Comments by "Arnold Hubbert" (@arnoldhubbert6779) on "How Did Blond Hair u0026 Blue Eyes Spread to Europe?" video.

@Bozvikvin So called "blond" hair among Palestinians and Syrians wouldn't be considered blond hair by European standards. Non Europeans consider anything lighter than black or dark brown as somehow "blond." It isn't. It's light brown at the most.
6
You could not be more incorrect. First of all, blue eyes didn't come from negroes. In fact, the negro race couldn't be further separated from that feature. No negro has ever had blue eyes and no umixed negro today has ever had blue eyes (unless diseased). Secondly, the ancestor to which you're referring (Cheddar man) was neither negro nor did he have dark skin like a negro. His DNA is Caucasian and his skin ranged from pale to olive (they're not sure). It's amazing how falsehood get exaggerated and then spread.
4
So, let me get this straight. You're claiming that the negro had blue eyes and blond hair originally, but then, much much later, white people acquired blond hair and blue eyes? So, blond hair and blue eyes originated in people for whom those charateristics don't exist at all (unless diseased)? The racial inferiority complex driven delusions of black people truly has no bounds. You guys will believe literally ANYTHING that makes you fell better about yourselves.
3
Lebanese "blond" hair isn't the same as Northern European blond hair. We would just call it a lighter shade of brown.
3
I agree. Here's my earlier comment: I've now heard this explanation for the origin of blond blue eyed people, as a result of the mixing of dark haired blue eyed people and blond haired brown eyed people. Although I don't have the evidence (yet) to back it up, I think this is completely BOGUS. They have so few examples of each kind in order to extrapolate any kind of useful theory. I can't prove it yet, but I'm certain that blond hair and blue eyes are genetically linked with each other and have ALWAYS been combined. The combination is so ubiquitous that I find it impossible to believe they've ever been separate.
3
Strawberry "blond" hair is really just brown hair, btw. It's just a way for people to classify themselves (or daughters) in the blond category but in reality just have lighter brown hair. Sorry, but it's true.
2
guleet75 I truly doubt that. The standards for a Lebanese with "blond hair and blue eyes" is different for a Northern European. I've had people point out a non-European supposed "blond" haired person before and I have no idea who they're talking about and then find out the person to whom they're referring would be considered brown haired by our standards.
2
guleet75 Sorry to doubt you. Just based on all of my experience, I've seen too many people claim someon was "blond" or looked "Nordic" but when I see them, they never are. I'm not sure what you're background is but maybe you have to be Nordic in order to reconize it in others? From my experience, most, if not all, of those claiming someone looked Nordic or blond but weren't, were all non Nordic themselves (in fact, usually someone of color). I'll admit, I can't always discern the phenotypical racial nuances in other races that to them, are obvious.
2
guleet75 I'm actually Scandinavian American, of mostly Norwegian but also Swedish and Danish ancestry (also some English). But my family is from a Scandinavian community in the US. I also have a Nordic phenotype (including blond, blue, pale, tall, etc.). Of course not all Scandinavians are perfect Nordic specimens but we have our own standard for what we consider Nordic.
2
guleet75 It's true that there aren't very many purely Scandinavian Americans anymore. We're all usually mixed with either German or English.
2
Your claim of the descent of all European is quite flawed, if you're referring to western and north western Europeans. Eurasian (specifically Ancient Northern Eurasian), yes, but not "Turkic" or "Mongol." Europeans descend from western hunter gatherers, Yamnaya (which is where the ANE ancestry comes from, and "Early Neolithic Farmers." Btw, the "Eurasian" isn't the same as modern east asian. The Eurasian were Caucasian and in fact were phenotypically Northern European (often quite tall, even often with blond hair and blue eyes). Look up "Ancient Northern Eurasians." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_North_Eurasian In fact, they've found mummies that are purely descended from ANE that you can see for youself (Look up Tarim Basin Mummies). Btw, if you're from Northern Europe but have the phenotype you described, depending on the region, it's likely due to either having Sami ancestry (who, of course, aren't European but east asian) or, in the case of some British people, gaelic or pictish ancestry. Or, you personally might have more recent Turkic or Mongol ancestry from a recent immigrant ancestor.
1
I've now heard this explanation for the origin of blond blue eyed people, as a result of the mixing of dark haired blue eyed people and blond haired brown eyed people. Although I don't have the evidence (yet) to back it up, I think this is completely BOGUS. They have so few examples of each kind in order to extrapolate any kind of useful theory. I can't prove it yet, but I'm certain that blond hair and blue eyes are genetically linked with each other and have ALWAYS been combined. The combination is so ubiquitous that I find it impossible to believe they've ever been separate.
1
Even though what you're saying would be considered taboo and "racist" so say publicly, you're very correct (and everyone secretly know it, but won't admit it). When something happens once or twice, it could be a coincidence. But, when it happens hundreds of times and for decades (and 95% of the time), you start to see a pattern and intent. As a Nordic blond man, I have just come to expect my phenotype will always be the villian. And, my blond wife and daughters will always be the object of desire and are often targeted by aggressive men as a result.
1
@man58652 But Hollywood is one of the main reasons for the negative blond sterotype ("dumb blond," or morally loose blond women, etc.). Also, I can't figure out why anyone for whom blond hair isn't natural would prefer blond hair over their own phenotype. I would think it was natural for everyone to just prefer their own phenotype.
1
guleet75 Not all are, of course, but probably at a much higher percentage than anywhere else.
1
guleet75 I have no idea but could be.
1
guleet75 I'll even tell you one more fact that most Scandinavian Americans won't tell you. In probably no more than 2 or 3 generations from now, for the most part, we'll be extinct as a separate identity (we'll be too mixed to qualify, in my opinion). There's too few of us in the US to last (we're only about 1% of the population. It's inevitable).
1
Non Europeans (or even southern Euroepans) will call anything lighter than black as "blond." As a Scandinavian American I wouldn't call anything blond that wasn't Nordic blond.
1
I believe YOU'RE the one affected by racism. You clearly have a personal bias. Often, I've noticed that people who are either mixed race or are of a non-Nordic race but living among Nordic people, they tend to have a racial inferiority complex. You've tried to be accepted by the majority race and considered equal but because you don't feel accepted, you instead try and destroy their racial identity which you think will result in your being accepted (if everyone is of mixed race, then you're not the exception anymore). The fact is, though every race has had some admixture in it's past, the Scandinavians are largely Nordic which is a very unique racial identity. The first Europeans weren't black. This is based on a misinterpretation of a single find that the scientists themselves have alreayd debunked. And, Norwegians haven't always been "dark." This is absurd and goes contrary to all scientific evidence. If you're Filipino (short, dark skin, hair, and eyes, asian eyes, flat face, etc.) you wouldn't fit in very well so so wonder you want to try and destroy Nordic Identity.
1