The Caucasoid descent of Chinese people

[JASA]

to Kharach-warrior or alanta1981...?

http://www.uglychinese.org is not acadamy level research site, it's sponsored by oversea Chinese for discuss some fun issues and it's entry level database for referense. meanwhile it's name are really talk show meaning.

Huns are Altaic mongoloid tribe is for sure, it's not points to argue here, ancient Chinese described those with caucasian feature nomads are collected slave of Altaic tribe mainly consisted by Sarmathian, Alans, Tocharian...

Caucasian tribe as far as we know today were not found in east of Altai mountain / Tarim desert in pre-history east Asia geosite. several archaeology single case even with DNA link are not enough to proof this serious scientific subject, American test Virgra as half million case before it goes to marketing..kidding.. yes, you assuming image may bring further interesting research involve.

the mainstream historian still hard to find resources to proof Chinese cicilaztion were created by non Sino-Tibetan group that outside of yellow river valley. yet, as begining..Hua---the word made Chinese call themself as pride is record nearly 4600 yrs.

North Hu is pointed Altaic tribe, such Huns, Tungus...
east yi, south man, west rong are all Sino-Titetan speaking tribe.

[Kharachi-warrior]

JASA, You should learn to state your opinion with the virtual evidence but not just to say "the mainstream historian still hard to find resources to proof Chinese cicilaztion were created by non Sino-Tibetan group that outside of yellow river valley." Then, Did Chinese sholars find the resourse to show people "the fact" that Ancient Chinese civilization were creacted by Sino-tibetan or Mongoloid? NO! To see those archaeological or DNA testing evidences above again.

Well, As for Yue-chi and Chinese people at its time, I think it's unacceptable that you ensure that other Chinese people were the pure Mongoloid people just because they record Yue-chi as the Caucasian people with Yellow hair and blue eyes. According to the DNA test evidence, It's no doubt that 2500-year-old Qi people( Qi state, one of largest state in China at that time) were Caucasian people with black (brown) eyes and black hair just like today's Turkish and 2000-year-old Qi people were the mix of Mongoloid and Caucasoid people. I mean that Turkish or Arabs with black Hair and black or brown eyes look very different to English or Russian with Yellow hair and blue eyes, although they are all Caucasian people.

[Kharachi-warrior]

Astasia, I also have very little knowledge about the origin of Aniu. But according to the DNA study, it seems that they perhaps have some genetic links with today's Tibetans.

http://www.pitt.edu/~annj/courses/no...mon_genes.html

http://hgm2002.hgu.mrc.ac.uk/Abstrac...11/hgm0584.htm

[Kharachi-warrior]

"Several archaeology single case even with DNA link are not enough to proof this serious scientific subject".



Ooh... I already list most ancient Chinese civilizations above. I think it's not a accidental thing, your idea?

[JASA]

the tribe that live in NW China (he xi corridor) plain back to BC 500 was called "Rou Zhi" not Yue Zhi, yue is moon in Chinese means, but this letter prononced ROU to discribe "Rou Zhi", got it? ya, they were Caucasian and may very close to Tocharian, is it related to others? may not..once you have one case has DNA link to IE, may have dozens reflects to Mongoloid, doesn't it?

Khitan, Xianbei are close to Mongolian language under Altaic tree, they are not Tungus branch.

Geography close not necessary means share language root, Jurchen/Manchu is quite different with Bohai/Kokuyo tone. Manchu is Tungus but Korean was not. Korean / Japanese are not belong to Altaic language group.

[stanza]

remember NOMADS people can't create civilazation, like Huns, Turk, Mongols..all low class nomads tribes, company by horse, swards, violence...even in Mongols view Turk is sub class tribe...please name any contribution to human history by Turk or Altaic people, don't mention Turkey, they stealed from Byzentine.


Hi,
I'd like to note that there was a civilization that was build up together with nomads and with their essential part in it. It is Jewish Kazarian kingdom (6-11-13 AC). It was formed in fusion of early Turcik, iranian Alans, Goth (Tetraxites) nomads with North Cacasian tribes including their ancient Hebroic micro-etnoses. They had a great confederation, embraced judaism and become center of great Jewish migration from Persia, caliphate and Byzanthium bringing knowledge and culture from their home countries. They became an only civilization of this kind, Turkic-Caucasio-Jewsh civilization, that kept Arabs at bay.



[Edited by stanza on 14th July 2003 at 21:04]

[countryboy]

Noted your ramblings about Caucasoid presence in China. You made your self an 'expert' by pasting irrelevant and illogic stuff, mixed with words like "don't know" and "not sure". Your only straw happened to be the article about DNA and I commented out there that it would be a partial analysis without responsibility.

The same researcher, Dr. Wang Li, had given a more correct exposition at http://tech.sina.com.cn/ology/2000-08-10/33254.shtml

You don't know how to read Chinese, do you? Maybe you could read Pakistani or Arabic? Your name probably betrays you to be someone other than a Pakistani or Arabic. We know Arabic men don't feel comfortable with European men, not to mention the Chechen women who chose to die instead of marrying a European. You could only fool some of Chinese who dyed their hair into creepy color, the sort of the product of Loreal.

As most Chinese scholars had pointed out, the findings from Linzi DNA only pointed to the phenomenon of human migrations, NOT genetic mutation, NOR "looking similar to Caucasians". At http://tech.sina.com.cn/ology/2000-08-10/33254.shtml Dr Wang Li stated that DNA analysis of remains from Linzi tombs in Shandong Province had shown that the people living in Shandong 2000-2500 years ago had shared some similar gene traits to today's people in Central Asia and West Asia on the <b>maternal side</b>.

Note Dr Wang Li corrected the saying to point to CENTRAL and WEST of Asia, not Europe. Besides, the only similar trait is on the maternal side.

The similarity, in my opinion, had derived from Mongoloid eastern campaigns throughout past 3000 years, as represented in the Hunnish, Turkic and Mongol wars. Nordic Racists just could not refrain from their excitement. Really don't want to waste my time debating this nonsense of Caucasoid presence in China.

Please read my research into Huns, Turks and Mongols at
http://www.uglychinese.org/hun.htm
http://www.uglychinese.org/hsiongnu.htm
http://www.uglychinese.org/uygur.htm
http://www.uglychinese.org/turk.htm
http://www.uglychinese.org/mongolian.htm
http://www.uglychinese.org/mongol.htm

You will see when Sino-Tibetan people first arrived at Gansu Prov, i.e. Corridor to the West of Yellow River, by 1000 year earlier than the mummies at least. You will see that Sino-Tibetan Qiangic people had remained in this area thoughout the past 4000 years. (You don't want a Tibetan to identify a thief for his father, right?) You will see when the Huns first raided into Chinese Turkistan and why they raided into Turkistan, causing the chain migration all the way to Bactria and India. You will also know when the Huns raided towards the west and conquered a statelet called Jiankun, i.e., ancestors of later Kirghiz. After the Huns will be Turks and Mongols who inevitably raided towards the west. The path is clear, and the events are clear.

By the way, show me a skull from Banpo Excavations? I doubt you have one. Just don't spread lies upon lies. I have more important agenda to deal with than debating with you.