Race: A Scientific Investigation

The Two Races of Mankind

Only in the 21st century has popular "anthropology" and true science met in unison.  In the 21st century, older terms based on stereotypes have been removed from the annals of science.  Previously, the Chinese stereotype conjured up the need for its own race.  This race was given various names such as "Mongoloid", (Farooque, par. 1),  or "Mongolian" or "Sinoid".  In a like manner, the Negro stereotype was imagined to necessitate its own race called "Negroid", "Africoid", or just plain "Negro", (Moore, par. 9).  After being separated by the stereotypical mindset of Caucasoid America, these two halves have been reunited as a whole.  Today, the Mongolo-Negroid race is realized among the most learned anthropologists who realize the foundations of anthropological thought were based on stereotype.  This divides humanity into two primary races: the Caucasian (Caucasoid proper) race and the Mongolo-Negroid race.  Although other experts may disagree with the combination of the traditional Mongoloid and Negroid races into a single race, (Thompson, par. 4) , the underlying formological data is incontrovertible.

Caucasoid Caucasian Negroid Mongoloid

Caucasoid Caucasian Negroid Mongoloid

Human migrations studies show the ancient migrations which formed the two present races of mankind.  Originally, there only existed the Mongolo-Negroid race in Africa.  This race branched out into West Asia to Europe and the Americas.  During its branching, a series of interconnected mutations which could only be described by science as an improbable demic divergence radically modified the Mongolo-Negroid model, beginning the Caucasian/Caucasoid branch of humanity.  While the Mongolo-Negroid racial branch continued its travel to Central Asia, India, Australia and South America, the Caucasoid/Caucasian branch settled in Europe during the last glaciation.  This branch travelled westward to settle in the Americas mixing with the Mongolo-Negroid race to produce hybrids.  These hybrid peoples gave rise to a select few of the great "Aboriginal American" peoples like Iroquois.  This was previosly proposed in the golden era of anthropology, but was summarily rejected due to the stereotypical fixity at the time.   Other smaller historical migrations of the Caucasoid/Caucasian race were into North Africa, the Arabian peninsula and Northern India, but these were comparatively minute. These minor, anthropologically speaking, explorations were all but absorbed into the Mongolo-Negroids.[1] Unable to upturn the Mongolo-Negroids in these lands, the Caucasian/Caucasoids merely mixed with them.  Their legacy is seen a minority of peculiar Caucasoid formological traits in otherwise Mongolo-Negroid individuals.

Whereas the Caucasian/Caucasoid went through radical physical modifications, the Mongolo-Negroid race went through relatively few modifications.  As the Mongolo-Negroid traveled out of Africa into West Asia there was only a slight change in coloration.  The basic form, however, closely matches the forms of East Africa.  As this group dispersed into India and Australia the basic form of the East and North African was kept, but the coloration lightened.  Due to parallel poles, the Chinese, Vietnamese and Pacific Islanders reverted their form to the structure of East Africish, all encompased within the variation of the Mongolo-Negroid racial form.[2]  As was mentioned previously, the Iroquois peoples and others hybridised under the invasion of the Caucasoid/Caucasian onto the Mongolo-Negroid eastern frontier.  Their penetration was unable to spread down into the Uto-Aztecan peoples who remained pure Mongolo-Negroid.   

The Caucasoid/Caucasian's form mutated from its Mongolo-Negroid origins to produce something quite different.  This difference is not enough to bear the designation "sub-species", but is substantially meaningful.  Although the metamorphosis of the Caucasoid/Caucasian was huge, some of Southern Europe's indigenous population has kept its previous morphology.  This is not to say that they have returned to the primordial Mongolo-Negroid form, but they certainly are harder to formologically distinguish.  Their distinct form is shared with Northern Caucasoid/Caucasians from Scandinavia, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, etc. but they differ in coloration.  The basic form or model if you will of the Caucasoid/Caucasian is distinguishable by the trained eye and is the most weighty consideration used to distinguish the Caucasoid/Caucasian as a separate race from the Mongolo-Negroid race.[3]

