Japanese=Koreans+Ainu say Discover Mag.
Rush...@aol.com
Discover magazine this month has an article about the ancestry of the Japanese
The article mentions that many Japanese would prefer not to know the truth.
And based on the conclusions in the article it's easy to understand why.
Basically the article finds that the ancestors of the Japanese are Koreans
and the "Jomon" people who are identical to, and were the ancestors of, the
Ainu.
These conclusions should not be too distressing---except that the Japanese
have a strong prejudice against the Koreans and the Ainu and have denied that
these peoples are their ancestors.
Jared Diamond, the author of the article, discusses why the Korean and
Japanese languages show very large differences even though the ancestors of
the Japanese were Koreans who crossed over to Japan only 1600 years ago.
Diamond explains that the Koreans who went to Japan were from the Koguryo
kingdom of Korea---a kingdom that spoke a different language (more like
Japanese) than the Silla kingdom. (The Silla kingdom unified Korea and
the Silla language is the basis of modern Korean).
Diamond backs up his opinions with genetic and archeological evidence.
Although Diamond doesn't state it--there are other interesting conclusions
that are implied by the article.
Facts in the article seem to support the view that Caucasians and Mongoloids
had a more Caucasoid common ancestor in the time before 13000 years ago.
Other facts support the conclusion that an isolated population will share
less of the genes causing "sapienization" and so remain less evolved or
more primitive. By this I mean more like our Australopithicine ancestors--
that is retaining more archaic traits.
Diamond mentions the well known fact that the Ainu were often thought of as
an archaic Caucasian population.(The Ainu were isolated in Japan starting
13000 years ago.) The fact of an ancient split between
Caucasoids and Mongoloids and then a change in the Mongoloids to a more
Mongoloid appearance is also supported by finds of Caucasoid looking
skeletons among Paleo-Indians. These Indians were simply groups who crossed
the Bering Straits (or land bridge) close to the time of the split.
As for Ainu being isolated and less evolved. Diamond points out that they
are hairier and have large brow ridges. Rushton points out that they retain
more of the archaic apocrine (or sex smell) glands. Ainu also have longer
forearms, a more simian like trait. Koreans have
no apocrine glands, but Japanese who (after crossing from Korea) mixed a
little bit with the Jomon (Ainu) people have a small percentage of people
who have a body odor problem.
The Jomon people, just like the Australian Aborigines, were isolated from
a large variety of new genes in Eurasia and so evolved less or maintained
a more Homo Erectus like morphology compared to their continental neighbors.
I don't think, based on these facts, that the Japanese should comment any
further that Koreans are "inferior" Andrew Smyth
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Yamane Kazuo
In an article Rush...@aol.com writes:
> Discover magazine this month has an article about the
> ancestry of the Japanese The article mentions that many
> Japanese would prefer not to know the truth.
> And based on the conclusions in the article it's easy
> to understand why.
> Basically the article finds that the ancestors of the Japanese
> are Koreans and the "Jomon" people who are identical to,
> and were the ancestors of, the Ainu.
This shouldn't come as really surprising.
Even the Chinese chronicle states that
people called Wa[regarded as Japanese] lived in Southern Korea as
well.
Possibly creating the base for intermixing lot easier.
Kenji Okamoto
In the article <6kl5ur$8ap$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> of newsgroup sci.anthropology,soc.culture.korea,soc.culture.japan
Rush...@aol.com wrote
| These conclusions should not be too distressing---except that the Japanese
| have a strong prejudice against the Koreans and the Ainu and have denied that
| these peoples are their ancestors.
Why you want to write like this? I'm very interesting on that
very point. :-)
If you could understand it more clearly, you should write Japanese
and Koreans may have common ancestors in the past. Can you realize
the difference between these two context?
I suppose not.
Kenji
Jiro
>The article mentions that many Japanese would prefer not to know the truth.
I do want to know the truth. On what is this article based?
