by Oscar Falconi


It shouldn't make a particle of difference whether the following dissertation was written by one of the world's supergeniuses or whether it was written by Mickey Mouse. Unfortunately, most of today's readers judge their sources and form their opinions according to the author's credentials rather than by critically studying and understanding (or faulting) his effort. This may be due to skepticism, lack of time, mental laziness, or just the reader's lack of confidence in his own judgement. For whatever reasons, a short description of my nature and nurture seems called for:

Fortunately, my parents disagreed about everything. My father smoked Camels, my mother, Chesterfields. My father wanted the windows open at night, my mother, closed. My father was always a Republican, my mother, a Democrat. My father wanted to stay in Manhattan, near his work, my mother wanted to move to Queens. When I asked about God, they disagreed about what to tell me. And so on. It wasn't a happy environment, but it did get me through my very impressionable years with few if any firm beliefs. In fact, no matter who said what, I realized there was probably another opinion close by. I suppose all this confusion was the reason I gravitated to Physics where most questions are, after some thought, answered with certainty and accuracy. There may be some questions that involve a certain amount of confusion, but, with a bit of statistics, we can even measure this confusion. This was all so beautiful and exciting to me that I ended up with a degree in Physics (M.I.T.).

Being a New Yorker in the 30s and 40s was an ethnic experience that I've only lately appreciated. Even though the list of my Public School, High School, and college classmates reads like a World War II platoon, I didn't know a German name from an Italian name from a Polish name. Names were just names and people were just people. The fact that Jews took a highly disproportionate number of honors at all my schools was only a recent realization for me. It wasn't until I spent over two years travelling in over 50 countries, staying in over 200 Youth Hostels in Europe, Asia, and Africa, in my 20s and early 30s, that I began to understand that peoples are indeed different - quite different - in the way they look, act, and think. In fact, it wasn't until I was 40 years old that it suddenly dawned on me why Jackie Heyman, my great Jewish pal in New York in the days of Lou Gehrig, Mel Ott, and Joe Dimaggio, always preferred Hank Greenberg - OF THE DETROIT TIGERS!!

Well, yes, my favorite was Joltin' Joe, but I really didn't realize he and I were of the same extraction until much, much later.

So, just as Physics was exciting for me in the 40s and 50s, Genetics and "Ethnics" were exciting for me in the 60s and later. As one gets older, and reads and observes and becomes knowledgeable in a particular area, certain truths become evident that are often not in agreement with what the uninformed majority believe. This is certainly the case in the Ethnic world and is one reason for my writing this booklet.

Since the time between the wars, and especially since WWII, there has been an attempt to equalize all races and cultures. In the 18th & 19th Centuries, however, British and American articles quite matter-of-factly discussed racial or cultural differences in what I feel was an honest attempt to arrive at truth. As late as Dec. 1918, in their "Races of Europe" issue, The National Geographic described the Laplanders as "dwarfed both in body and mind...even the children have faces which are frequently drawn and ugly...their whole frame often undeveloped and misshapen. The Lapps are pathetic figures to foreigners." Thus were the Laplanders denigrated as Europe's most undesirable race. An isolated comment? Not at all. Two years earlier, the Dec. 1916 National Geographic pulled no punches regarding the Australian Aborigine: "There is general agreement that the "blackfellow" is on the lowest rung and perhaps the very bottom of the ladder of civilization. These savages rank lowest in intelligence of all human beings. Mentally he is a weak child ... abstract ideas are apparently beyond his reach. His cranial capacity is 10% less than the African Negro." (The Australian Aborigine, a remnant of Paleolithic Man, is considered a Caucasian.)

Could you imagine such statements, which are probably more true than not, being made today? Highly unlikely - due to their political "incorrectness". However, many important decisions are being made these days that require FACTS. These decisions concern immigration, education, welfare, crime, "Head Start", equal opportunity, affirmative action, housing, bussing, gene manipulation, cloning, abortion, amniotic fluid testing, and many more, and MUST have the ethnic FACTS to determine the viability, priority, or even the advisability, of the various programs. We're playing "Make Believe" in America today, a game we can't win in the competitive world of tomorrow.

Oscar Falconi, Saratoga, California November 8th 1987
This booklet is dedicated to my father,
Oscar Valente Falconi
born in Italy, this day, 100 years ago.


