Robert, if people like Abe Hiroshi can have that appearance without having any Caucasian DNA at all, then you shouldn’t call their appearance “Caucasian looking”, it sounds extremely Eurocentric and misleading from a genetics stand point.
Also, genetics has shows that Paleo-Mongoloids and Australoids are not the same thing. Otherwise, the Ainu would be much genetically closer to Australian Aborigines than to Modern East Asians (which they aren’t) . Instead, they are actually closest to Native Americans, Native Taiwanese and other groups that have maintained their Proto-Mongoloid features.
The Mongoloid race as a whole is much older than you say it is Robert. It was 41,000 years ago when their split from Caucasians happened, and about 11,000 years ago when the Neo-Mongoloid (aka classic East Asian) phenotype first appeared. The Japanese in particular are about 85% Neo-Mongoloid (Yayoi) & 15% Proto-Mongoloid (Jomon).
Also, DNA studies have shown that the Hmong people don’t have any Caucasian ancestry at all. Traits like light hair & eye colors actually originated in Central Asia (where the Mongoloid race began) and only later spread to Europe due to natural selection. This is why Genghis Khan, who was proven to be 100% Mongoloid, had red hair & green eyes, why many Koreans & Japanese are born with brown hair, and why many contemporary Mongolians (who range 83%- 100% Mongoloid) Kazakhs (61%-85% Mongoloid) and related groups have a wide range of hair and eye colors.
Finally, little Australoid (and no Caucasian) ancestry exist in Malays & Indonesians. Both groups are about 80%-90% Mongoloid.
The skulls at the huge dig in north China from 9,000 YBP appear Australoid (Ainuid). The general consensus is that the Mongoloid race only goes back 9,000 years. Before that, all Asians look Australoid on skulls. In the north, they look Ainuid or maybe Polynesian. In the south, they look Negrito or better yet, Melanesian. Ainuids are Australoid on skulls, not genes. That is the way I split people. Genes are misleading. Filipino Negritos look like Filipinos on genes. Thai Negritos look Thai on genes. Forget that.
Splitting on skulls give us much better races. We get Tamils of India, the Senoi and Mansi and Semang Negritos of Thailand and Malaysia, the Philippine Negritos, the Ainu, the Paleoamerinds, the Baja California and Tierra del Fuego Amerinds in addition to the Melanesians, the Papuans and the Aborigines all in one group. Polynesians are trickier. If you only go by genes, you have throw everyone, even the Melanesians, everyone but the Papuans and Aborigines, out of Australoids and retain only Papuans and Aborigines in Australoid. That doesn’t make sense to me. I would rather split on skulls. Are the Ati really Filipinos? Are the Semang really Malays? Are the Mansi really Thais? It makes no sense.
On skulls, both Malays and Indonesians are part Australoid. Malay skulls show signs of having recently derived from the Semang and the Senoi. In fact, they call the Semang “our ancestors.” Indonesians are only 20% Taiwanese Aborigine – that it the Mongoloid in them. The other 80,000 comes from proto-Dai from Yunnan, China who moved down into the area in large numbers when there was a lot flooding 10-20,000 YBP. Proto-Dai were a an Australoid (Melanesian) group.
Sure, the Asian race is very old. It starts in Northern Vietnam 53,000 YBP. Caucasoids were never a part of the Asian race; instead, Caucasoids are derived from mixing 2/3 Proto-Mongoloid (possibly Ainuid) with 1/3 Paleo-African (possibly Khoisanid). But 53,000 YBP, those proto-Asians in North Vietnam did not look like Mongoloids. Instead, they probably looked like the Semang and Mani (Negrito).
You say Eurocentric like it’s a bad thing. I am a White man and I am proudly Eurocentric. I love my great White people and most of my Caucasoid brothers too.