Japanese
>have a strong prejudice against the Koreans and the Ainu and have denied
that
>these peoples are their ancestors.
Is that based on comments by the older uneducated Japanese ? It is a matter
of course that the three groups are related in some way to one another. But
the story of their great journey and resulting diversity of Mongoloids is
complex. At least two large different groups existed who adapted to the
cold weather and who did not. And several other small groups also migrated
to the country. Some even insist that the ancestors of Emperors were Jews,
which is never supported by scholars. But some Shinto rituals seem to
endorse it.
>I don't think, based on these facts, that the Japanese should comment any
>further that Koreans are "inferior"
Note that these views are held only by the older and/or uneducated. I am
fed up with this sort of childish "superiority/inferiority" argument.
Ghostwriter
Rush...@aol.com wrote:
>
> Discover magazine this month has an article about the ancestry of the Japanese
> Basically the article finds that the ancestors of the Japanese are Koreans
> and the "Jomon" people who are identical to, and were the ancestors of, the
> Ainu.
> Other facts support the conclusion that an isolated population will share
> less of the genes causing "sapienization" and so remain less evolved or
> more primitive. By this I mean more like our Australopithicine ancestors--
> that is retaining more archaic traits.
> As for Ainu being isolated and less evolved. Diamond points out that they
> are hairier and have large brow ridges. Rushton points out that they retain
> more of the archaic apocrine (or sex smell) glands. Ainu also have longer
> forearms, a more simian like trait.
> The Jomon people, just like the Australian Aborigines, were isolated from
> a large variety of new genes in Eurasia and so evolved less or maintained
> a more Homo Erectus like morphology compared to their continental neighbors.
Japanese
are (nowadays) one of the scientifically and technologically most
advanced
people. How that? What about japanes I(???)Q scores?
Shimpei Yamashita
I think you misread many of Diamond's assertions, and I do have some
questions about his points as well.
<Rush...@aol.com> writes:
>Jared Diamond, the author of the article, discusses why the Korean and
>Japanese languages show very large differences even though the ancestors of
>the Japanese were Koreans who crossed over to Japan only 1600 years ago.
2400 years ago. He said 400 BC, not 400 AD.
>Diamond explains that the Koreans who went to Japan were from the Koguryo
>kingdom of Korea---a kingdom that spoke a different language (more like
>Japanese) than the Silla kingdom. (The Silla kingdom unified Korea and
>the Silla language is the basis of modern Korean).
>Diamond backs up his opinions with genetic and archeological evidence.
>Although Diamond doesn't state it--there are other interesting conclusions
>that are implied by the article.
No--the Koguryo theory is only backed up by similaries in vocabulary. That's
a bit suspect, I think, since words can be imported very quickly--witness
how many English words are in the standard Japanese vocabulary today.
Japan had plenty of time before Koguryo went extinct to incorporate
its vocabulary even if Koguryo immigrants arrived in Japan well after
400 BC.
>Facts in the article seem to support the view that Caucasians and Mongoloids
>had a more Caucasoid common ancestor in the time before 13000 years ago.
>Other facts support the conclusion that an isolated population will share
>less of the genes causing "sapienization" and so remain less evolved or
>more primitive. By this I mean more like our Australopithicine ancestors--
>that is retaining more archaic traits.
>Diamond mentions the well known fact that the Ainu were often thought of as
>an archaic Caucasian population.(The Ainu were isolated in Japan starting
>13000 years ago.)
You massively misread the article here. Diamond only mentions that the Ainu
were often *thought* to be Caucasoids because of their body hair. To quote
the article,
Partly because Ainu men have luxuriant beards and the most profuse body
hair of any people, they are often classified as Caucasoids (so-called
white people) who somehow migrated east through Eurasia to Japan. In their
overall genetic makeup, though, the Ainu are related to other East Asians,
including the Japanese and Koreans.
