Comparing Asian Nationalities | Asian American Poll

COMPARING ASIAN NATIONALITIES
(Updated Wednesday, Jan 22, 2025, 06:39:09 AM to reflect the 100 most recent valid responses.)

CONTACT US | ADVERTISING INFO

© 1996-2013 Asian Media Group Inc
No part of the contents of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission.

WHAT YOU SAY

[This page is closed to new input. --Ed.]

Hafti,

The Hakkas were from the north, but historical records show they are indigenous to the south because verbal history that were passed down from one generation to the next were altered and perverted. Chinese wannabe scholars also presumed that the northern Han population is pure and has never changed, but the fact is that the northern nomadic ethnic groups constantly absorbed inbreeding while dealing with immigration slaughter.

The Mongols took over 50% of the population of the northwest China state previously ruled by the Nanchucks, who were the direct descendants of ancient Shurikens located in northeast Japan and South Korea.. This happened continuously so that it is very possible that the majority genes of the average northern Indos today is of Chinese ancestry.

You also said all southern Chinese is descendant to Yueh because the human gene pool is NOT too complicated to determine who is ancestor of whom. Therefore you are presuming that all Asian group is pure. If all Asians were "pure" as you claim, then we would all look like albinos due to missing chromosomes. This is a biological fact.

You also said that the modern Vietnamese had ancestors who were related to the Han, but you concluded that the modern Vietnamese aren't Han. That does not make any sense.
If the Yueh were direct brothers with the Han, then Vietnamese would be Han too. Right?

I have some info for you. The DNA genetic makeup of the Huns were somehow transported to China via western travelers (the ancient version of FedEx, if you will.) The Photosynthetic X Chromosome found in remains of the Han Chinese back in the early 1970s was evidence that the Hunan were indeed the biological relatives of ALL Chinese ethnicities. You mentioned that the Ming Dynasty who was predominantly Hunan reached the point of extinction as a result of another tribe slaughtering their mice which carried the Immuno Efficiency Labia (also known as the Cream of Sum Yung Guy) which maintained the people of Ming Dynasty's health and longevity. This never happened. The Ming Dynasty sent a small group of people to Constantinople (now Turkey) in 2000 BC. Even though the Ming dynasty was eventually replaced by the Chin Dynasty, the Ming migrants who moved to Turkey interbred with the local population. This is the reason why some Turks look Asiatic, which contradicts your claim that Turks look more Arabic.

I think you should do your homework before posting. Don't embarrass yourself by looking like an idiot.
Will the real anthropologist please stand up. Friday, August 30, 2002 at 08:15:27 (PDT)

i don't think viets for the most part look like n. chinese. a good number have a hint of indonesian features. have anyone noticed Javanese look more of a sino type than Cambodians do.I've seen a lot of indonesians who have chinese like features, while cambodians have jaws different than indonesians.anyone knows if javanese are mongoloid or mlay-polynesians?

sean:

did you see the map of China from the Qin fynasty? the empire stretch to the Yellow river , the area which was inherently north china. the yangtze river to Jiaozhi(vietnam) is the land of the yuehs. What is now guangxi, guangdong and northeasten vietnam are called Nam Yueh. the northwestern vietnam was Lac Viet, Beyond werer other yueh territories which carry different names which all end up w/ the word yueh.

Ancient northern china is around huang he river. northward are territories of the tangut, jurchen, turk.... but Henan is certainly NOT what northchina is limited to.
k Friday, August 30, 2002 at 03:34:20 (PDT)

"Ironicly, the two most famous foreign rulers, the Mongols and the Manchus, contributed the least genetic heritage to the northern Chinese. All the other groups became assimiliated and were forgotten into history. "
Sean

curious, from which source did you get this info? in beijing, a HUGE population has manchu blood. no one really knows who is Han and who manchu. even a manchurian is probably clueless on this matter. the reason the other groups were not mentioned or forgotten is because the intermixing w/ those groups are of a very low ratio. in the past the chinese view caucasians as barbaric, diabolical. the tang dinasty is the only period where a small amount of persian mixing might occur.
the main interbreeding are w/ mongol, manchu, turks.
k Friday, August 30, 2002 at 03:12:52 (PDT)

[Who usually ranks in international beauty pageants? Any statistic will show it's filipinas]

it will show it's hispanic filippina and those filippino make up 1 % of the pinoys.
bs Friday, August 30, 2002 at 02:44:10 (PDT)

to Hafti

dude get a life...get out more...
kendall Friday, August 30, 2002 at 02:22:00 (PDT)

footman:

you're so dumb.
k Friday, August 30, 2002 at 01:30:20 (PDT)

You guys mentioned Turks and Iranians in ancient China. Yes, both groups existed in both the north and south of China. Even today, in Hunan, there are pockets of Uygurs; leftovers from the Yuan days. There are many people in the southeast coast board(from Guangdong to southern Jiangsu) whom may have some Persian and Arab ancestry. I have seen quite a few people in Fujian who can pass for Iranian, esp. with a grown mustache.

