. Except for recent arrivals in South Africa, they are the only type of Aryan  commonly found in Africa. Recent arrivals from to South Africa are primarily from the Netherlands and Great Britain.
    In Madagascar is the Turanian racial type Malayan Malagasy. Malayan Malagasy are found mainly in Madagascar on the central Imerina Plateau. They make up less than a third of the island's population.
    The Khoisan is the least populous human species inhabiting Africa. They include the San (Bushmen), Khoi (Hottentots), Sandawe, and Hatsa (Kindiga). The Sans and Khoi are found primarily in Namibia,  Botswana, and southern Angola. The Sandawe and Hatsa live in Tanzania. Khoisans are also found in South Africa in the form of the hybrid coloureds. Except for the coloureds of South Africa, Khoisans are a minor to insignificant part of the populations in the countries where they are found.
    Table 4 describes the Southern Mediterranean, Malagasy, and Khoisan.

References
Allen, Thomas Coley. Species of Men: A Polygenetic Hypothesis. Franklinton, North Carolina: TC Allen Company, 1999.

Comas, Juan. Manual of Physical Anthropology. English edition. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas Publisher, 1960.

Coon, Carleton S. and Edward E. Hunt, Jr. The Living Races of Man. New York, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1965.

Coon, Carleton S., Stanley M. Garn, and Joseph B. Birdsell. Races . . . A Study of the Problems of Race Formation in Man. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas Publisher, 1950.

Deniker, J. The Races of Man: An Outline of Anthropology and Ethnography. London, England: Walter Scott, Limited, 1900.

Haddon, A. C. The Races of Man and Their Distribution. New York, New York: The Macmillian Company, 1925.

Keane, A. H. Ethnology. Cambridge, England: The University Press, 1896.

Kroeber, A. L. Anthropology Today: An Encyclopedic Inventory. Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press, 1953.

Peschel, Oscar. The Races of Man, and Their Geographical Distribution. New York, New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1885.

Seligman, C.G. Races of Africa. 3rd edition. London, England: Oxford University Press, 1957.

Taylor, Griffith. Environment, Race, and Migration. Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press, 1937.

Endnotes
1.  Carleton S. Coon and Edward E. Hunt, Jr., The Living Races of Man (New York, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1965), p. 26.

2.  A description of the Pygmy is found in Species of Men: A Polygenetic Hypothesis by Thomas Allen, pp. 101-103.

Copyright © 2017 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More articles on anthropology.

For Whom Is the Constitution Written?

For Whom Is the Constitution Written?

Thomas Allen

    For whom is the Constitution for the United States of America written? The answer is easy. The preamble clearly states for whom the Constitution is written. The preamble reads:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