Nowhere else does he discuss this idea that the Ainu may be Caucasoids. I
personally don't buy the theory; the similarities between the Ainu and the
Caucasoids are can be easily explained by convergent evolution, and aren't
necessarily related, any more than the dark skin colors of the Africans
and the Indians are.
You also are putting words in Diamond's mouth when you mention words
like "less evolved" and "primitive." Nowhere does he mention such
words except in linguistic terms. Those are pretty dangerous terms,
you know.
>The fact of an ancient split between
>Caucasoids and Mongoloids and then a change in the Mongoloids to a more
>Mongoloid appearance is also supported by finds of Caucasoid looking
>skeletons among Paleo-Indians. These Indians were simply groups who crossed
>the Bering Straits (or land bridge) close to the time of the split.
>As for Ainu being isolated and less evolved. Diamond points out that they
>are hairier and have large brow ridges.
He mentions this about the *Jomon* people. Not the Ainu. Please read the
article more carefully.
>Rushton points out that they retain
>more of the archaic apocrine (or sex smell) glands. Ainu also have longer
>forearms, a more simian like trait. Koreans have
>no apocrine glands, but Japanese who (after crossing from Korea) mixed a
>little bit with the Jomon (Ainu) people have a small percentage of people
>who have a body odor problem.
See, the mention of words like "archaic" and "simian" really trouble me.
It appears as though you are trying to push some political agenda veiled
in "scientific" data. It's just all too common in human biology.
>The Jomon people, just like the Australian Aborigines, were isolated from
>a large variety of new genes in Eurasia and so evolved less or maintained
>a more Homo Erectus like morphology compared to their continental neighbors.
>I don't think, based on these facts, that the Japanese should comment any
>further that Koreans are "inferior" Andrew Smyth
Like I said, I do have a couple of objections to Diamond's assertions, but
they pale in comparison to my objections to yours. Your premise that
inferiority of a race is related to superficial resemblence to our ancestral
species is just plain wrong. Inferior in what way? Do longer arms, body
smell, etc., hinder people who have them in any way compared to people who
don't? It sounds exactly like the reasoning used by pseudobiologists earlier
this century to argue that black men were inferior to white men.
--
Shimpei Yamashita <http://www.patnet.caltech.edu/%7Eshimpei/>
ming zuo
In article <6knb8l$s...@eyrie.org>,
Shimpei Yamashita <shimpei+ey...@BOFH.patnet.caltech.edu> wrote:
>species is just plain wrong. Inferior in what way? Do longer arms, body
>smell, etc., hinder people who have them in any way compared to people who
>don't? It sounds exactly like the reasoning used by pseudobiologists earlier
>this century to argue that black men were inferior to white men.
Wasn't this argument still being used by the Japanese Prime Minister
last year? He stated that the overall intelligence of the US was pulled
lower by the black people.
>
>--
>Shimpei Yamashita <http://www.patnet.caltech.edu/%7Eshimpei/>
--
Ming Zuo Present: EarthWatch, Inc.
mz...@harper.uchicago.edu Longmont, CO
The University of Chicago
Rushtown
>How interesting! The less evolved, more primitive, Home Erectus like
>Japanese
>are (nowadays) one of the scientifically and technologically most
>advanced
>people. How that? What about japanes I(???)Q scores?
Japanese have the third highest IQ scores in the world,
following the Jews and Koreans. If they had not mixed
a little with the Jomon (ie Ainu) people they'd have a couple
more IQ points and would not be falling behind the Koreans
in micro chips and international academic competitions.
Rushtown
><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: Japanese=Koreans+Ainu say Discover Mag.
>From: Shimpei Yamashita <shimpei+ey...@BOFH.patnet.caltech.edu>
>Date: Fri, May 29, 1998 18:01 EDT
>Message-id: <6knb8l$s...@eyrie.org>
>smell, etc., hinder people who have them in any way compared to people who
>don't? It sounds exactly like the reasoning used by pseudobiologists earlier
>this century to argue that black men were inferior to white men.
