>>520969901
the case, which indicates that Europe itself is the source of these light features, not some foreign group that invaded.
The prevalence of light features, stereotypically European, is highest in northern Germany, Scandinavia (including Finland), the Baltic Region, and the northern Slavic region like Poland and northwestern Russia.
This, then, is likely the region of the world where such light traits as define stereotypical Europeans, or what we and the world think of as the most definitive looking Europeans, originated.
The Aryan Conquest and Aryan Replacement Theory is just false. The Aryans did invade and conquer, since they must have in order to explain why nearly all European languages for at least 3,000 years have been Indic languages (only called "Indo-European" because they came to predominate in Europe even while this designation does not mean they originated in Europe, which they certainly didn't), and because Aryan invasion and conquest explains why traditional European paganisms were localized versions of the Indic religion of the time with similar sky gods (whose equivalents in southern and northern Europe are Zeus/Jupiter and Odin, respectively).
So the Aryans who invaded Europe around the 2nd century BC definitely had a deep cultural impact, which suggests they didn't only invade Europe, but rather they properly conquered and subjugated nearly all of Europe, except perhaps Ireland and perhaps also Great Britain where the even older Celtic-Druidic religion remained intact and where Indo-European or Aryan religion didn't start to make inroads until the Dark Age Migration Era after Wester Rome collapsed.
But the idea that the invading Aryans of the 2nd millennium BC account for the genetics of Europe and the stereotypical fair European phenotype is contradicted by the fact that this phenotype is found in far greater abundance today, and has been found in far greater abundance in the intervening millennia, in northern and northeastern Europe
4chan Search
2 results for "68e40bbcfa6f1f16e0f95ed7a355fd79"
Less white = Racially inferior = LESS HUMAN
Let's face it, when we say people are less white and are racially inferior, this means those people are less human than full whites are. It's just the hard truth, a fact of nature and biology.
Nordics are the only full human beings. Nordics are north Germans, Dutch, and Scandinavians.
Brits are the second highest race, and as such, they are less human than Nordics are, but more human than Mediterraneans, who are next in the hierarchy.
After Mediterraneans are Slavs, who are less human than Meds but more human than East Asians.
On and on the hierarchy goes until you reach the shittiest of Africans, like the pygmies and Nilotics (Sudanese), who are even lower than the ordinary sub-Saharan Bantus.
The hierarchy of race and racial superiority and inferiority is also the hierarchy of humanness. Only Nordics are fully human. To be fully human, you must have blond hair and blue or green eyes. Anything other than this equates to being incompletely human.
Nordics are the only full human beings. Nordics are north Germans, Dutch, and Scandinavians.
Brits are the second highest race, and as such, they are less human than Nordics are, but more human than Mediterraneans, who are next in the hierarchy.
After Mediterraneans are Slavs, who are less human than Meds but more human than East Asians.
On and on the hierarchy goes until you reach the shittiest of Africans, like the pygmies and Nilotics (Sudanese), who are even lower than the ordinary sub-Saharan Bantus.
The hierarchy of race and racial superiority and inferiority is also the hierarchy of humanness. Only Nordics are fully human. To be fully human, you must have blond hair and blue or green eyes. Anything other than this equates to being incompletely human.