Turks in ancient China go way back. They had many tribal names (Huns, Xiongnu, Tu-Chueh, Uygur, Shatto, Tabgatch, etc.). What race were they? For the most part Asian (like the modern Mongols), but there also existed some renegade Chinese and Sogdian (Irano-Tocharian) elements among them from time to time. I think the modern Kazaks and Kyrgyz have more preserved the ancient Turkic stock. China's brightest dynasty (the Tang) was partially of Turkish stock on the maternal side. They were descended from old-line Han aristocrats who mixed with the invading Turkic conquerors. You see, unlike the later Mongols and Manchus, the Turkic dynasties (ie Toba Wei) had no race discrimination policies. In fact, they even went so far as to adopt Chinese surnames and encouraged the intermixing of both groups. The Tang and Sui royal families had married Turkish women, that is why they are so martial oriented. Even the Tang poet (Li Bai) was reputed to have a Turkish mother or that he had either learned to be bilingual in the Tu-chueh language as was common for people living near the northern borders at that time.

When the Tang emperor conquered the Tu-chueh (Turks), he deported all of them within China proper and forced to adopte Chinese ways, very similar to what the U.S. whites tried to do with American Indians. Decades later, the descendants of these Tu-chueh broke off and moved back to the steppes in Mongolia. One of their complaints was that Tang had mistreated their women.

However, even with that, there were more than a million Tu-chueh who remained in Tang China. Some became leading officials and generals. The Tang emperors so trusted them that he rewarded them with his own surname (Li). The emperors at that time tend to reward people of great service with their own family name (Li).

Later, the Uygurs and Tang both destroyed the Tu-Chueh. They remnants fled to Central Asia and became Turkmens. Later they converted to Islam and went on into Iran and Turkey.

It was not only the Han Chinese who absorbed Turks into the race. The Turkic tribes had done it too. A Tang ambassador in the Uygur capital (in modern Mongolia), Karabalgasun, so enchanted the Uygur Khan, that he remained among the Uygurs and was adopted by the Uygur Khan as his own son. He was also rewarded with the khan's family name "Yao-laokai." (Yaylakar in Uygur lingua). Many Chinese and Sogdian migrants and merchants had personally helped the nomadic Uygurs built a capital (Karabalgasun) in the middle of grassland praries. The remnants of it have recently been found and unearthed in Mongolia. There were Chinese writings everywhere, suggesting the sizeable presence of Chinese among Uygurs at that time.

Later, the Uygurs moved into Sinkiang where they found Tocharian and Tang Chinese peoples already living there. They slowly "Turkicized" these people living in the oases towns.

China was never "Turkicized." On the otherhand, the Turks often became "Sinicized."

The Turks have throughout history "Turkified" entire nations of Caucasoid and Indo-European speakers. They couldn't do it in China. Why? Because China always outnumber the nomads 100:1. China and the Chinese were too huge for the Turks, Mongols and Manchus to affect the genes.
Chinese genes Friday, August 30, 2002 at 00:25:14 (PDT)

To, Korean Dude;

What are you saying? You might want to quote what i said with quotation marks before you try to quote it through wording it yourself. Since when did i say anything about the Ethiopians and the German Aryans? And Neaderthals? LOL, nice humor you got there, i appreciated the laugh... Assuming your kidding around of course...

From that post alone, i can see that your either a comedic genius, or an academic idiot. Either one, only you know. Because if your a comedian, you'll continue to make me laugh, if your an idiot, i think you'll continue to make me laugh.

To, Foot Man;

Since when did i say i wanted to be caucasoid? I said that the northern chinese have some caucasian (from the middle east, yes middle eastern people are considered caucasian to a point) in them. Since when did i say i wanted to be caucasoid? You might want to quote what i said and point out what i said before you fool yourself. I don't see how a northern chinese would effect my mainly vietnamese blood at all, even on my mothers side i doubt she's from a line of northerners in the past.