    “We the People of the United States . . . to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” Who are “ourselves” and “our posterity?” They are the people who wrote and adopted the Constitution and their descendants. That is, they are Aryans, Whites. As Aryans wrote and adopted the Constitution, it is solely for Aryans. As almost all Aryans then abided by the Biblical prohibition against interracial mating, they expected their posterity to be Aryan. (If any Aryan sinned and had a child by a person of another race, that child was not considered an Aryan.)
    Therefore, the Constitution is not written for Negroes. It is not written for Melanochroi from India, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Somalia, etc. Moreover, it is not written for Turanians from China, Korea, Japan, the Philippines, Southeast Asia, etc. Nor is it written for the Turanian Indians and mestizos from Latin America. Likewise, it is not written for Indo-Australians and Khoisans.
     Supporting the notion that the Constitution is written for Aryans is the first naturalization law, which was enacted in 1790. It restricted naturalization to free Whites. It excluded Blacks, American Indians, Muslims, and later Asians. Furthermore, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Jay, and other founding fathers declared that the United States was and should be a White man’s country. By the way, nearly every President, if not every President, held this sentiment until John Kennedy.
    In conclusion, Aryans wrote and adopted the Constitution for the United  States of America for Aryans. They did not write it for Negroes, Melanochroi, Turanians, Indo-Australians, or Khoisans. Until Whites in the United States realize and admit that the Constitution is written solely for them and for no other race, species of humans, the social, political, and economic problems affecting the United States will not be solved. Until ministers start teaching the Biblical prohibition against interracial mating, these problems will not be solved. Moreover, constitutionalists need to acknowledge that the Constitution is solely for Aryans and need to proclaim such. A necessary part of solving the social, political, and economic problems of the United States is returning to the Constitution in its original intent. Admitting that the Constitution is only for Aryans, Whites, is a necessary and essential part of this return. A return to Constitutional government cannot be made without this acknowledgment.
    The biggest hindrances to returning to Constitutional government are Christian ministers and constitutionalists. Because of political correctness, ignorance of the Bible, or fear of being called a “racist,” ministers fail to teach that the Scriptures prohibit miscegenation and interracial mating, that Adam was an Aryan, White, and only Aryans are created in the image of God, and that God is a segregationist and a racial separationist. (God confusing the languages of man as a result of constructing the Tower of Babel is perhaps the greatest act of segregation and racial separation ever experienced by mankind in recorded history.) Likewise, because of political correctness, ignorance of the Constitution, or fear of being called a “racist,” constitutionalists fail to identify the people for whom the Constitution is written and to teach that it is written solely for Whites.
    Before ministers and constitutionalists can return to the proper understanding of the Bible and the Constitution, they need to abandon the Deity of King. They need to cease the idolatry of bowing before his idol. To do this, they need to realize, acknowledge, and teach that Martin Luther King was a rabble-rouser, a scoundrel, a frontman for the Communist Party, and a leader of one of the most destructive movements that the United States have ever endured, the civil rights movement. (As a result of the civil rights movement, the immigration laws were changed to discriminate against Whites and to flood the country with non-Whites such that in a few years, Whites will be a minority in their own country. It also brought the war on poverty, racial and sexual quotas, affirmative action, effeminized and emasculated men, degraded women, homosexual marriages, legalized abortion, growth in out-of-wedlock children, genocide via interracial mating, etc.)

Appendix 1.
    Most people incorrectly refer to the Constitution for the United States of America as the Constitution of the United States of America. According to the preamble, the correct title is the “Constitution for the United States of America.”

Appendix 2.
    Most people refer to the United States in the singular: the United States is. However, the Constitution refers to the United States in the plural: the United States are. For example, Article III, Section 3, Paragraph 1 reads, “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.” The plural pronouns, “their” and “them” are used to refer to the United States.
    Some historians argue that Lincoln’s War to Suppress Southern Independence was fought over a verb. Lincoln and his supporters fought for “is” while the Southern States fought for “are.” Before the War, most people referred to the United States in the plural: they, them, their, are, etc. After the War, most people referred to the United States in the singular: it, its, is, etc.

Copyright © 2017 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More articles on politics.

Skeleton Differences of Human Races

Skeleton Differences of Human Races

Thomas Allen

    This article discusses some of the racial differences in the skeleton. Not discussed is the skull as it deserves an article to itself. A brief description of the races of humans is given in "Species of Men" by Thomas Allen (2015). A more detailed description is given in Species of Men: A Polygenetic Hypothesis by Thomas Coley Allen (Franklinton, North Carolina: TC Allen Company, 1999),
    Bones differ with race.[1] Their density, size, proportions, and forms vary with race. Negroes have denser bones than Aryans. The volume of the sacral canal differs with race.[2]
    Compared to Aryan children, bones grow faster in Negro children. They grow slower in Turanian children.[3]
    The racial characteristic of the pelvic bones is usually distinct enough to make racial identification possible using only the pelvis.[4] The pelvic bones in Negro women are narrower than those in Aryan and Turanian women;[5] the pelvis of Aryans is absolutely and relatively wider than in non-Aryans.[6]
    Legs and torso of Aryans are medium to long in length. For Turanians, legs are relatively short to medium, and the torso is relatively long to medium. Flattening of the lower leg bones and of upper arm bone (the humerus) is frequent and pronounced. The legs of  the Negro is relatively long, and his torso is relatively short. The Negro’s forearm and lower leg bones are relatively long.[7] Negroes have proportionally longer arms and legs than Aryans. Turanians have long trunks and short arms and legs.[8] Like the Negro, Indo-Australian have relatively long arms.[9]
    The femur, thigh bone, varies with race. Two indexes, the Pilastric index and crural index,  illustrate the difference.
    The Pilastric index represents the linea aspera of the femur. (The linea aspera is a rough longitudinal line on the back of the femur.[10]) The following equation calculates the Pilastric index:

Pilastric index = antero-posterior diameter at middle of shaft x 100/ lateral diameter at middle of shaft

    Turanians have a Pilastric index of 103.5 to 113.1 for males and 99.8 to 108.8 for females. Aryans have a Pilastric index of 107.6 for males and 106.7 for females. Negroes have a Pilastric index of 108.6 for males and 106.5 for females.
    The crural index represent relative length of the thigh to the leg. “The higher the crural index, the longer the leg with respect to the thigh; an index of 100 would represent equal length of both segments.”[11] The following equation calculates the crural index:

crural index = bicondylar length of the tibia x 100/ bicondylar length of femur

    Anthropoids have a crural index of 92.3 for orangutan, 83.5 for chimpanzees, and 80.8 for gorillas.
Negroes have a crural index of 86.5; Turanians, 83.6 to 85.9; Indo-Australians, 88.8; Aryans, 83.5.
    The relative length of the forearms of the races differ. The brachial index represents the relative length of the forearm. The higher the brachial index, the greater the relative length of the forearm to the arm. The following equation calculates this index:

brachial index = length of radius x 100/ length of humerus

(Radius is the bone of the thumb side of the forearm.[12])
    Anthropoids have an brachial index of 79.9 for gorillas and 100.7 for orangutan. Aryans have a brachial index of 73.2 to 74.5; Negroes, 77.0 to 78.5; Turanians, 76.9 to 78.2; Indo-Australians, 78.3.[13]
    The torsion angle vary with race. “The torsion angle is formed by the crossing of two reference lines . . . a) the reference line used for the humeral head passed through the greater tuberosity between the insertion of the supraspinatus and the infraspinatus muscles, b) the reference line for, the distal end of the humerus was the articular axis which passes through the center of both capitulum and of the trochlea.”[14] The torsion angle for Aryans is 164̊. Indo-Australians have a torsion angle of 134.5̊ to 143.9̊. For Turanians (Amerindians), it is 138.5̊ to 150.2̊.[15]
    The frequency of olecranon fossa perforation varies with race and sex. (Olecranon fossa is a depression at the curved process from the ulna [the inner and large bone of the forearm] at the elbow.[16]) Anthropoids have a frequency of 26.3 percent for chimpanzees and 84.0 percent for orangutans. For Aryans, the frequency is 5 percent for males and 17.6 percent for females. For Negroes, the frequency is 11.8 for males and 34.5 for females.  Turanians have a frequency of 17 to 58 percent, and Indo-Australians, 48.5 to 58 percent.[17]
     The arch in the feet of Aryans and Turanians are well-developed. However, the arches in Negroes’ feet are low and often result in flat feet.[18]
    The ability to squat is determined by the angle at the neck of the ankle bone. The greater the angle, the easier it is for a person to squat. For Aryans the angle is 18̊; for Turanians, 20̊; for Negroes, 24̊; for apes, 29̊.[19]
    Exostosis (outgrowth of bones) is common in Aryans, less so in Turanians, and rare in Negroes.[20]
    Although Negroes usually have seven pairs of true ribs, they have eight pairs much more often than Aryans.[21] Also, the shoulder blade, scapula, varies with race.[22]
    The body of Negroes appear well-proportioned while Aryans appear thickset and Turanians even more thickset.[23]
    The vertebral column of races differs. Several indexes are used to describe these differences. These indexes include the Cunningham’s index, the sacrum length-breath index, and the sacrum curvature index.
    Cunningham’s index represents the development of the lumbar curve. The following equation calculates the index:[24]