There seems to be a consensous of opinion that Mongoloids
and Caucasoids split off about 35,000 years ago. At one point,
I'm sure you must agree, the two races shared a common ancestor.
I didn't say that Diamond said this, I said that facts in his article
implied it. There are Caucasoid looking aboriginal peoples
in Asia, and Mongoloid looking ones in Europe. (the Lapps)
Maybe these are groups that split off longer ago, closer to
the time of the Mongoloid-Caucasoid split.
I think you misread the article if you don't see that Diamond says
that the Jomon people were the ancestors of the Ainu.
I did not say anyone was "inferior" in the article. And I realize
that the Japanese have the second highest IQ of any ethnic
group, after the Jews. Nor did I say that the Ainu have low IQ.
I don't know, do you?
I did say they have more archaic and simian like traits---just
as the Australian Aborigines (thought of by all as "primitive"
peoples) have retained these traits. This is a fact---maybe a
politically incorrect fact, and a distressing fact---but a fact
none the less. And they have kept these traits for the reason
I said---isolation from the large Eurasian gene pool.
Isn't it true that many Japanese consider the Ainu "primitive"
or the representatives of a less evolved branch of mankind?
rodd...@my-dejanews.com
In article <6knb8l$s...@eyrie.org>,
Shimpei Yamashita <shimpei+ey...@BOFH.patnet.caltech.edu> wrote:
>
> questions about his points as well.
No surprise there. Rushy baby specializes in mangling everything he reads.
> <Rush...@aol.com> writes:
> >Jared Diamond, the author of the article, discusses why the Korean and
> >Japanese languages show very large differences even though the ancestors of
> >the Japanese were Koreans who crossed over to Japan only 1600 years ago.
>
> 2400 years ago. He said 400 BC, not 400 AD.
Guess our Rushyboy has gotta avoid those pesky IQ tests based on number
manipulation.
He knows, he's just closed up in his little world and can't get out.
> --
> Shimpei Yamashita <http://www.patnet.caltech.edu/%7Eshimpei/>
Shimpei, your last sentence captures our dear little Rushyboy's agenda. He;'s
on that life affirming quest, "find someone inferior to me." Judging by his
evident reading skills (the mangling of articles is not confined to this
subject alone) he's a little desperate.
Rod
Rushtown
><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: Japanese=Koreans+Ainu say Discover Mag.
>Date: Sat, May 30, 1998 09:58 EDT
>Message-id: <6kp3ad$po6$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
I never used the word "inferior" in my post. I believe that
Japanese and Koreans and Jews have a higher average
(genetically based) IQ than my ethnic group--Irish. So I
am not a racist of the variety that says, "My group is smartest."
I'm mainly interested in the TRUTH, and the way people are
afraid to express it.
For example in Diamonds article: Diamond mentions that the
Jomon people (who he identifies with the Ainu) were isolated
in Japan for 13000 years. And he also describes traits that were
more characteristic of our Austrolopithicine ancestors (although
he doesn't say this) as being characteristic of the Ainu. These
traits are, big brow ridges, hairiness, apocrine glands, longer
forearms. If Diamond were discussing Chimpanzees he would
have mentioned the obvious and interesting conclusion that
the Ainu had retained these (primitive) traits because of their
isolation. Because of PC he avoids the conclusion.
I don't know if the Ainu have a low IQ or not. Apparently they've
mixed only a little bit with the new Japanese migrants (ie Koreans
from 400BCE (I stand corrected)) and so if the Ainu had low
IQs it has not harmed the Japanese of today. rushtown
SCN User
Aren't these theorists a little disturbed by the fact that Ainu are tall,
light, blue-eyed people?
Lin
In a previous article, Rush...@aol.com () says:
>Discover magazine this month has an article about the ancestry of the Japanese
>The article mentions that many Japanese would prefer not to know the truth.
>And based on the conclusions in the article it's easy to understand why.
>Basically the article finds that the ancestors of the Japanese are Koreans
>and the "Jomon" people who are identical to, and were the ancestors of, the
>Ainu.
