RACIAL DISTINCTIONS BASED ON LANGUAGE BARRIERS

For instance, the spread of Indo-European language group concurs with the spread of antigen HLA-A1 characteristic of the Nordic anthropological type, which indicates that the original carriers of Indo-European language group were the Nordids. In the same fashion, it can be established that Baltids are the corresponding carriers of the Uralic language group. Mongols correspond to the carriers of Altaic language group. The Semites (Armenoids and Orientalids) are the carriers of Afro-Asian group; the Sinids are the carriers of Sinotibetan group in Central and East Asia, the Nilots are the carriers of Nilosaharic group in Africa, etc.

Based on different extent of mutual structural proximity of genetic markers which characterize different anthropological populations, we can categorize the populations according to the genetic proximity. For instance, the genetic analysis of Nordic antigen HLA-A1 reveals its quite small structural difference from the genetic markers characteristic of the Yellow race. The Nordic HLA-A1 is very close to HLA-A3 (Alpids and Baltids), A11 (Paleomongols), A30 (population with some elements of the Yellow race, which is dominant with Bantu, Bushmen and Hottentots in Africa, and also with Basques to some extent). The very same genetic method reveals that the Dinarians (HLA-A2) by origin are close to all the Mediterranians (A2, A19), ancient Cro-Magnons (A28), Black Nilots in Africa (A28) and the Sinids (A19) in North-East China and Korea. The Semites (including original Jews and Arabs) reveal a genetic proximity with the related populations from India (Dravidian people) and certain populations in the Far East (an element of Eskimos, Canadian Indians and Japanese). The Semites were mixed with almost all African populations, especially on the male side. Genetically close populations are also close in terms of their temptations of character. While different branches of the Semites are prone to sensuality, the populations close to the Dinarians are prone to vanity (pride, arrogance, haughtiness, desire for power), and the populations close to the Mongols demonstrate selfishness and exploitation.

Nowadays, out of ideological reasons, many follow the dogma that mental differences between races do not exist. However, an interesting observation of Dr Richard Lynn, the psychologist whose work "Race Differences In Intelligence: An Evolutionary Analysis" (2006) reads that "The position of environmentalists that over the course of some 100,000 years peoples separated by geographical barriers in different parts of the world evolved into ten different races with pronounced genetic differences in morphology, blood groups, and the incidence of genetic diseases, and yet have identical genotypes for intelligence, is so improbable that those who advance it must either be totally ignorant of the basic principles of evolutionary biology or else have a political agenda to deny the importance of race. Or both.".

Those who criticize the existence of differences between races often remark that there are no pure races. If we analyze two dog populations, one of them having fun in an American park, the other one in European, we will actually notice that the differences between certain dogs within each population are greater than it would be if we compared the averages of the dog populations themselves. But, to say that there is no difference between a Cocker Spaniel and a Pit Bull due to this fact is entirely frivolous. Hence we meet individuals in one and the same population who are not identical, but possess quite different psychophysical characteristics (which were recognized and christened by astrologers as different astrological signs). Their height, color of hair, eyes, type and amount of intelligence, temperament and psychological type differ in a relatively wide range. Thus, even though the representatives of different human races are more mixed nowadays than different dog races, it is no obstacle for recognition of their characteristics (which clearly reveals the anthropological-astrological experience), and the reason for this lies in a simple fact that the genes are inherited in entire blocks (parts, that is, pieces of chromosomes). Mosaic blocks which determine the essential elements of human motivation and physical appearance can hardly be broken into smaller pieces and lose their phenotypic identification, that is, it would take thousands of years of different human races living together for that to happen. As long as we keep identifying individual physical differences in people, we will also identify the mental differences between them.

Many astrologers are able to presume a Zodiac sign or ascendant of an individual based on their physical appearance, which is actually the recognition of the anthropological origin of the individual. In fact, astrologers noticed that there is a connection between appearance and psychological type, which they, out of superstition, do not link to one’s anthropological origin, but to the astrological factor. For example, astrologers claim that early hair loss (baldness) is typical of Leo, Aries and Sagittarius, which have intense male attributes (astrologers also claim that these are fiery signs, energetic and choleric). Is there any correlation between man’s masculinity and early hair loss known to science? It was established that a high level of male sex hormone testosterone causes early hair loss. Therefore, the cause of significant male psychological attributes of the aforementioned signs and their early hair loss is the same, which is the excessiveness of the male hormone testosterone. In addition, astrologers claim that people born under the sign of Leo have lion-like appearance, strong bones and are quite tall; these are actually attributes that have occurred due to increased secretion of growth hormones (a result of anterior pituitary): “Their height can reach over 6’5’’ (2 meters). This happens because the pituitary gland extensively secretes the growth hormone at the time when the growth of the bones is not yet completed. Nevertheless, if the pituitary gland continues the production of the hormone when the bone growth is entirely completed, we have people with long legs and arms (acromegaly), or we can see that this growth has led to a particular development of facial bones. Then we have the people with lion-like appearance” (Davor Rogić, On sexes, births and newborns, pg 31). Astrologers therefore have the experience that could greatly contribute to anthropology, because they have observed and recorded a distinct correlation between man's mental and physical attributes and therefore collected voluminous evidence that the origin of different psychological types is not in the astrological factor, but inheritance.