Our hereditary characteristics are all the product of the genes of our ancestors, the result of billions of years of fortuitous chemical reactions, mutations, selection, survival by brain and brawn, and just plain luck. America's gene pool is just the sum total of all the genes of all of America's future parents. (Once you've conceived your last child, you're no longer part of the gene pool.) This pool is changing everywhere, every day. For instance, it changes according to locality, resulting, in time, in considerable regional variations. The gene pools of, for instance, South Carolina, Vermont, California, and Hawaii are all completely different from one another (see Appendix A).

The wide variations, from city to state to country, in the proportions of White, Black, Asian, Indian, and Hispanic blood, their changes from year to year, and their genetic consequences, are not easy to display and visualize. Comparing and understanding the complicated meanderings of the ethnic content of different groups, or subgroups, with time, and extracting useful information from long, impersonal, compilations of raw data, is difficult at best. Cold tabulations of numbers are not conducive to conceiving, developing, and elucidating the new ideas, discoveries, and understandings that can usually be inferred from good data.

Because of special properties (to be described below) of the equilateral triangle and the regular tetrahedron (a pyramid composed of 4 equilateral triangles), we are able, with great clarity, to display very complicated relationships:

* between 3 variables with the 2-dimensional triangle, and
* between 4 variables with the 3-dimensional pyramid.

Let's begin with the equilateral triangle. From ANY point on the plane of the triangle, it's an interesting and useful fact that the sum of the 3 perpendiculars from that point to the 3 sides ALWAYS equals the altitude of the triangle. (The altitude is defined as the shortest distance from any vertex to the opposite side). Let's define the altitude equal to 1 (each side would then = 1.1547), and let's label the 3 vertices: White, Black, and Asian. Any point on the triangle denotes a particular mixture of these 3 groups in direct proportion to the length of their 3 perpendiculars. Each vertex represents each of the three 100% pure ethnic groups. Any point on the opposite side of, say, the Asian vertex, would have no Asian blood in its group since it lies on the "Asian = 0" line connecting the Black and White vertices.

The center of gravity of the triangle (that point 1/3 the way up from every side) would represent the gene pool for a city whose composition is 1/3 White, 1/3 Black, and 1/3 Asian. Amalgamating Washington D.C. with Honolulu would come very close to this 1/3, 1/3, 1/3 mix (which isn't possible for an individual since one person's heredity is the sum of halves, quarters, eighths, sixteenths, etc., no combination of which can ever add to 1/3).

The reason we can represent 3 variables in two dimensions is that the sum of all 3 is constant. The sum of all 3 perpendiculars always = 1, just as the sum of all 3 ethnic groups always equals 1 person or 1 group . Incidentally, if we drew 3 lines from any point to the 3 vertices of the triangle, we would divide up the equilateral triangle into 3 smaller triangles of various shapes and areas. It's easy to show that the areas of these smaller triangles are in the same proportion as the size of the ethnic groups they represent.

In illustrating the use of the Ethnic Triangle, let's take the case of the United States: The American situation, though, is complicated by the fact that our large Hispanic population has a considerable Indian component (more than the average Hispanic who did not emigrate to the U.S.). The estimated Indian population of the United States and Canada in 1492 was only about one million, whereas there were about 4.5 million Indians in Mexico alone. The student can include the Hispanic either by breaking down his heredity into White and Indian, or by completely substituting the Hispanic for the Indian and relabeling the vertex. Since the Indians are so vastly outnumbered by the Hispanics, this could be a reasonable approach. Very little error would be introduced whether or not American Indians were included with the Hispanics. We have chosen NOT to substitute, but to combine the Indian and Hispanic populations together. The reasons were:

1. The effect of the Indian on our U.S. Ethnic Composition curve pretty much dies out long before any Hispanic effect is encountered. Any data or events are therefore easily separated: Anything before, say, 1920, is American Indian related. After 1920, Hispanic.

2. Most of the Indian blood in the U.S. today is due to the Hispanic's Indian heritage. There are about 125 Whites in the U.S. for every Indian, but only about 10 Whites for every known Hispanic (and about 7 Whites for every Black). These numbers are decreasing rapidly because of the increased fertility of these groups (about double the White rate of population increase) plus the tidal wave (hundreds of thousands per year!) of illegal Hispanics emigrating permanently across the Mexican border. In any event, the student must choose and best manipulate his 3 variables according to the problem of the moment. We will label one vertex "Indian/Hispanic".

