bolueeleh wrote: ↑Sun May 27, 2018 8:41 am didnt all modern human beings evolved from homo sapiens which came from africa while another independent species neanderthal from northern hemisphere extinct? correct me if i am wrong

It's a theory, widely believed at the moment given what has been found, there's also a multi-regional model where Homo sapiens could of came about in different places around the same time. More than likely any earlier human activity is probably under the ocean given the lower sea levels.

Seasquatch wrote: ↑Sun May 27, 2018 9:15 am

bolueeleh wrote: ↑Sun May 27, 2018 8:41 am didnt all modern human beings evolved from homo sapiens which came from africa while another independent species neanderthal from northern hemisphere extinct? correct me if i am wrong

It's a theory, widely believed at the moment given what has been found, there's also a multi-regional model where Homo sapiens could of came about in different places around the same time. More than likely any earlier human activity is probably under the ocean given the lower sea levels.

Yes, it's a theory, not an hypothesis. And given the overwhelming amount of evidence garnered so far, it can be taken as fact.

https://www.diffen.com/difference/Hypothesis_vs_Theory

I like skinny women! They make my dick look bigger

John Bingham wrote: ↑Sun May 27, 2018 1:15 pm Hinduism refers to religion, not race.

To be more exact it can refer to religion + culture. I think it's pretty clear in pre-angkor "khmer" empires, you had
a local population that was relatively "primitive" so a lot of their culture was transferred to them by the Hindus, like the khmer script, for example.
Obviously when you're dealing with a population thousands of miles from the source of a culture it does not get entirely transmitted, but a local form of
it gets adopted to some things. That's why they refer to it as "Hinduized" and not "Hindu" kingdoms. No need to look further than the khmer script to
see where Khmers come from.

King Fan Che Man during the 2nd century enlarged Funan about 10 to 12 times of the previous size of 500 li. Funan was a tributary state to China from about 300 AD to 600 AD. Funan is the Chinese pronunciation of the ancient Khmer word pnom, meaning mountain. The exact nature of the ethnology of Funan is uncertain but it was probably an Indianized state of Khmer people that preceded the similar state at Angkor Wat. Funan had a Malay upper class, but most of the population was Negrito.

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military ... -funan.htm

The earliest inhabitants of Vietnam are believed to have been Negritos.

http://factsanddetails.com/southeast-as ... -3330.html

many genetic studies easily found support this.

frank lee bent wrote: ↑Sun May 27, 2018 11:18 pm

King Fan Che Man during the 2nd century enlarged Funan about 10 to 12 times of the previous size of 500 li. Funan was a tributary state to China from about 300 AD to 600 AD. Funan is the Chinese pronunciation of the ancient Khmer word pnom, meaning mountain. The exact nature of the ethnology of Funan is uncertain but it was probably an Indianized state of Khmer people that preceded the similar state at Angkor Wat. Funan had a Malay upper class, but most of the population was Negrito.

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military ... -funan.htm

The earliest inhabitants of Vietnam are believed to have been Negritos.

http://factsanddetails.com/southeast-as ... -3330.html

many genetic studies easily found support this.

yeah Khmer body and features support it in my eyes too

the out of africa proposal has come under serious question lately with the advent of denisovan and neanderthal marker genes in modern populations.
https://www.edge.org/conversation/chris ... -of-africa

undoubtedly so called "negritos" in the pacific and indian ocean basins are of very ancient origin, though quite diverse genetically.

Nonsense, where's the evidence the Funan population was mostly "negrito"? And even if it was and there's evidence for it, it doesn't mean modern khmers come from that negrito line and not the chinese or indian.
What we do know is that both Hindu and Chinese had major influence, and we really do not know the amount of genetic material that came from 1) the ancient population 2) the hindus 3) the chinese.
If you go to Burma, you can clearly see they have more "indian" in them, and if you go to Vietnam they're more similar to the Chinese then Khmer are. So it makes sense logically that the khmers are something in between
the more Chinese vietnamese and the more Indian Burmese (I didn't mention Thais because they're very mixed). As for Jamie_lambo's photos, photography did not happen until the late 19th century, and no the khmers were not negritos at that time, they look just like the khmers today. Of course
you can select some photos that have haircuts that look like "negritos" but I'm sure khmers today could do that haircut too.