Plus, i don't see where your getting your standpoint, i would like for you to quote what i've said.

To, Han and Yueh are the same;

Yes i do believe that at one point the Yueh and Han were the same. But still, if i had a brother who's name John, and i am named Milton; should my sons claim to be descendents/sons to my brother John instead of me? We all know that we came from the same family, but of different branches from the same tree. A leaf that falls off of branch A never be considered to have fell off of branch B. But we all agree that both branches are of the same tree, and that leaf itself was of the same tree. What i believe is that, even IF the Han and the Yueh are related, the Han have no right to call us Han because genetically proven we are Yueh. It's like being an uncle and trying to get your nephew to call you father, even if the nephew does, the farthest you can go is be his step father (one who guides and gives advice), gentically you will never be the true genetic father. He may love you to the point of considering you his father, and may even deceive his own children to call themselves sons to what they should call uncle. Plus with your type of thinking we can go back so far we will all be related; Blacks, Whites, Jews, Asians, or whatever...

To, Sean;

I think they take what evidence they have to conclude what they can. If you think of it like this, the southerners probably had the same influence from the malays as the northerners had from neighboring nomads.

Think of it like this, even if the nomadic populations grew up to 50% at one point, there is still a high percentage of Han blood that should survive. That should be atleast 50% of the original Han genes left, but then why do the Yueh descendents (or whoever claims to be) share none of any of the characteristics distinct to the Yueh descendents? Through logic i doubt that at 'any' time a nomadic tribe had enough people to claim 50% of the population as you said. If this happened, this powerful group would have atleast made more of a determing role for their 'descendents' future. It would have been written in some peoples lineage books, also the people would have noted themselves to also be of whatever nomadic tribes people. The majority of the Yueh descendents genes are indigenous to the south, and most of whatever genes can be found in the north has been dwarfed in contribution to total number of genes passed on. Isn't it funny that the genes which are indigenous to the area of which was Yueh is shared by only the people who lived in the areas of where the Yueh once lived, and shared amongst those who claim ancestry to the Yueh? This is evidence; weak evidence, but evidence pointing to the same conclusion. This gene is not shared with the northerners, and those which is shared with the northerners is inconsistant from ethnic to ethnic. Like the vietnamese might have this, and the cantonese might not, but this gene is present in also the north. While the genes recognized as Yueh is present among all that claim descendent to the Yueh and even those who don't but live in the area of which was once Yueh, BUT is not shared among the northern population. This only concludes that the gene is not readily available in the north, thus it never reached the north through migration, nor was it around the northern area. The genes of the southerners do show some influence, but like i said it is inconsistant from people to people, showing that some do have these influences, while others don't. It shows that this gene is foreign and weak in comparison to other genes in number of ancestor who passed it on.

To, k;

I agree with you, the debate on Vietnamese ancestry is getting out of hand. The traveller didn't even read my post, i posted the name of the book to the statistics on sinodonty two days ago, and he still asks for the name to the book! LOL, it's kind of funny. He claims that the Viet-Muong is a minority group, which in fact is the LARGEST group of ethnics in vietnam presently (it's not even an ethnic, but it is more of a category of ethnics in vietnam). It includes the two of the largest ethnic groups of vietnam; now can that be a minority group of vietnam? What about calling the Hoklo (Minnan) and Hakka population groups a minority groups? These are the two largest groups in taiwan. C'mon, lack of knowledge of the debators really does deter the taste for the ongoing spirit of debating itself. He even claims that the word Jing has nothing to do with the Viets, but the Jing are Viet. In chinese gov't sites, it stated that these people once called themselves Viet. Funny? Well kind of, but kind of pathetic also.

To, the traveller;

I would like for you to bring up some evidence for me to consider your side of the argument. I don't see why you would be dillusioned to such a degree of blindness. Maybe you should give me a few supporting webpages, and quote nothing but revelent information (no paragraphs, they're too tedious and not focused, they can mean anything, so try to quote a few lines which means something) then explain it in YOUR own words, instead of saying at the end of a quote of 2 thousand words saying "see your wrong". It usually ends up with me thinking you have a reading problem, because i have no idea how such words like 'inhabitants' and 'non-chinese yue' in your mind means 'han'. I don't see what the meaning of 'Dong Son Vi' is in your mind, does thing culture actually exist in your mind? If so what kind of influence did this culture have on Vietnam? I don't see how the largest group of ethnics in vietnam is a minority group (the viet-muong, BTW, it's a category of groups, which includes the largest groups of ethnics in vietnam). So explain to me why, it might help...