Referring to Figure 4, the use of the Ethnic Triangle is almost self- explanatory. Data for the U.S. ethnic composition from 1630 to the year 2100 was taken from several U.S. Census Bureau tables covering past censuses and projections for the future. This mass of data is displayed so that one can easily see where America's gene pool is heading - namely toward greater Hispanic and Black ratios. The increasing distance between the 10-year intervals since World War II indicates a rate of change of ethnic composition presently taking place in the U.S. that surpasses the rate of change that took place from 1630 to 1700. This chart makes it quite clear that by the year 2100 the U.S. will be as much Hispanic and Black as it was White by the year 1800. Is this good or bad for our country?

The answer to that question depends on which particular genetic characteristic is to be considered. The controversial question of I.Q. will be discussed in more detail, below, in conjunction with the Ethnic Pyramid, but considering it now in 2 dimensions will help us later in 3 dimensions. If we assume different

average I.Q.'s for the different ethnic groups, we can plot lines of equal I.Q. on our Ethnic Triangle, superimposed over our 1630 -2100 Ethnic Composition curve, as shown in Figure 5. There are studies that show our assumption of I.Q.'s of 100 for American Whites, and 90 for the Hispanic-American and the American Black are quite realistic, and so these values are plotted as shown. Clearly, the average I.Q. in America has decreased from about 99 during World War II, to about 98 today, and will decrease another point by the year 2000 or 2010. To lose just two I.Q. points, and take a full 60 or 70 years to do it, may not strike one as very important, however the ramifications of such a loss can be considerable.

Assuming complete amalgamation (total assimilation) of all ethnic groups (which may take several hundred years, but which WILL happen), it can be shown that a "mere" 2 point drop of a population's average I.Q. will cut the percentage of geniuses (anyone having an I.Q. over 150) to less than half! And by the time our actual amalgamation is almost complete, our American I.Q. will be about 92, meaning that the percentage of geniuses will decrease to less than 1/30th the WWII percentage. And the percentage of supergeniuses (anyone over 180) will decrease to less than 1/500th! This is clearly disadvantageous to America and its people and to our ability to compete with other countries who ARE concerned about their gene pool (such as Germany and Japan).

A few words must be said at this point. We have shown above how uncontrolled immigration of Hispanics, and the increased fertility of the Hispanics, Blacks, and Indians will, with the help of gradual intermarriage and the ultimate amalgamation of all ethnic groups, lower America's average I.Q. in several hundred years to about 92. What can we do? The first obvious answer is that we must carefully select our immigrants for intelligence, health, and ability to contribute. This is obvious and no more need be said. Now what shall we do with the population we're already stuck with? We've all heard about the changes in our tax and welfare laws that would help eugenically manipulate our gene pool in a positive manner. Of course these should be seriously and immediately considered. Enough said about that, too. But what about intermarriage? Well, it might appear obvious that we should try to delay our assimilation and ultimate amalgamation for as long as possible, however this is not the case! If we did that, America, in the year 2400, would end up with an average I.Q. close to 90 due to very low White fertility. However, looking again at Fig. 4, it's quite clear, if we had instant amalgamation, TODAY, that America's average I.Q. would remain at 98 since, once amalgamated, all fertility rates are equal. Any national I.Q. changes will then result only from the free choices made by individuals as encouraged or discouraged by laws, customs, media propaganda, type of immigration, and so forth. It's therefore very important for America's future that intermarriage be encouraged, and that the rate of assimilation be increased immediately so that we are amalgamated as soon as possible. This last statement will rub the racist the wrong way, but, if he loves his race, he'll see the validity of our reasoning. His proposed solutions (isolation, emigration) are not practical.

