Why do Asians look Asian?

[Gangerolf]

well yeah but most scandinavians look no different from Finns

you take that back!

Lapps (samis) are generally more "asian-looking" than Finns, but speak a related language. That could mean that Lapps and Finns have common ancestors but the Finns have mixed more with Scandinavians. Just my little theory of course, haven't really read much about this

[Al B. Sure!]

wide noses are better for warm climates supposedly because they cool the air hence why Africans generally got them. Yet mediterrenean people and Indians who live in almost the same climate as Africa have thin noses.

[Frankychan]

i was about to get into a until I actually read the responses. It's all about genetics and evolution just like every here has already said.

I'm half Asian so I have Asian characteristics...(i.e. Lactose Intolerance for one) but also have other qualities as well.

[Bosh]

isn't that thought to be the case with native americans?

Its the case for everyone except Africans. Due to bottlenecks there's more genetic difference between different black ethnic groups than between, say, me an someone from China.

This suggested two possiblities: the Chinese are a separate but just as old population. Or they came from Africa in relative recent times.

Or that they assimilated a lot of different ethnic groups.

wide noses are better for warm climates supposedly because they cool the air hence why Africans generally got them.

Right. But its pretty damn rare for people to die because they've got the wrong kind of nose, so environmental pressures wouldn't be very strong and could be countered by genetic drift.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Ned
Actually, geneticists, using DNA analysis, have traced the origin of the Chinese to Africa. The Chinese and African gene-pools are the most diverse on the planet, indicating extreme age. This suggested two possiblities: the Chinese are a separate but just as old population. Or they came from Africa in relative recent times.

Well they discovered that they did come out of Africa by tracing their migration. However, I do not recall ho long ago this was.

Last that I heard all non-Africans have been traced to a group of Homo sapiens who migrated out of Africa by crossing the Red Sea into Yemen about 70,000 years ago.

[Al B. Sure!]

Boshko:

Its the case for everyone except Africans. Due to bottlenecks there's more genetic difference between different black ethnic groups than between, say, me an someone from China.

Then why are there more obvious differences among Caucasions (blue eyed blondes versus black eyed black haired) and between Caucasions and Asians?

[Ned]

Dr. Strangelove, indeed. But the migration of the Chinese was actually traced from Africa, to the ME, to India, to SE Asia and then to China using their DNA. I recall reading an article about this about five years ago.

[Bosh]

Then why are there more obvious differences among Caucasions (blue eyed blondes versus black eyed black haired) and between Caucasions and Asians?

Most African-Americans are from West Africa and thus are similar ethnically (especially after interbreeding). In Africa you find a lot more diversity, specifically the Ethiopian, Sudanese/West Africa, Pygmy and Bushman groups. IIRC they're more genetically diverse than even the difference between Caucasians and Aborigonies (and whites and aborigonies are definately more similar genetically to each other than either are to africans) sicne ALL the differences between non-african groups is only a couple ten-thousand years old.

[Dinner]

I'm curious about the genetic differentiation, which was mentioned earlier. Was it just variation with in "normal" DNA or was it variation with in Mitochonridal DNA. The reason I ask is Mitochonrial DNA comes only from the mother and mutates very slowly (it is essentially totally separate from the rest of human DNA) so a group could have alot of variations but all share the same small group of mitochondrial DNA.

Why is that important? Because a large population with lots of diversity in "normal" DNA but low diversity in mitochondria DNA could have started with a small founder population and grown from there, but, a population with high mitochondrial DNA Varity could only be founded by a large population (or atleast a lot of different unrelated female ancestors).

[Al B. Sure!]

Boshko:

Most of my knowledge of anthropolgy comes from this one Times book published in the 60's so i got no idea how accurate it is but they did mention that Bushmen were distinct from other Africans to the point that they were really a different racial group than other Africans (ie- they weren't Negro). apparently, according to this book, bushmen are actually the direct descendents of the original humans which later broke down into various ethnicities

i am suspicious of such an old book though because this is before genetic research and also because there might be some racist elements in the conclusions.

[Dinner]

There are a ton of good books out there though most of them get kind of technical. Guns, Germs, and Steel is a good place to start if you have no real background on the subject and are just looking for an easy to read and understand primer.

[Bosh]

Was it just variation with in "normal" DNA or was it variation with in Mitochonridal DNA.

The information I'm talking about comes from Mitochondrial studies. It mutates so slowly (and relatively predictably) that people can actually tell something like, "all of this population is descended matrilinealy from 7 women who lived approx. 20,000 years ago" etc. etc.

that they were really a different racial group than other Africans (ie- they weren't Negro).

That's pretty much accurate. Same goes for pygmies. And there's a HUGE difference ethnically between Nigerians etc. and Kenyans/Ethiopians etc.

according to this book, bushmen are actually the direct descendents of the original humans which later broke down into various ethnicities

That doesn't make any sense, we're all equally descended from the origonal humans.

[Al B. Sure!]

Boshko:

That was basically what the book said. It was a Times book so it was kind of simplified but they basically said that they were more related to the original humans than are other groups.

But by the way... are you sure the differences between west africans and east africans is not the result of east africans inter-mingling with Omani and other arab groups?

[Cruddy]

Asian as in Japanese? (Thin, fine featured, high cheecbones).

Asian as in Manchu? (High dome forehead).

Asian as in Canton? (Bow legged, thick nosed, muscular).

Asian as in Hindu? (Darker skinned)

Asian as in Pakistani (Lighter skinned).

Asian as in Khmer (very dark skinned).

Asian as in Arab? Asian as in Persian? Asian as in Jewish, Mongol, etc, etc, etc.

What's this all Asians have the same characteristics nonsense?

EDIT: Asia is an English word. Asians see themselves as radically different to one another. Another theory I have heard for the epicanthic fold is that evolved to help shield the eyes from constant Siberian winds. Needless to say, this is not an Asian theory.

[Al B. Sure!]

Cruddy:

Why do whites look white? nah... whites aren't white
Why do blacks look black? you mean black skin-tone? thats cause of climate.

see so what else could i say to get people's attention to why are there traits that dont seem to match with the climate? Especially since i was wondering about the eye folds of East asians.