COMMENTS
Its an interesting study indeed.
I posted this study here awhile back. The problem here is that Racialreality is trying to use this study as proof of \"racial clusters\". If one looks at the \"north African\" cluster, the only ones out of that group that could remotely be labelled \"caucasoids\" are the Moroccans and the Gizeh sample, the rest are not. In fact, when on looks at the Somalis, labelled appropiately under the \"sub-Saharans\" cluster, they're less prognathous than all of those labelled \"North African\" except for the Gizeh sample and even less prognathous than some Europeans. thus this study isn't indicative or useful for determining so-called \"racial clusters\". RR needs to learn how to read and interpret.
The real problem is that you need mental help.
Of course these results recapitulate the racial clusters that consistently emerge in both anthropology and genetic studies. The fact that not every population fits neatly into a single category doesn't disprove the reality of clustering, as Neil Risch has made emphatically clear:
\"Populations that exist at the boundaries of these continental divisions are sometimes the most difficult to categorize simply. For example, east African groups, such as Ethiopians and Somalis, have great genetic resemblance to Caucasians and are clearly intermediate between sub-Saharan Africans and Caucasians [5]. The existence of such intermediate groups should not, however, overshadow the fact that the greatest genetic structure that exists in the human population occurs at the racial level.\"
![](\"http://www.haloscan.com/images/jskit-ad-banner-small.png\")
Commenting by HaloScan