Cunningham index = sum of posterior height of lumbar vertebrae x 100/ sum of anterior height of lumbar vertebrae

    Cunningham index classification is:
    kurthorachic          up to 97.9
    orthorachic            98 to 101.9
    koilorchic              102 and above

    “Indices above 100 indicate absence of a strongly developed lumbar curve. . . .”[25] Aryans are kurthorachic. Indo-Australians and Khoisans are koilorchic.[26]
    The sacrum is formed by the five vertebrae that follow the lumbar vertebrae. The following equation calculates this index:

length-breath index = maximum sacred breath x 100/ midventral straight height

    Sacrum length-breath index classifications is:
    dolichohieric (narrow sacrum)     up to 99.9
    subplatyhierric                                100 to 105.5
    platyhieric (wide sacrum)             106 and above

    Turanians (Chinese), Negroes, and Khoisans are dolichohieric. Aryans and pygmies are subplatyhierric.  Turanians (Polynesians), Indo-Australians, and Melanochroi are platyhieric.[27]
    The sacrum curvature index represents sacral curvature. The following equation calculates this index:

curvature index = midventral straight height x 100/ midventral curved height

    Anthropoids have an index of 98.7. Indo-Austrailians have an average index of 93.1; Negroes, 92.4; Khoisans,  88.5; Turanians, 85.4; Aryans 84.9 – 86.5.[28]
    As shown above, the skeletons of the races of humans differ significantly. Even absent the skull, a trained person can often identify the race of a person by his skeleton alone.

Endnotes
1. Juan Comas, Manual of Physical Anthropology (Springfield, 1957), pp. 412ff.  Stanley M. Garn, Human Races (Springfield, 1961), p. 27.

2. Garn, p. 27.

3. J. Philippe Rushton, Race, Evolution, and Behavior: A Life History Perspective (New Brunswick, 1995), p. 29.

4. Garn, p. 27.

5. James F. Downs and Herman K. Bleibtreu, Human Variation: An Introduction to Race and Racism (Beverly Hills, California:Benziger Bruce & Glencoe, Inc. 1972), p. 261.

6. Vladimir Andeyer, Raciology: The Science of the Hereditary Traits of Peoples, 2nd ed., trans. Patrick Clourier (Moscow, Russia, 2007), p. 182.

7. Robert Bean, The Races of Man: Differentiation and Dispersal of Man (New York, 1932),pp. 89-90.

8. Andeyer, p. 182.

9. Andeyer, p. 181.

10. W.A. Newman Dorland, American Pocket Medical Dictionary (Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders Co., 1945), p. 535.

11. Comas, p. 428.

12. Dorland, p. 803.

13. Comas, p. 428.

14. Comas, pp. 422-433.

15. Comas, pp. 423.

16. Dorland, pp. 388, 676.

17. Comas, pp. 421-422.

18. Robert Bean, The Races of Man: Differentiation and Dispersal of Man (New York, 1932), pp. 89-90.

19. Andeyer, p. 185.

20. Bean, pp. 89-90.

21. Andeyer, p. 181.

22. Comas, pp. 419-420.

23. Andeyer, p. 182.

24. Comas, p. 415.

25. Comas, p. 415.

26. Comas, p. 415.

27. Comas, p. 415.

28. Comas, pp. 415-416.

Copyright © 2015 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More articles on anthropolgy.

Of One Blood

Of One Blood

Thomas Allen

    Proponents of the unity-of-man doctrine who use the Bible to support their doctrine like to quote the first part of Acts 17:26: “And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth. . . .” Therefore, they conclude that all humans have a common origin. They imply, if not outright claim, that the blood of the races of humans is identical. Thus, races cannot be distinguished by blood.
    Most modern scholars doubt that the Greek text used by the translators of the King James Version of the Bible, for this verse was a copy of the original. The best Greek texts do not contain the word “blood.” The word “blood” appears mainly in later Western manuscripts as an interpolation. Most likely, “one” in Acts 17:26 refers to God, who is the maker of all nations of humans.
    Even if the word “blood” is in the original, this verse does not show that all humans descended from Adam. It merely shows that God made each race of humans.
    Whatever blood means in this verse, it does not mean blood flowing through the veins. As shown below, the frequency of genes, alleles, antibodies, and proteins in the blood of the races of humans varies significantly.
    The blood of the races varies at least statistically. The percentage of the population of the several races having certain blood groups varies enough so that the race of a population, if not of a particular individual, can often be identified based on blood analysis. Further, a person’s blood can often eliminate him as a member of a particular race.

[1]

    The Diego (Di-a) blood antigen is absent in Aryans and Negroes, but high in Turanians.[2] The Kell (K) antigen is common in Aryans, but is rare in Negroes and Turanians.[3] The Sutter (Js-a) antigen occurs only in Negroes.[4] Indo-Australians have an extremely low frequency of the B gene, approaching zero, a low frequency of the M gene, no A-2 gene,[5] and a high frequency of the N gene.[6] Asian Turanians have a high frequency of the B and Rh-z genes and almost no A-2 gene. American Turanians have a low frequency of the N gene, little or no B gene, and no A-2 gene. Negroes have a high frequency of the A-2 and Rh-o genes and possess some frequency of the Rh− gene. Aryans have a moderately high frequency of the Rh− gene, and a moderate frequency of the B and A-2 genes.[7] Rh− (cde) blood is almost none existent in Turanians, Indo-Australians, and Khoisans.[8] Blood group A-1,2 is found in Negroes, but is seldom found in Aryans or Turanians.[9] Compared with other races, Aryans have a high frequency of A-2 and Rh−.[10] Negroes are high in Rh-o, P, and Haptoglobin Hp-1 and very low Fy-a (Duffy positive). They have “private genes attached to the MNSU system, including Hunter, Henshaw, and V; a special Rh gene, e-s, in the combination Dce-s; and a gamma globulin variant Gmab.”[11] Indo-Australians are high in CDe (Rh-z), N, NS, Duffy positive (Fy-a), and Haptoglobin Hp-1.[12] Contrary to popular myths, the races do not share a common blood.
    Moreover, the blood of humans strongly resembles that of chimpanzees.[13] Even a chimpanzee with type-A blood can receive a transfusion of human type-A blood.[14] If the criterion of having the same blood makes all the races of humans descended from Adam, then chimpanzees are also his descendants.
    Furthermore, “blood” in Acts 17:26 cannot be referring to the genetic makeup. The different races of humans have significantly different genetic makeup.[15]
    As shown above, the various species of humans differ in their blood. Humans do not have a common blood.

Endnotes

1. Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza and Francesco Cavalli-Sforza, The Great Human Diaspora: The History of Diversity and Evolution, trans. Sarah Thorne (Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1995), p. 125. Carleton S. Coon, and Edward E. Hunt, Jr., The Living Races of Man (New York, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1965), p. 286. Richard A. Goldsby, Race and Races (New York, New York: The Macmillian Company, 1971), p. 59. R. Ruggles Gates, Human Ancestry from a Genetical Point of View (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1948), pp. 158, 338, 356. Stanley M. Garn, Human Races (Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas • Publisher, 1961), p. 47.

2. Stephen Molnar, Races, Types, and Ethnic Groups: The Problem of Human Variation (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1975), p. 76. Coon and Hunt, p. 283. Lionel Casson, et al. Mysteries of the Past, ed. Joseph J. Thorndike, Jr. (New York, New York: American Heritage Publishing Company, Inc., 1977), p. 219.

3. N. E. Morton, “Interracial Crosses and Group Differences,” Racial Variation in Man, ed. F. J. Ebling (New York, New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1975), p. 152.