Astrologers automatically attempt to correlate all the existing physical characteristics (for example, eye color, various hereditary illnesses…) with certain mental characteristics which, according to them, have a common astrological cause. However, only certain physical attributes are correlated with some mental attributes – namely, those which originate from the same gene (mostly related to hormonal function) or from different genes, but which are inherited in a common piece of chromosome and so remain together despite the genetic mix with the people of different origin. This proves that behind the types there is no astrological factor, but logic and principles of genetic inheritance.

Why is it then that they rather research positions of the stars in the sky than their own ancestors and anthropology? If they aim at human psychology, why do not they deal with it instead of astrology?

The answer to this question is at the same time the answer to the question of why humanity has a need for superstition. It is because the superstitious way of thinking liberates one from their responsibility. If my destiny depends on the position of celestial bodies, then there is nothing I can do about it, because I cannot change their position. I can only get informed about my destiny, not change it, for what can I do against "greater force"?! Even if I did think I have free will, believing in the astrological factor would be my subconscious temptation to avoid confrontation with the responsibility for my own actions, for I would deal with stars instead of my spirit. Nonetheless, if I were aware that the source of the problem lied in me and in my nature, I would naturally be focused on myself instead of the stars. Confronted with my own sinfulness, I would bear the responsibility to work on myself and overcome the roots of the sinful tendencies of my nature.

However, some astrologers might attempt to prove that the astrological factor affects our inheritance and makes us sinful, some of us in one way, some in the other. But, is the moment of our birth, as astrologers claim our destiny depends on it, what determines our inheritance? No, because hereditary traits are determined nine months prior to that, at the moment of conception, not the moment of birth. Besides, a person cannot inherit more than their parents have at their disposal and can offer them. Parents offer us four sets of genes at the moment of conception. We can inherit one out of two genes from each parent for each trait. Regardless of the Zodiac sign under which we are born, we cannot have anything more than what our parents give to us. If none of the parents has a dark hair gene, but two light colored hair genes, we cannot have dark hair, no matter what sign or ascendant we are born under.

Let us look at how this principle works with different dog breeds. We know there are different dog breeds, which differ in their character and appearance. A specific mark on the fur of a dog race certainly is not a source of an attribute of the breed, but is inherited along with its character attributes, so we know by this mark that the dog has a certain character and, by experience with the dogs with the same mark, we form what some would call a stereotype about the dog race. For instance, we form stereotypes that Cocker Spaniels are good to children, and that a Pit Bull is a very difficult and aggressive dog. The same applies to humans; their shortness or tallness, or some other physical attribute, cannot shape their mental attributes, but all those attributes can only be inherited together. As we have already pointed out - genes are inherited together in entire blocks, “pieces" of chromosomes, so there is a frequent correlation between certain mental and physical attributes in their inheritance and demonstration. What is the role of the astrological factor in all this?

There is no astrological factor that will cause one dog breed give birth to another one. Each dog breed has unique character and physical attributes, which are dependant on inheritance, not on the position of celestial bodies at the moment of birth. We can say the same about humans; children look more like their parents than their Zodiac sign. All the Mongolian children have Mongolian attributes, regardless of the time of birth. All the Black people are dark-skinned, without regard to their time of birth. As we can see - there is no room for any astrological factor. It does not work from the outside as some external factor, nor from the inside does it affect the inheritance itself, for the inheritance depends on the ancestors. The logic behind this deliberation imposes the following conclusion: if the basic psychological types of astrological signs have no source in the position of celestial bodies, but in inheritance, then we will recognize a correlation between the basic anthropological types and basic psychological types of Zodiac signs. We will therefore attempt to recognize which astrological sign corresponds to which anthropological type.