Just a few more words, please. It seems that over the past millions and billions of years, in the struggle for existence, decreased ability was offset by increased fertility. Whether by design or by chance, the human species inherited and exhibits this law of Nature to this day. The last few paragraphs have shown the dilemma facing America today as a result of this ruinous ability/fertility problem that Nature has thrust upon us. This dilemma must eventually be examined by each nation to determine whether it's losing or gaining persons of greater or lesser ability. They must then act accordingly, using positive eugenic measures, some of which we've mentioned. If a nation can direct its own gene pool well enough to offset any lack of control at its borders, it should then be able to permanently maintain its place in the pecking order of the world's nations. It goes without saying that the first nations to fully accept and apply the recent revolutionary advances of the (mostly American) Biologists and Geneticists will be the first nations to succeed technically, commercially, and, if they're so inclined, militarily.

Now let's move on to the 3rd dimension. But first, we must explain how to view the stereo-pair illustrations that will be used. The idea is to get your right eye to look at the right illustration, and your left eye to look at the left one. Then, after some practice, your eyes and brain will combine the two and a 3-dimensional illustration will "lock-in". First, relax your eyes so they're looking far away. Then place the stereo-pair right up to your eyes so that your nose touches the paper just below the center of the pair. You will see a very blurry image. Now, as you gradually move the stereo pair away from your eyes, you'll see 3 images. Look at and begin to focus on the middle image. It may be necessary to rotate the paper slightly so the two images (that you're trying to see as one) will be properly aligned vertically. When the stereo pair is at about normal reading distance, you should be able, with some practice, to superimpose the 2 middle images, and get your brain to suddenly lock-in the 3-D image. If you use glasses, avoid bifocals, at least while learning, since they can produce extraneous images. If you have trouble, find the "Width" control on you monitor and decrease the horizontal size of the raster on your screen. When your two images finally "pop in", the satisfaction and resulting information, clearly presented, as only 3D can do, will be well worth the time and effort.

The regular tetrahedron, our "Ethnic Pyramid", has some very interesting and useful properties, as did our Ethnic Triangle. For instance: from ANY point within the volume of the pyramid, the sum of the FOUR perpendiculars (to the 4 surfaces) ALWAYS equals the altitude of the pyramid (the shortest distance from any vertex to the opposite surface). We again define the altitude equal to 1 (each of all six edges now = 1.2247). Since all 4 perpendiculars must add up to 1 person (or 1 city or 1 state or . . ), we can represent 4 ethnic groups in 3 dimensions. As before, each of the 4 vertices represents a 100% pure ethnic group. Any point on the opposite surface is of

course 0% of that group. The center of gravity of the pyramid (that point ¼ the way up from all 4 surfaces) represents, for instance, a person with a grandparent from each of the 4 different ethnic groups.

Also, if we draw 4 lines from any point to the 4 vertices, the regular tetrahedron will be divided up into 4 smaller tetrahedrons of various shapes, the volumes of which are in the same proportion as the ethnic groups they represent. Either the volumes or the lengths of the perpendiculars of the 4 small tetrahedrons can represent the 4 different ethnic percentages, however the lengths of the perpendiculars are much easier to display and visualize.

To illustrate the construction and use of the Ethnic Pyramid, let's begin with the data used to derive the U.S. Ethnic Composition from 1630 to 2100, of Figure 4. The U.S. population can be broken down into White, Black, Asian, and Indian/Hispanic. We'll be starting with a triangle, but since we're introducing another variable, the Asian, we'll have to slightly redraw Figure 4. But we're getting ahead of ourselves.

Whenever we construct an Ethnic Pyramid, we'll be choosing one of its triangular surfaces, plotting time points on this surface, and placing pins of various lengths into each of the points. These pins will stick up within the pyramid to indicate that fraction of the fourth ethnic group at each point of time. The best surface for plotting the data is the one representing 0% of that ethnic group having the fewest persons within the U.S. (This surface requires the shortest pins.) If Asians comprise 3% of the U.S. population, and if the altitude of the pyramid is 3 inches, then the pin should stick up .09 inches above the Asian = 0% surface. In order to determine where in this surface to stick the pin, merely distribute the Asian percentage equally to the White, Black, & Indian/Hispanic percentages. For instance, if the W, B, I/H & Asian percentages are 79%, 9%, 9%, and 3%, then we merely add 1% to the W, B, and I/H figures to arrive at 80%, 10%, and 10%. This will determine a discrete point on the calibrated Asian = 0% triangle in which to perpendicularly place the pin. A "calibrated" triangle lets you to read your position, from 0% to 100%, for all 3 groups, and to go right to the point having the 80%, 10%, 10% values you've just determined. If the surface is not calibrated, and a ruler is necessary to find the pin position, remember that you're measuring on a triangle whose altitude is 1.06066 times greater than the pyramid's altitude. The base and vertex are of course still 0% and 100% respectively. The point representing the U.S. (minus Asians) for a year of interest is then marked, and a pin of proper length is placed into the marked point so that the pin's head will be at its proper position within the pyramid. When we repeat this process using American population figures for every decade from 1630 to the year 2000, a quite interesting 3- dimensional curve (Figure 9) similar to Figure 4 will wend and twist around here and there, reflecting various immigrations (or importations) of the different ethnic groups. Since the U.S. Asian population is so small, the curve never rises much more than a few millimeters from the plane of the paper until the late 20th Century. The curve for each individual state of the U.S. would of course be a completely different (and often fascinating!) story.