4. Morton, p. 152.

5. William C. Boyd and Isaac Asimov, Races and People (New York, New York: Abelard-Schuman, 1955), p. 158.

6. Gates, p. 157.

7. Boyd and Asimov, p. 158.

8. Casson, p. 219.

9. Carleton S. Coon, The Origin of Races (New York, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1962), p. 173.

10. Coon and Hunt, p. 286.

11. Coon and Hunt, p. 286.

12. Coon and Hunt, p. 287.

13. Coon, pp. 172-176.

14. Herbert Wendt, It Begin in Babel: The Story of the Birth and Development of Races and Peoples, trans. James Kirkup (Boston, Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1961), p. 374.

15. See the works of Luigi Lucia Cavalli-Sforza — especially The Great Human Diaspora: The History of Diversity and Evolution (1995) and The History and Geography of Human Genes (1994). Officially, he takes the politically correct position of racial equality and the unity of man. Also, see Species of Men: A Polygenetic Hypothesis (1999) by Thomas C. Allen for a polygenetic position.

Copyright © 2015 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More articles on anthropology.

Species of Men

Species of Men

Thomas Allen

Either we must admit different species in the genus Homo, or we must entirely reform zoological classification. – George Pouchet

    The following tables show the major branches, racial types, and representative nationalities or people of the several extant species of men.

For a detailed description of these species and racial types, see Species of Men: A Polygenetic Hypothesis by Thomas Coley Allen and "The American Indian" and "Indo-Australian."

 More articles on anthropolgy.

Skin Color

Skin Color

Thomas Allen

[Editor’s note: The following is “Appendix 3: Skin Color” with minor modification from Species of Men: A Polygenetic Hypothesis by Thomas Coley Allen (Franklinton, North Carolina: TC Allen Co., 1999. Footnotes have been converted to end notes.]

    Three substances cause skin color:[1] hemoglobin, carotene (or keratin), and melanin. In Aryans hemoglobin dominates. In Turanians and Khoisans, carotene usually dominates. For the other species of men, melanin dominates.
    All skin contains melanin. However, in Aryans it is slight enough so that hemoglobin of blood shows through the skin giving it a pinkish or reddish tinge or appearance. (One distinguishing characteristic between Aryans and Melanochroi is that the blue color of blood vessels can be seen through the untanned, and often tanned, skin of Aryans — hence, the term “blue blood.” However, for Melanochroi the blue color is seldom apparent.)
    Melanin occurs as granules in the granular layer of the epidermis. (The epidermis is the bloodless outer layer of the skin.) Melanin determines the degree of the skin's darkness and its hue (color on the chromatic scale). There are two types of melanin. They are eumelanin (black melanin) and phaeomelanin (dun, or orange to red, melanin).[2]
    Eumelanin granules appear in the untanned skin of Negroes and Australians as blackish discs between 1.3 and 1.0 microns long and between 0.6 and 0.5 microns wide.[3] They lie singly in individual capsules. Eumelanin granules also appear in the skins of Aryans (except Nordics, East Baltics, and many Alpines), Melanochroi, and Turanians (including American Indians). In their skins eumelanin granules are smaller and round or elliptical in shape and are between 0.7 and 0.6 microns long and about 0.5 microns wide. They occur in clusters. The volume of eumelanin granules in the skins of Aryans, Melanochroi, and Turanians is about one-fifth of the volume found in Negroes and Australians. The tint of the skins of Aryans and Melanochroi result from eumelanin.[4]
    Phaeomelanin granules are similar to the smaller eumelanin granules in size and shape. They are found in the skins of Aryans, Melanochroi, and some Turanians. They may also occur in the Negro Melanesians.[5, 6]
    Carotene, a yellowish pigment, is found in the outer horny layer of the skin and in subcutaneous fat. It gives the skin of Turanians and Khoisans a yellowish hue.[7]
    For fair skinned people, blood in the dermis, the inner layer of skin, contributes to color. The hemoglobin in blood gives Aryans their pinkish or ruddy color.
    Three parts of the solar spectrum (ultraviolet, visible light, and infrared) impact the three basic skin colors (white, yellow, and black) differently. Ultraviolet and infrared penetrate white skin while it reflects visible light. Yellow skin reflects visible light, absorbs infrared, and allows ultraviolet to pass through. Black skin absorbs all three bands of radiation. Intermediate colored skins, usually some shade of brown, fall between the extremes of the three basic colors.[8] Thus, the darker the skin the less the ultraviolet and infrared radiation penetrate the skin. The fairer the skin the greater the penetration of ultraviolet and infrared radiation.
    Fair skin reflects more visible light than does darker skin. At 6500 to 6850 angstroms (Å) the percent reflectivity for Aryans averages about 50 to 64 percent. For Turanians average reflectivity ranges between about 35 and 48 percent. For Melanochroi the range is 23 to 41 percent. Australians have a reflectivity of about 12 percent. The reflectivity for Khoisans is about 43 percent, and for Negroes (Sudanese) it is about 24 percent.[9]
   

