So-called "australoids"?

Question

Im curious to know WHY the peoples of melanesia and australia are considered to be a different race than the ******* peoples of africa. Is is REALLY true that melanesians are genetically closer to caucasians than black africans? Not only do papuans have identical appearance to black africans, but their culture and tribal are are Also strikingly similar. Perhaps they arrived there by boat from across the indian ocean rather than from a landbridge to SE Asia.

Answer 1

They have different genes because they are not closely related. They just look similar because they have similar environments.

Answer 2

Native Australians appear to have been among the 1st to migrate out of Africa some 60,000 yrs ago.  Genetically they are derived from mitochondrial (female) haplogroups M & N and Y (male) haplogroups C & F.  M & N are common in the mideast & N produced most European haplogroups. While M eventually produced most Asians & North Americans.

Some "suspect," due to the heavy brow ridges & some fossile evidence, a mixture of homo erectus genes, but it is doubtful that will ever be proven.

Africans are predominately Haplogroup L0 thru L7 where haplogroup N is spread accross the Mid East to south east asia.

Added:

I forgot to mention that Y haplogroup F is the oldest haplogroup found outside of Africa (not in Africa) & appears to have arisen 60 to 80,000 yrs ago. It is found in India & along the southern coasts of Asia... indicating a migration path.  Y haplogroup C seems to have appeared 50 to 70,000 yrs ago & is the founding haplogroup for native Americans, also indicating a migration path through Asia.

Answer 3

It's likely because they have been seperated for years, and don't bear many cultural, linguistic, or other similarites. The similar apperiance is likely because those features help them in their native environment. The environment is somewhat similar to Africa, so they wouldn't change very much.

Answer 4

They look similar because they have adapted  to similar climate.

Answer 5

Really not so similar. For example, Australian aboriginals have heavy brow ridges (piece of bone that is just above eyebrows. Very unlike Africans, who have small ones. Hair is very different. Only skin color is similar. I've not heard about them being more similar to Europeans than Africans. Africans have the greatest amount of genetic diversity of any geographic region in the world. All of us are subsets of Africans. Aboriginal culture really not similar to those in Africa, except superficially. Art very different.

Answer 6

Genetically they are closest to South East Asians, not modern Africans. They are separated from modern Africans probably by about 70k years, which is about the oldest racial split we know of. They came from Africa to Australia via the 'Beach Buggy' route, following the coast of India and Southern Asia, crossing over at New Guinea into North Australia. Mitochondrial DNA tracks them very neatly. They just haven't changed much in that time. The environment was pretty similar, so there was no need. Although, there is a common mutation for blond hair among Aborigines that's not from Europeans.

Interestingly they seem to have made it into the Americas before anyone else, as several set of Australoid looking bones have been found In South America, and Baja California.

The Aborigines probably weren't the first humans in Australia either. Look up 'the Bradshaw paintings' and 'Mungo man'. Mungo man is not derived from our Mitochondrial Eve, so had had to be related to an earlier human population wave.

Confused? You should be.

Answer 7

You know they kind of look different.  Look at both groups closely.  Or rather, their pictures