In working with the Black group (defined in America as anyone having ANY Black blood), there are complications. First, there is a considerable White component in the American Black. Secondly, Black "purity" varies geographically. For instance, California Blacks have lighter skin than Georgia Blacks and test out higher in I.Q. Again, the student must handle such small annoyances in a way that will least impact the validity of his research and his conclusions.

The Ethnic Pyramid is certainly not limited to the White, Black, Hispanic, Indian, and Asian groups. Consider Australia: Their four ethnic groups might be: Caucasian, Aborigine, Asian, and East Indian. They might also divide the Caucasian Race into Northern European and Southern European out of interest/concern about the large influx of Italian and Greek immigrants in recent decades (just as Italy and Greece would be interested/ concerned about a large influx of Australians). It would then be necessary to choose the 4 groups of interest, such as: Northern European, Southern European, Aborigine, and Asian. The East Indians might be included with the Southern Europeans since both groups are considered Caucasian, but this would depend on the particular population problem being investigated. Israel, for instance, might care to illustrate how their various sub- populations of Arabs and Jews from various origins are changing with time, and to better determine the direction their gene pool is heading, and even to see at a glance what steps are required to redirect the pool to some perceived improved state.

In the use of the pyramid for comparing many variables, it's important to note that a linear relationship between these variables is required. It turns out that many characteristics do, in fact, act in a linear manner. In the mixing of two different ethnic groups, there are so many different genes involved (even in a single trait such as skin color or intelligence), with so much overlap or similarity in expression, that the resulting mixed group assumes features and characteristics that are just mid-way between the two. We can substitute almost any physiological measurement at the vertices and estimate the result in the amalgamated group. For instance we can again assign intelligence quotients to the ethnic

groups. Let's take 100, 90, 110, and 90 as the White, Black, Asian, and the Indian/Hispanic I.Q.'s. Plotting these values onto the 4 surfaces, we find flat and parallel planes-of-equal-quotients develop which pass through the body of the pyramid. Comparing these planes with, say, the American curve discussed above, will result in the valuable information about the improvement or deterioration of our American gene pool insofar as intelligence is concerned. This graphic presentation is a good illustration of the use of the Ethnic Pyramid and how a variety of information can be accurately combined so that complicated relationships can be easily visualized and better understood.

If, however, we're dealing with, for instance, a recessive gene which by itself controls a single trait, we can expect a non-linear expression for that trait. We must be more careful and operate at the gene pool level, which acts in a linear manner, rather than with the resulting manifestation, which is non-linear. For instance, the fraction of blue- eyed persons in any ethnic group equals the SQUARE of the fraction of blue-eyed genes in the random pool. Thus, if half the eye color genes in the pool are recessive blue, then ¼ of the population have blue eyes. Our pyramid works well averaging gene pool fractions which mix linearly as the ethnic group proportions, however, the trait's fraction in the resulting amalgamated group must be calculated from the linear results as found using the Ethnic Triangle or Pyramid as we have just done. Incidentally, despite the fact that brown eyes are dominant and blue eyes are recessive, it can be shown that, with random mating, this ¾ to ¼, brown to blue ratio will, over the generations, remain constant (except for statistical variations, usually noticed only in tiny populations).