     A standard chart or scale used to measure skin color is the von Luschan's Hautfarbentafel. This scale contains 36 shades of color ranging from pale pinkish white to black, with three yellowish tones.[10] The colors contained on this scale are whitish, reddish white, whitish yellow, olive yellow, light brown, brown, reddish brown, dark reddish brown, blackish brown, grayish brown, and pure black.[11] On this scale skin color for Aryans range between 1 and 17, excluding 4 through 6. That of Melanochroi ranges between 18 and 29. For Turanians the range is between 4 and 6 and between 12 and 23. Negroes have skin colors of 27 to 36. That of Australians ranges between 24 and 29. For Khoisans the range is between 18 and 23.
    Deniker divides skin color into ten shades: pale white, florid or rosy, light-brunette, yellowish-white (similar to the color of wheat), olive-yellow (similar to the color of new portmanteau leather), dark yellow-brown or dark olive (similar to the color of dead leaves), red or copper, reddish-brown or chocolate, sooty black, and coal black. Under his scheme Aryans are pale white, florid, and light-brunette white. For Turanians the basic shades are yellowish-white, olive-yellow, and dark yellow-brown or dark olive. The basic shades in Negroes are reddish-brown or chocolate, sooty black, and coal black. For Melanochroi the basic colors are red or copper and reddish brown or chocolate. Australians are generally reddish-brown or chocolate.[12]
    Similar to Deniker’s scheme is a simplified version of Broca's scale. This scale consists of three basic colors (white, yellow, and black) divided into ten shades. The shades are pale white, reddish white (Northern Europeans), tawny white (Mediterraneans), pale yellow (Chinese), warm yellow (American Indians), brownish yellow, reddish brown (Eastern-Hamites), chocolate brown (Australians), brownish black (Dravidians and Melanesians), and black (Bantus). Thus, skin colors for Aryans are pale white, reddish white, and tawny white. Skin colors for Turanians are pale yellow, warm yellow, and brownish yellow. Black and brownish black are the colors for Negroes. For Melanochroi the skin colors are reddish brown and brownish black. Australians have chocolate brown skin.[13]
    Keane identifies six primary colors. Under his scheme, Aryans fall into two colors: florid white (Northern Europeans and Finns, i.e., Nordic, many Alpines, and East Baltics) and pale white (Southern Europeans, i.e., Mediterraneans, Iranians, Northern Semites, and Southern Mediterraneans). Turanians fall under yellow (Chinese, Tunguses, Paraoeans, and some Indians of South American), brown (Polynesians, Plateau Indians), and copper red (Prairie Indians). The color of Negroes is brown (Negritos) and black (African and Oceanic Negroes). Melanochroi are black (Eastern-Hamites) and brown (Indo-Iranians and Fulas). Khoisans are yellow, and Australians are black.[14]
    Brinton provides the following scale for skin colors:[15]
    a.    White: (1) white, brown undertone (grayish); (2) white, yellow undertone; (3) white, rosy undertone.
    b.    Medium: (1) reddish; (2) yellowish (olive).
    c.    Dark: (1) black; (2) dark brown, reddish undertone; (3) dark brown, yellowish undertone.
    Hrdlička used a scale of five colors consisting of twelve shades. His scale contained white (florid, light, medium, light brown), yellow-brown (light, medium, dark, chocolate brown), pale-yellowish, dusky-yellowish, black (brown-black, bluish-black, grayish-black, ebony-black).[16]
    Color is difficult to measure accurately because of the different ways that people perceive the color of skin. This difficulty leads some to claim that skin color is not a reliable indicator of race. Not only do different people see the same color differently, the same person may see the same color differently under different lighting. People may disagree that a shade of red is carmine or scarlet. However, unless they are color blind, they can distinguish either shade from green. People may argue about whether a person from Northern Europe is a Nordic, East Baltic, or Alpine based on slight differences in skin color.[17] Any argument over skin color vanishes when the color of this person's skin is compared to that of an African Negro.[18] Likewise, one can easily distinguish blue eyes from brown eyes although disagreement over shades of blue or brown may occur.
    Skin color is also criticized as a valid racial identification tool because it can vary with age, diet, and health. The skin of a sickly person may differ noticeably from that of a healthy person. The obvious answer to this problem is that identification should be based, whenever possible, on healthy adults eating a normal diet. When classifying animals, taxonomists choose normal healthy adults to establish the standards and to identify to which species a population or individual belongs.
    That skin tans eliminates it as a valid racial identifier so claim some people — especially those who claim that no races of men exist. The solution to this problem is simple. Observe the untanned skin.
    Skin color is a valid descriptor of the several species of men. Although some overlap of color occurs, especially that of Negroes, Melanochroi, and Australians, skin colors in general differ with race. This is specially true for Aryans and Turanians.

Endnotes
1. More details on skin color are given by Babun, pp. 22-27; Baker, pp. 148-160; Bodmer and Cavalli-Sforza, pp. 580-582; Brace and Montagu, pp. 271-293; Brinton, pp. 29-31; Comas, pp. 264-265; Coon, Racial Adaptation, pp. 48-62; Coon and Hunt, pp. 229-235; Deniker, pp. 46-48; Downs and Bleibreu, pp. 244-251; Goldsby, pp. 90-94; Jurmain and Nelson, pp. 141-144; Keane, Ethnology, pp. 171-174; King, pp. 142-146; and Molnar, pp. 119-127.

2. Carleton S. Coon, Racial Adaptation ( Chicago, Illinois: Nelson-Hall, 1982), p. 48.

3. One micron equals one-thousandth of a millimeter or about 0.000039 inches.

4. Coon, Racial Adaptation, p. 49.

5. [Editor’s note: Since the author wrote this book, he has reconsidered the classification of the Melanesian.  He now classifies the Melanesian as part of the Australian species, which he now calls the Indo-Australian species.]

6. Coon, Racial Adaptation, p. 49.

7. Coon, Racial Adaptation, p. 50.

8. Coon, Racial Adaptation, pp. 54-55.

9. Carleton S. Coon and Edward E. Hunt, Jr.,The Living Races of Man (New York, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1965), p. 230. Stephen Molnar, Races, Types, and Ethnic Groups: The Problem of Human Variation (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1975), pp. 122-123.

10. Coon and Hunt, p. 229.

11. Juan Comas, Manual of Physical Anthropology (English edition. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas Publisher, 1960), pp. 264-265.

12.  J. Deniker, The Races of Man: An Outline of Anthropology and Ethnography (London, England: Walter Scott, Limited, 1900), p. 47.

13. Comas, p. 264.

14. A. H. Keane, Ethnology (Cambridge, England: The University Press, 1896), pp. 173-174.

15. Daniel G. Brinton, Races and Peoples: Lectures on the Science of Ethnography (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: David McKay, Publisher, [1901]), p. 31.

16. Comas, p. 264.

17. In this particular example head-shape would immediately distinguish a Nordic from an Alpine or East Baltic.

18. This does not mean that the difficulty of using skin color as a distinguishing racial identifier does not or cannot occur. The differences between the skin color of Aryans and Melanochroi can be slight and may occasionally be difficult to determine or distinguish along the transitional zone between these two species in North Africa and West Asia.

 More articles on anthropolgy.