>These conclusions should not be too distressing---except that the Japanese
>have a strong prejudice against the Koreans and the Ainu and have denied that
>these peoples are their ancestors.
>Jared Diamond, the author of the article, discusses why the Korean and
>Japanese languages show very large differences even though the ancestors of
>the Japanese were Koreans who crossed over to Japan only 1600 years ago.
>Diamond explains that the Koreans who went to Japan were from the Koguryo
>kingdom of Korea---a kingdom that spoke a different language (more like
>Japanese) than the Silla kingdom. (The Silla kingdom unified Korea and
>the Silla language is the basis of modern Korean).
>Diamond backs up his opinions with genetic and archeological evidence.
>Although Diamond doesn't state it--there are other interesting conclusions
>that are implied by the article.
>Facts in the article seem to support the view that Caucasians and Mongoloids
>had a more Caucasoid common ancestor in the time before 13000 years ago.
>Other facts support the conclusion that an isolated population will share
>less of the genes causing "sapienization" and so remain less evolved or
>more primitive. By this I mean more like our Australopithicine ancestors--
>that is retaining more archaic traits.
>Diamond mentions the well known fact that the Ainu were often thought of as
>an archaic Caucasian population.(The Ainu were isolated in Japan starting
>13000 years ago.) The fact of an ancient split between
>Caucasoids and Mongoloids and then a change in the Mongoloids to a more
>Mongoloid appearance is also supported by finds of Caucasoid looking
>skeletons among Paleo-Indians. These Indians were simply groups who crossed
>the Bering Straits (or land bridge) close to the time of the split.
>As for Ainu being isolated and less evolved. Diamond points out that they
>are hairier and have large brow ridges. Rushton points out that they retain
>more of the archaic apocrine (or sex smell) glands. Ainu also have longer
>forearms, a more simian like trait. Koreans have
>no apocrine glands, but Japanese who (after crossing from Korea) mixed a
>little bit with the Jomon (Ainu) people have a small percentage of people
>who have a body odor problem.
>The Jomon people, just like the Australian Aborigines, were isolated from
>a large variety of new genes in Eurasia and so evolved less or maintained
>a more Homo Erectus like morphology compared to their continental neighbors.
>I don't think, based on these facts, that the Japanese should comment any
>further that Koreans are "inferior" Andrew Smyth
>
Rushtown
><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: Japanese=Koreans+Ainu say Discover Mag.
>Date: Sun, May 31, 1998 01:49 EDT
>Message-id: <Ett46...@scn.org>
I hadn't heard they were blue eyed. They look more Caucasoid,
NOT because they are related to Caucasians---but because the
common ancestor of whites and orientals (about 35000 years ago)
looked more caucasian. When the two populations split, those
people who went east became modified. How do I know it was
the people who went east who became modified (ie less causcasian looking)?.
Because the "standard" human out of
Africa (ie Blacks and Whites) does not have high cheek bones,
or an epicantic fold on the eyelids, or a flat face. These
modifications occured in Asians as a result of the extreme cold
and dustiness of the Gobi desert. The eye fold protected the
eye from the glare of the sun on the snow, and from dust.
Asians also have more fat in the eye orbit to keep the eyeball
from freezing. The flat face is also a protection from cold. Long
noses and projecting faces are subject to frost bite.
Although the split between Blacks and Whites occured 100000
years ago, and the split between Orientals and Whites occured
35000 years ago---Mongoloids are the most "alien" race because
they have the above extreme adaptations not found in other
peoples. Andrew Smyth
Rush...@aol.com
In article <199805301925...@ladder03.news.aol.com>,
rush...@aol.com (Rushtown) wrote:
>
> ><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: Japanese=Koreans+Ainu say Discover Mag.
> >Date: Sat, May 30, 1998 01:18 EDT
> >Message-id: <6ko4qg$1...@eyrie.org>
> >
> >Rushtown <rush...@aol.com> writes:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Subject: Re: Japanese=Koreans+Ainu say Discover Mag.
