>>17777036 (OP)>Who was genetically superior and why? "Genetically superior" is a nonsensical statement from the archeological perspective. We have no way of testing things like inherent muscle density or IQ.
>What were the major differences between them?Both were tall, but hunter gatherers were generally gracile and lithe, prioritizing stamina and cardio. Pastoralists like the Yamnaya were generally bulkier due to an abundance of animal proteins from dairy.
>Were they really that different from each other? They were as different as a pair of disparate ethnic groups could be. Different lifestyles, living standards, genetic ancestries, etc.
>And why does mainstream science claim the WHGs were swarthy?Most WHG archeogenetic testing indicates it, though they had light eyes. The mistake a lot of people make is trying to compare modern ethnic groups to ones that existed thousands of years ago under very different circumstances. It's likely, if not certain, that these peoples would not comfortably resemble any modern racial or ethnic group, as they long predate them. "White people" as we speak of them today, are the result of countless generations of ancient ethnic admixtures combined with environmental pressures.