What group is closest related to Europeans?

Specifically the Berbers?Arabs?Copts?

I see a lot of North Africans that look European, it's a bit confusing to me

I'd say it depends on the European group, but Levantines, Turks, Caucasians, Tatars, Urgics/Sammi are all more or less tied.

correction, some not a lot

It's funny because Berbers often do have a bunch of European admixture, maybe like 25% average, with some being rather light skinned, but they also have a bunch of Sub-Saharan admixture 15-25% for berber people.

Check out this tree.

Attached: tree.png (688x549, 125K)

Attached: 2h6ca44.jpg.png (1366x768, 644K)

Kebabs, which is why it doesn't matter

Asians are Europeans closest relatives. Europeans have something like 40% asian dna already.

>english as one group
pure fantasy

People in West Turkey and/or Central Asia.

Attached: 6e20f01cdcbd76a1b2915720838c6083.jpg (736x498, 66K)

East asians.

So Arabs,North Africans and Caucasians?

Pajeets
ever heard the turn Indo-European?
we even share a similar language structure
though to be specific we probably are most similar to Persians

Genetically?

Attached: 615ef9dc1bed6ed51b80fdf9feb99864.jpg (736x806, 117K)

Yeah right Chang

People from the Levant (that includes Jews), Turkey and the Caucasus mountains. Regardless of ethnicity or religion these groups cluster closest to Europeans genetically. North Africans would be similar but they have some nibba ancestry from their slaves.

Unironically this group.

Attached: IMG_E3901.jpg (748x882, 48K)

>Arabs are white!
What a great thread to have consider we just had an "Indians are white!" thread full of race mixing propaganda.

german jews yeah
but not actual semetic jews

Related?

Arabs, North Africans, Middle Easterners followed by South Asians and East Africans then East Asians, and finally Negroids/West Africans

As far similarities in behavior and intelligence it's East Asians that are closest even if they aren't closely related genetically they have evolved similarly.

Attached: F2.large_.jpg (600x434, 58K)

My question is when we say North Africans, are we speaking about the Berbers?Arabs?Copts?

No one said White, I'm simply asking what groups are closest related.

Were German Jews typically the ones that wore black fedora hats?

Attached: IMG_E4962.jpg (295x291, 22K)

Nope its the truth. Its because European and Asan have a common origin in Siberia.

Persians. Iran literally means land of the Aryans.

not white, but caucasian
WHITE only really refers to a few specific european races.
you know, Anglos, Scots, Germans, Scandinavians, Dutch
this does not count Irish, Meds, Slavs, Finns, and European Jews
French aren't even white half the time.
Its confusing but this how it was.
I assume White = Protestant origins
non white = Catholic

If that's right, why is Aryan so associated with pale, blue eyed, and blond Northern European types of features? Why is the definition not mostly brown/black haired people of light to medium beige skin coloring?

Caucasus Mountains

because Nazis changed the definition to suit their agenda.
all these other races are Aryan, but they are the most Aryan

That makes sense, thank you for the answer.

Italians

Italians

Its actually not there but further north and east near the urals
Caucasian isnt an accurate term and im not talking about that.
I mean actual full hun and mongol type asians are related to Europeans.

That’s not what the thread says at all silly leaf.

Ethnicities are not always useful when it comes to determining race in the Middle East since they've all been mixing for 1000+ years, sometimes even more.

It's more like this: Arabs from Tunisia are usually lighter featured than Arabs from Egypt, or Copts from northern Egypt than Copts nearer to Sudan etc, Berbers like Tuaregs are darker than Berbers nearer to the coast etc. So geography sometimes plays even a bigger part than ethnicity.

The nazis took the word you idiots

the ones who are related to them had ancestors who were raped by mongolians and huns

and reinterpreted it

Huns and mongolians didnt exist back then asshat.
Im talking about ancient prehistory.

when there were no asians and europeans

Were all of the porto-East Asian types of people, the Chinese, the Mongolians, the Turkics, the Tungusics, the Koreans, the Japanese, the Vietnamese, and the rest with similar eye/face characteristics originally living in the steppes beneath the Uralic Mountains, or much further east? Did they live like Huns and Mongolians, largely on horseback, nomadically hunting, and sometimes gathering? Or, were they more similar to north Asian Siberians that had a lack of horses, and subsisted on foot to travel and hunt and gather?

>porto
Proto is what I meant.

None of these people existed im talking about the origin of both asians and europeans was one people that split.

Would North Africans or Gulf Arabs be closer to Europeans?

They may have a relationship but I highly doubt Mongols and Huns are closer to Europeans than say Persians or even Semites.

Arabs, Berbers, Caucasians, Persians. Maybe some Russified Tartars. That's why Islam so shitty: it's like you lost all of your cousins and extended family to some weird cult.

please read

so where does indo-european come into play

South Chinese aren't that genetically distant from other East Asians. Too much admixture.

persians and pajeets
north africans too

in terms of how close they are
arabs>indians>north africans (meaning the non arab ones)>asians

Why are you getting into prehistory when nothing was split off yet then when the question is about current groups?

