G
GuyFromSingapore
It's all fun games until someone gets punched
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2020
- Posts
- 15,939
- Reputation
- 11,525
The Istmid subtype of the Zentralid(German spellings).
Comments on this phenotype:
Mayas are not reduced like pygmies, the reason why some groups had almost pygmie like height is that they were starved populations who couldnt achieve their normal heights, poor nutrition.
Thats true but such trends lead a) to modification and b) long term selection in the direction of reduced pyknomorphy. Thats evident if looking at the typical Istmid subtype of Zentralids, especially if comparing with normal Zentralids (Pueblid subtype) which are reduced themselves, but still with more normal proportions. The Istmid type is the epitome of a reduced-dependent-poor farmer population type.
Even if they grow they just look like "giant babies", because of their infantile growth and proportions, but dont reach normal height and proportions if speaking really about Istmids - most, not all Maya are of that subtype.
Istmids and the Palaungid subtype of Palaemongolids are just extreme examples of reduction-infantilisation of farmer populations.
Other Indianid racial types suffered too, but even if they were short, they looked nothing like that.
Typical Istmids:
Yes, they grow if getting more food, but more in the breadth than length...
And in most cases you can draw a line from head to head in such Indianid types, that is genetic uniformity, social conditions alone would still make them looking more different if being genetically more different. But thats an inbred poor farmer population, and it was like that since the old Mayas reached their carrying capacity and began to biologically degenerate and losing their former cultural height as well.
So, the small head woul dbe something after the fact, not directly related pygmization per se.
Agreed, like I said above. No objections from my side.
Palaungids in SEA show signs of clear reduction-infantilisation, partly even as extreme (individuals), same is true for Istmids (~Maya population).
You can see similar trends (infantilisation) in many areas of the world, mainly in those which "lost" fights for better areas and were pushed into poor areas of retreat or reached a population level which couldnt provide the necessary level for proper individual development.
Usually this tendency is not associated with a general reduction of the brain, but the brain rather keeps its size with just slow, if at all, reduction. Its a saving on the costs of the body primarily.
Agrippa according to national geographic mag - thailand has obesity rates as high as the united states and mexico, turkey and egypt - how would your analysis explain this thailand obesity issue? comparatively china is a moderately high 6% and over obesity rate - thailand is 24% and over.
Thats a good point because what races will be now the most obese? Those which had enough protein and were selected for efficiency, or those which were selected for saving energy and storing fat because proteins and food was low, starvation and disease a constant threat and other factors of group selection less important which were important for the regions I meant.
But of course, there is a strong environmental influence, but its typical that the progressive and efficient types dont tend to obesity, the reduced and brachymorphic saving variants do. Just look at a comparison of the Maya farmer type (Istmid), extreme reduction, rather degenerated, strong tendency towards obesity, on the other hand, certain areas of Mexico which were better of, have lower tendencies towards obesity (Pueblid type) though both belong to the same basic subrace (Zentralid) and evolved in different directions, one with more challenges, another one, the Mayas, after their civilisation collapsed in particular, had to just survive and reproduce fast with a minimum of energy.
Its simple, if a type is mainly made for surviving and being able to work with a minimum of input, a minimum of energy, what will happen if such a group-individual will get the same food-energy which might make even a progressive adult variant a little bit fatter (because its too much even for them)? Well, they will be just obese...
Comments on this phenotype:
Mayas are not reduced like pygmies, the reason why some groups had almost pygmie like height is that they were starved populations who couldnt achieve their normal heights, poor nutrition.
Thats true but such trends lead a) to modification and b) long term selection in the direction of reduced pyknomorphy. Thats evident if looking at the typical Istmid subtype of Zentralids, especially if comparing with normal Zentralids (Pueblid subtype) which are reduced themselves, but still with more normal proportions. The Istmid type is the epitome of a reduced-dependent-poor farmer population type.
Even if they grow they just look like "giant babies", because of their infantile growth and proportions, but dont reach normal height and proportions if speaking really about Istmids - most, not all Maya are of that subtype.
Istmids and the Palaungid subtype of Palaemongolids are just extreme examples of reduction-infantilisation of farmer populations.
Other Indianid racial types suffered too, but even if they were short, they looked nothing like that.
Typical Istmids:
Yes, they grow if getting more food, but more in the breadth than length...
And in most cases you can draw a line from head to head in such Indianid types, that is genetic uniformity, social conditions alone would still make them looking more different if being genetically more different. But thats an inbred poor farmer population, and it was like that since the old Mayas reached their carrying capacity and began to biologically degenerate and losing their former cultural height as well.
So, the small head woul dbe something after the fact, not directly related pygmization per se.
Agreed, like I said above. No objections from my side.
Palaungids in SEA show signs of clear reduction-infantilisation, partly even as extreme (individuals), same is true for Istmids (~Maya population).
You can see similar trends (infantilisation) in many areas of the world, mainly in those which "lost" fights for better areas and were pushed into poor areas of retreat or reached a population level which couldnt provide the necessary level for proper individual development.
Usually this tendency is not associated with a general reduction of the brain, but the brain rather keeps its size with just slow, if at all, reduction. Its a saving on the costs of the body primarily.
Agrippa according to national geographic mag - thailand has obesity rates as high as the united states and mexico, turkey and egypt - how would your analysis explain this thailand obesity issue? comparatively china is a moderately high 6% and over obesity rate - thailand is 24% and over.
Thats a good point because what races will be now the most obese? Those which had enough protein and were selected for efficiency, or those which were selected for saving energy and storing fat because proteins and food was low, starvation and disease a constant threat and other factors of group selection less important which were important for the regions I meant.
But of course, there is a strong environmental influence, but its typical that the progressive and efficient types dont tend to obesity, the reduced and brachymorphic saving variants do. Just look at a comparison of the Maya farmer type (Istmid), extreme reduction, rather degenerated, strong tendency towards obesity, on the other hand, certain areas of Mexico which were better of, have lower tendencies towards obesity (Pueblid type) though both belong to the same basic subrace (Zentralid) and evolved in different directions, one with more challenges, another one, the Mayas, after their civilisation collapsed in particular, had to just survive and reproduce fast with a minimum of energy.
Its simple, if a type is mainly made for surviving and being able to work with a minimum of input, a minimum of energy, what will happen if such a group-individual will get the same food-energy which might make even a progressive adult variant a little bit fatter (because its too much even for them)? Well, they will be just obese...
Last edited:
