LigaFantasma's channel

I'm a little unclear on type 3. Is that just the average European skin tone? The model they used looks white but It's still a little vague.

"Olive skin" has got to be the most meaningless, confusing skin color term. I always thought it meant the classic "Mediterranean" type of complexion. But some people use the term for darker people like Arabs and Latinos and some use it for pale skinned people with some yellow tone in their skin. ...

I always thought "olive skin" was the color of darker white people like Italians or Greeks. Latinos are brown skinned.

@johnnydarkly Spaniards aren't brown, they're white.

Since when is Muslim a race?

Australians are disgusting racist people. Total deluded race fanatics. In the US, all these "wogs" would just be white.

Blonde hair looks good with Asian features. We need more people like that.

What's unusual about a red haired Armenian? Or a blue eyed Berber? those are fairly common traits for those groups.

The British are uniquely insane when it comes to anything involving skin color, race or ethnicity. Light brown is "black"now? Both boys are bi-racial, both could claim to be "black" in the cultural sense. Why is the light brown skinned baby "black" and the pale skinned baby "white"?

Interesting video. I see Russians with those faces all the time. A slightly prognathous robust nordic, a bit like the Tronder type but blonder.

What physical type is associated with R1b?

@LadyAvarice4590 The Spanish were never blonde.They're brunette whites. Always were.

Those aren't typical Spaniards.

Are Mongols really mixed? they seem definately of Asian race.

There were no white people 19,000 years ago! I doubt even 9,000 years ago. These people are genetic cousins to modern whites just like Indians are genetic cousins to Siberian Asians. They weren't the same racial stock.

These people didn't look "white". They lived 9,000 years ago. They were ancestral Europeans - brown skinned, robust facial bones. Related to modern day whites but not really the same type.

@cwp91206 I doubt these people looked much like modern day Europeans. They predate the shift towards light pigmentation in Europe. Is it really accurate to call them "white Europeans".

The Guanches weren't Indo-Europeans they were Hamitic speakers.

@IndianLand26 Cosign!

9:49 "Norway or the British Isles or God knows where..."

That statement says it all. This man and others like him want to confuse the distinction between Caucasoid and Northern European. Kennewick man may have had Caucasoid like features, he might have even been genetically Western Eurasian or pa...

5:56 "Afro-asiatic, Southern Asians and European HLA's in indegenous American populations"

That says it all, right there. CAUCASOID not "white" And only in NE Native Americans. And only at 25% maximum in those groups.

Just let it go, nazi.

I like the way you give the keenewick man reconstruction a full beard and pale complexion. Biased much?

Maybe he had smooth skin and a brown complexion. How can we be sure?

Why are you hiding behind an artificial voice? You're a loathesome racist.

There was no ancient "White" migrations! Stone age Europeans weren't white in the modern sense. You're being dishonest.

What's "Mongol" about those people? They don't have East Asian features, they don't even have straight hair! They look like text book Caucasoids.

Your examples are terrible. Your "paleo-Atlantid" isn't even in the ball park for that type.