Also further evidence of what im talking about is seen in Aborigines from Australia.
Aborigines are the third group to split from Europeans and Asians.
When a white or asian person has a child with an aborigine.
The child will look asian or European.
This is because aborigines migrated at the time of the Euro asian split and are closely related to both peoples common ancestors.

didnt fucking exist at the time

iranians and druze

Because relatively Europeans and asians are genetically and culturally similar because of that prehistory connection.

imagine a timeline when you could go to Persia as if it was as safe as going to the otherside of the country.
fuck Islam, fuck Communism, fuck drugs
globalism could only work if we eradicate all three of these
until then isolationism all the way

Attached: 3C919E8000000578-4148684-image-a-111_1485529107398.jpg (962x962, 189K)

>Arabs, Berbers
They are Mestizos (nogs)

>Russified Tartars
mongol mestizos

east asians developed from abos and are closer to abos

pajeets are abos (australoid) that mixed with arabs/persians

North Africans, Arabs, and Pajeets are all caucasians too, so them

Then where do west Asian groups fall?

Persians

so what are you even saying
of course if you go DEEP into the family tree whites and asians are very much related
but if you go deeper we are also very much related to rhinos

North Africans

They are a southern migration of a similar group in the south but Europeans and Asians have a northern basically siberian origin.
Im just annoyed that this is covered up in the mainstream and lies like Europeans being related to africans is pushed.

Look at ancient Asian culture there is so many obvious European similarities.

Linguistic groups of people who were ruled by an Aryan (white) upper class.

Attached: 1200px-Indo-European_branches_map.svg.png (1200x1200, 445K)

No. I'm saying that Europeans and Asians are closely related and you dont have to go far back. Not cave man far back but before proper recorded history.
Prehistory means before people were writing history down. Which basically started with the geeks.

Would these people have been synonymous with having Eurasian looks?

Abos, Australoids, Veddoids (Indians), and Mongoloids are derived from an Onge population. East Asians and Australoids are modeled as branches related to Onge and Tianyuan.
science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/suppl/2018/07/03/361.6397.88.DC1/aat3628_McColl_SM.pdf
biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2018/03/31/292581.full.pdf

The mongoloids were only formed genetically around the Neolithic, and before that, the region was inhabited by the ancestors of Australoid peoples, such as the Onge and Papuans

Would the Australian Aborigines have went through India, and left branches of people that split off from them, on the way to Australia, to form the Dravidian population of India?

Nice try kike, your sand nigger tribe has nothing in common with Europeans.

Attached: 0-2971975.png (500x521, 142K)

I imagine they would have looked a bit asian a bit european and as a people a mix of both.
You can see this in the region today.
Redhaired white looking people hangout with very asian looking people and sometimes there is mixed characteristics.
Europeans branched off and took the developing European looks with them Asians went east and became more asian.
Theres evidence there were white people in ancient asia too.
Some ancient european groups look like asians.

yeah but ethnicities are far more complex than
WHITE, ASIAN, BLACK

Absolutely nothing to do with what im talking about shut the fuck up.

correct

the basal roots of semites are much further diverged from europeans than asians

mongoloids originate from australoids (abos)

see papuans lived in china until recently

Neolithic China was also ' Australoid '

en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTOTAL-RLXB198602001.htm

Archaeologist Peter Bellwood claims that the vast majority of people in South and east Asia, the region he calls the "clinal Mongoloid-Australoid zone", are Southern Mongoloids but have a high degree of Australoid admixture.[40]

NE Asians are also related to Australoids, since prior to 10,000 years ago, Australoid populations characterized the human settlements of all of NE and SE Asia, all of the Americas and India.

Aboriginals are very similar to psuedo-caucasians like japanese ainu and siberian ainu.

pajeets are australoid abos. nafris/arabs are mutts like mestizos

what are you even saying though
"ASIANS AND CAUCASIANS RE RELATED"
yeah sure, but lets narrow it down cause Caucasian itself is still very broad

Going to Persia to visit is still quite safe if you're a white man. It's only unsafe if you have Iranian citizenship or are involved with alphabet. youtube.com/watch?v=_2LEgowbzSc

neat, but not really the point i'm trying to get across

Of course people can learn new languages and often speak the language of the conquers but, it's still a somewhat useful marker of ethnicity actually.

I consider these linguistic ethno-cultural groups to be our natural enemies. We must destroy them. I would even ally with the turks for a time if I was sure we could wipe them from the face of the planet.

Attached: 640px-Afroasiatic_languages-en.svg.png (640x421, 78K)

no they dont. are you retarded

the group ANE (ancestral north eurasians) formed in the icy steppes around iran/russia

the people that later became europeans moved into the ukraine and bred amongst dark sandnigger type farmers

the people that later become asians stayed north for a much larger time. one branched off early, moved south into vietnam/thailand, bred a little amongst the australoids, but mostly killed them off

the people that later became asian then, later, moved into northern china, later, moving south and breeding a little (but mostly killed) the people that killed off the australoids

mongoloids do not originate from australoids, but only have a very tiny component of their dna

Caucasian was a word coined by some guy that liked georgians

they ever teach you what a homophone is? cause words can have multiple meanings you know and if you're confused use your context clues

Caucasian is a misnomer you idiot.

You're a fucking idiot

do you have any more racial comparison pictures like that

Attached: 1536355407482.jpg (736x964, 90K)

In terms of genetics it's sandniggers but in terms of social compatibility and ability to coexist in a prosperous society it's East Asians

Attached: 1504122613313.png (800x533, 640K)

i'm just going from my understand of how things were back then in america
though germans weren't entirely accepted until much later also
but you understood what i meant. right CUNT?