> >>>Date: Fri, May 29, 1998 20:07 EDT
> >>>Message-id: <Etqtp...@midway.uchicago.edu>
Just reposting here
> >>>
> >>>In article <6knb8l$s...@eyrie.org>,
> >>>Shimpei Yamashita <shimpei+ey...@BOFH.patnet.caltech.edu> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>species is just plain wrong. Inferior in what way? Do longer arms, body
> >>>>smell, etc., hinder people who have them in any way compared to people
who
> >>>>don't? It sounds exactly like the reasoning used by pseudobiologists
> >earlier
> >>
> >
> >You didn't use the word explicitly, but words like "primitive" and
> >"simian" suggest exactly that.
>
> I was talking about the Ainu---most older Japanese would
> agree. And when it comes to the physical characteristics they
> have retained, such as large brow ridges, hairiness, apocrine
> glands (smell), long forearms, then it is true---these are traits
> which are similier to those possessed by homo erectus, so
> they are primitive. ( and according to J Philippe Rushton,
> overall Mongoloids have less "primitive" traits compared to
> other races).
> It might not be PC, but mankind differs not only racially, but
> in evolutionary grade or advancement as well.
Anne Gilbert
In a previous article, fuck...@stupid.racists (Ghostwriter) says:
>ail
>From: Ghostwriter <fuck...@stupid.racists>
>Newsgroups: sci.anthropology
>Subject: Re: Japanese=Koreans+Ainu say Discover Mag.
>Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 17:08:27 +0200
>Organization: F.T.S.R.
>Lines: 27
>Message-ID: <356ECF...@stupid.racists>
>References: <6kl5ur$8ap$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
>Reply-To: fuck...@stupid.racists
>NNTP-Posting-Host: pgtd2074.mch.sni.de
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (WinNT; I)
>
>Rush...@aol.com wrote:
>How interesting! The less evolved, more primitive, Home Erectus like
>Japanese
>are (nowadays) one of the scientifically and technologically most
>advanced
>people. How that? What about japanes I(???)Q scores?
>
How can anybody say the Japanese(or Koreans, or Ainu, for that matter)
are less evolved? Less evolved than what? For that matter, *all* of us
are descended from some group of H.erectus(or erectus-like ancestor).
And as for *cultural* evolution --- an increasing number of pieces of
archaeological evidence suggests that H.erectus people may have had
simple tools, but they may well have had cultural and mental capacities
similar to our own.
Anne Gilbert
--
Anne Gilbert
keb...@scn.org, avgi...@hotmail.com
Visit my website at http://members.tripod.com/~kebara and read about my
Great Science Fiction Masterpiece
Rushtown
><HTML><PRE>Subject: Re: Japanese=Koreans+Ainu say Discover Mag.
>From: keb...@scn.org (Anne Gilbert)
>Date: Tue, Jun 2, 1998 17:59 EDT
>Message-id: <Ety2E...@scn.org>
>
>
>In a previous article, fuck...@stupid.racists (Ghostwriter) says:
>
>>ail
>>From: Ghostwriter <fuck...@stupid.racists>
>>Newsgroups: sci.anthropology
>>Subject: Re: Japanese=Koreans+Ainu say Discover Mag.
>>Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 17:08:27 +0200
>>Organization: F.T.S.R.
>>Lines: 27
>>Message-ID: <356ECF...@stupid.racists>
>>References: <6kl5ur$8ap$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
>>Reply-To: fuck...@stupid.racists
>>NNTP-Posting-Host: pgtd2074.mch.sni.de
>>Mime-Version: 1.0
>>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (WinNT; I)
>>
>>Rush...@aol.com wrote:
>>How interesting! The less evolved, more primitive, Home Erectus like
>>Japanese
>>are (nowadays) one of the scientifically and technologically most
>>advanced
>>people. How that? What about japanes I(???)Q scores?
>>