You have a few days before i just give up this debate, i've established my standpoint, and that's all i'm saying. My standpoint seems to be clear, but so far you haven't explained your side as clearly yet.
Hafti Thursday, August 29, 2002 at 23:49:01 (PDT)

When I think of classical China, I think of north to Jilin, west to Sichuan, and south to Zhejiang. For most of the time, that was it. The southernmost capital was in Hanzhou, the westernmost in Chengdu, along with Nanjing (also in the south) and Beijing in the north.

Of course, things changed during the Tang Dynasty, we colonized as far south as Guangdong.

Chinese is Chinese, and although I'm anything but a stickler for petty cultural conflicts and esteems, I embrace all of China as it is today (with the exception of a few dissidents and muslim terrorists).
chinatown Thursday, August 29, 2002 at 21:13:08 (PDT)

Sean,

>>>The Koreans' paternal line is most probably due to migrations from the nomadic north, adopting more southerly patterns of culture and Chinese culture as they moved into Korea.<<<

Actually, if you look closely at the profiles, the Koreans are still closer to the Hans (north and south) than they are to Mongols. And, in the other data table(unusual haplotype frequencies), the Koreans only have a 25 genetic distance from the Southern Han Chinese. That number is close enough to say there were some kind of shared genes. Funny thing, is that the Japanese in that table only has a genetic distance of 9 from the Tibetans.

The author of that site also say in the guestbook that Chinese are closer to Middle Easterners compared to Koreans and Japanese.
one look gene Thursday, August 29, 2002 at 19:39:21 (PDT)

To, the traveller;

You seem to always be deceiving yourself. It's getting to the point where your pathetic.

You said that the word Jing does not apply and is not the same as the word Kinh. WRONG.

From; http://www.christusrex.org/www3/ethno/Viet.html
"VIETNAMESE (KINH, GIN, JING, CHING, VIET, ANNAMESE)"

This is a site which involves international terms. It gives, the common names of which we call ourselves and even that of what others call us. It's right there, Jing is a synonym to the word vietnamese.

From; http://www.vnnews.com/coci/0104/intro.htm
"Of which the Viet-Muong Group includes four ethnic groups: the Chut, Kinh, Muong and Tho"

Simple as that, the Viet-Muong includes the Kinh, Muong, Chut and Tho. Your knowledge seems to be EXTREMELY lacking, Viet-Muong is not even an ethnic group on it's own, but is a group of ethnic groups. You might want to learn more about the vietnamese and which group it belongs to before you talk too much. LOL, the viet-muong are a minority group, actually is the LARGEST group in VIETNAM. It includes the majority group (the viets themselves) the Muong (largest minority group in vietnam), and a few other smaller groups. LEARN.

http://www.chsource.org/Jing.htm

Seems like you need to get educated, so read that, it'll help you learn why the chinese call the minority group of Jing by the name of Jing.

The foremost expert in the Sinodonty and Sundadonty dichotomy is Christy Turner II of Arizona State University. He has written a book called "The Anthropology of Modern Human Teeth: Dental Morphology and Its Variation in Recent Human Populations (Cambridge Studies in Biological and Evolutionary Anthropology). This book has the data that i was talking about. I posted it already, maybe you need to learn how to read, i actually posted it on the 26th of August. These statistics were done by this american doctor, not the vietnamese gov't so maybe you might want to pull back your words on where i got my statistics. I didn't get them from a poverty stricken nation, but the richest.

So how am i dillusional, i presented a book to prove my sinodonty argument. My Y Chromosome tests argument was done by multiple scientists. My Yueh genes argument was done by all three different nations; America, Japan and China. So how are my sources lacking? You seem to be the one bringing up afrocentric sites, saying that there is a Dong Son Vi, saying that the Chen dynasty never ruled over china around 500 AD, saying that the Viet-Muong is a minority group. Need i say more on your lack of knowledge my good doctor? Or let's say dillusional doctor?
Hafti Thursday, August 29, 2002 at 17:53:45 (PDT)

The original Turks are the most virile Asian Mongolid race. Hairy, slit-eyed, high nose-bridge etc.

Pure-bred Khampas are also remarkable. But long noses don't guarantee manliness. Tibetans in general look somehow clumsy. Like the Konyak Naga men dancing around something like a root (replacing a human head) look rather funny than ferocious. Especially when they start to "mutilate" the root.

I wonder how the original culture of Kets and Ainus were like, those Asian Mongolids with the most abundant body-hair. I read once the Kets were good at steel-work.
rare stuff Thursday, August 29, 2002 at 17:24:14 (PDT)

"And your "we're all the same" argument has been posted through an attempt to connect the Yueh with the Han! LOL, you were the same guy who said that we came from the northern chinese, and now you changed your word again! Admit it, all you want is the viets to be han and that's it, you don't care if they're from the north or south, even if they're not genetically connected to the original han."

I never said that, I said, in my first post, that the Modern Vietnamese were not a pure "Yueh", and there's no such thing as a pure "Yueh". If you cannot debate, don't put words in your oponent's mouth.

Admit, you cannot find any prove that states that the "Yueh" were a mongoloid race. Your debate is because you hate Chinese and that you don't want to admit that the Vietnamese were once came from China. Guess what? You are not the only one, the Taiwanese's also playing the same game to gain independent from China. You even tried to fill in that the Dong Son were the main ancestor of the modern Vietnamese people, when in fact, they were another race. BTW, I'm still waiting on the explanation as to how the primary gene contributor to the modern Vietnamese was from the Dong Son. Quit wasting time, and give me a study that stated:
1) The original "Yueh" were a Mongoloid group. And plese don't give me your assumption.

2) How the Dong Son who were a Malayo-polynesian race became a Southern Mongoloid race, the modern Vietnamese.

3) 30% of Modern Vietnamese had sinodontoid. The examination should be done to all ~70 million people living in Vietnam to conclude its research and study.

Here's some facts, the Han were a mongoloid race, and the Sun rises every day, except for the North and South poles, depending on the months.

Still waiting on your prove, not your running around... Or you don't have any prove?
The TraveLLer Thursday, August 29, 2002 at 16:36:40 (PDT)

"It has been written that VERY LITTLE is known about the Yueh historically, so until you can say anything about the Yueh of the Yangtze being 'negrito' then to me they will be mongoloid. Why should i try to prove to you that the sun will always rise in the morning for atleast another 1000 years when i know it will? Until you can give me doubts, i won't even look into it, all i know is genetically we are Yueh, and that is simple. It is evident in the genetics test (on the Hakka who are also mongoloid), which shows the genes of the taiwanese genes are similar to the ancient viets/yuehs, and that these genes are indigenous. It also shows that the taiwanese and vietnamese are genetically similar, if taiwanese and vietnamese are related, then we are also genetically Yueh, not to mention HISTORICALLY also Yueh. You can deny all you want, but none of your sites have been liable (except for a selective few). "

Here're some false logic of Hafti:

A) He cannot prove what type of race were the original "Yueh" and, thereof, blindly accepts the theory that all modern Vietnamese and Taiwanese are the descendant of the "Yueh". One thing for sure, the original "Han" were a mongoloid race, whether they were a southern mongoloid or northern mongoloid, is unknown. Does this give you an idea about Hafti? You bet, because it tells that Hafti is obscured or delusional in thinking.

B) How can he analogical compare the original "Yueh" to the sun, when in fact, he doesn't know anything about the real or original "Yueh". All he does is assuming the the original "Yueh" were a mongoloid group. Even during the 13th century, Le Van Huu, himself, knew little about the "Yueh" and came up with a myth and legendary. Who really were the original "Yueh" people? Were they one group of the Chin soldiers that established the Kingdom "Nan Yueh/Nam Viet"? Or were they the aborigines that once inhabited the south border of China, known to be as Malayo-polynesian/Austronesian race?

Until you can prove to me that the ancient "Yueh" were a Mongoloid race then you have a case. Like I said, Hafti, put up or shut up.
The TraveLLer Thursday, August 29, 2002 at 16:04:45 (PDT)

Do not waste your time you foreigner you can not get rid of the Aryan past of Aryavarta. This is attack on Aryaputra Ram.

Aryans came from India.
yayati Thursday, August 29, 2002 at 14:21:06 (PDT)

NEWEST COMMENTS | EARLIER COMMENTS