Genetically, the Caucasoid/Caucasian race has a vast divide from the Mongolo-Negroid race, (Khan, par. 2).  Genetic studies performed by anthropologists in Europe have historicially been flawed by the plague of American exceptionalism, (Rauth, par. 2).  As discussed previously, American exceptionalism with its pseudo-scientific "racial" definitions based on xenophobic polarity ruined all chance for objectivity by Europeans in regards to anthropology.  America, with its deeply embedded stereotypes, has continually failed at genetic objectivity.[4]  Out of the mess of genetics, rogue scientists reflect the stereotypes of the day.  Every stereotypical character concocted in virulent American stereotype culture has its place in the genetic charts of these stereotypical geneticists.  True genetics, on the other hand, will show the Mongolo-Negroid and Caucasian/Caucasoid races affirmed by the method of forms or formological classification.

Although any individual component of the skull may be shared between races, the formological category[5] of the skull can be readily observed by the trained eye.  This is equivalent to saying that there are two kinds of books that may in fact share words or sentences in common, but the topic or form if I may of the book will be holistically different, (Curtis, par. 2). Unfortunately, many craniofacial anthropologists who have been trained in the legacy of American stereotypes will be unable to distinguish the correct formological classification of even the most exemplary Mongolo-Negroid or Caucasian/Caucasoid skull, but those free of bias will most likely diagnose the correct formological classification. 

Caucasoid Caucasian Negroid Mongoloid

Caucasoid Caucasian Negroid Mongoloid

Foot Notes

[1] The ancient Caucasoid migrations were not as uniform in numerical composition as my above statements may appear.  Some explorations numbered only a few people while others took the form of whole tribes.
 
[2] In this sense, reversion is a non-technical term.  There is not a transcendental form which is being unearthed, but a form that is being formed again.
 
[3] As a personal note, when I worked in the field, I was required to identify Caucasoid, Mongoloid or Negroid skulls.  I almost never misclassified a Caucasoid skull, but "Mongoloid" and "Negroid" skulls often overlap in traits and are impossible to distinguish from each other, showing the error in the three race system.
 
[4] I was never formally trained in "genetic" anthropology, but it is something my job was converging toward before I retired.  This means that although I am not degreed in genetics, I have dabbled in the subject.  My long-years practicing "traditional" physical anthropology makes me consider the newfangled arena of genetics with suspicion to say the least.  I am especially suspicious when they do not conform to the formological data that I have collected over my lifetime.   
 
[5] Some consider "formological" distinctions to be contingent upon multi-variable numerical measurements.  This publication considers the holistic viewpoint which is much more semantically related to the root "form" in "formological".
 
The scans labeled "Fig. 2" and "Fig. 4" were originally part of a paper publication I was working on for a couple of years after I retired.  It was more technical than this publication, often incorporating superfluous journal notes that I recorded over my life.  I decided the internet was a better medium.  Also, I believe the estimeed anthropological journal would not have favored a proposition as revolutionary as the physical differences betweeen Negroids and Mongoloids being too faint to merit separate racial groups.
 
Works Cited
Thompson, Bert. Apologetics Press. "The Origin of the Races."  2007. February 2, 2007. http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2007
 
Khan, Hayat. Pak History. Differences Between Pakistanis and Indians. 2007. February, 5 2007.  http://www.geocities.com/pak_history/differences.html

Curtis, Gary. Fallacy Files. "Composition." 2007. March 8, 2007. http://www.fallacyfiles.org/composit.html

Moore, Richard. Race and History. "Creation of the Negro." 1999. March 10, 2007. http://www.raceandhistory.com/historicalviews/negro.htm

Farooque, Ahmed. Manipur Online. "The Mongol Peoples: Window in History." 2002. March 10, 2007. http://www.manipuronline.com/Potpourri/August2002/themongols17_1.htm

Rauth, Robert. Liberty Haven. "The Myth of Cultural Imperialism." 1988. March 12, 2007.  http://www.libertyhaven.com/noneoftheabove/culture/mythcultural.shtml