Whenever we speak of the standard deviation (SD) of a human IQ distribution, we always take it to be about 15. But surely, with IQs varying so much from race to race, society to society, and from group to group, the SDs will also vary. Nature exhibits and makes good use of variability. We'd never expect man's SD to be just 1% of our average IQ since this would require 2/3 of humans to have IQs between 99 and 101 - leaving little room for selection and improvement. Similarly, if the SD was a full 50% of the average IQ, 1/6 of all humans would have an IQ less than 50 and would never survive when 1/6 have IQs over 150! Clearly, the lower IQ folks would be so highly selected against in the hunt for food, shelter, and mates, that the population's SD couldn't possibly remain at 50% for long. The inferior fraction might migrate away, be selected against, or killed! Or the superior fraction could break away to form another group or species. A law of nature may exist that would require a group to diverge into 2 groups when large physical or mental disparities occur. We in fact can witness, today, peoples' tendency to separate into groups of their own kind: rich neighborhoods, hippie communes, Chinatowns, little Italys, ghettos, rural communities, or college towns - resulting in cities as diverse as Beverly Hills and Watts.

So it may well be, in a group's fight to survive, be it fish, insect, or human, there exists this universal, trans-species rule that the SD is, say, about an eighth of the group's IQ. This concept may also be valid for the variation of the many subgroups of talents that constitute the overall intelligence of a species. For instance, one wouldn't expect variations of much more than +/- a factor of 2 for size, strength, visual acuity, sense of direction, smell, reflexes, and so on.

Mankind is composed of many races, nationalities, and subgroups within nationalities (ie. Northern and Southern Italy). But by observation of the various groups throughout the world, it's clear the IQs of the groups are themselves very different, with full-blooded Australian Aborigines at about 70, and Russian Jews at about 115. These are the extremes, so let's assume:

(1) - The average IQ of all the world's humans is 100.
(2) - The SD of IQs within each homogeneous subgroup is 12.
(3) - The SD of the average IQs of all the separate subgroups is 9.

Assumptions 2 and 3 agree with the oft-quoted (and probably accurate) statement that the variation BETWEEN groups (SD=9) is less than the variation WITHIN a group (SD=12).

But America's IQ SD is most certainly artificially high. We tolerate highly diverse groups and in fact encourage them to survive by legislating all sorts of perks such as welfare, and low-cost housing and medical care for the unfit, lazy, and mentally deficient - all those groups that couldn't make it in a truly competitive society. In addition, the United States has been, and continues to be, peopled by hundreds of races, nationalities, religions, plus political, economic, and illegal immigrants from all corners of the world. If we wish to determine the SD of the American IQ, it'll be necessary to combine the 2 SDs above (12 & 9) so as to reflect our heterogeneity. The mathematics results in the simple fact that the combined SD is merely the square root of the sum of the squares of the two SDs above. The American SD is then 15.

A country's present and future IQ depends on its genetic history, its immigration, the proliferation rate of its different groups, taxation philosophy, abortion and welfare laws, etc. America's IQ is presently just under 98 and will be about 96 in the year 2030. Japan's average IQ is about 107 and, being a very homogeneous group, its SD is about 12.5 (despite the high average IQ).

Comparing U.S. and Japanese IQs and SDs results in some very informative conclusions. If U.S. IQ & SD are 98 & 15, and Japan's are 107 & 12.5, we can construct the following table:

        75     90    98   100   107   120    150       180       

USA: .938 .706 .50 .45 .28 .07 .00027 .0000000220 JAP: .995 .915 .77 .72 .50 .15 .00027 .0000000025
Our first observation is that only about 8% of Japan's people have IQs between 75 and 90, compared to America's 23%. Since production line workers come from lower IQ groups, it should be clear that a major reason for America's poor reputation in workmanship and quality is that we must choose from a pool of workers having lower IQs.

About 15% of the Japanese have engineering capability (IQs above 120) compared with just 7% for the States. The only area of encouragement is that America's larger SD results in a few more supergeniuses (IQs above 180) for us. With our ¼ billion population, we should have 5 or 6 supergeniuses whereas Japan would be very lucky to have one. Does this fact explain why America, with many more persons above 150 IQ, does the original thinking, while Japan, with its superior pool of engineers and workers, does the copying, improving, and superior manufacturing?

At present, there are many more Americans than Japanese with IQs above 150. But this superiority is only temporary. By the year 2030, when America's IQ drops to 96, the situation will have completely reversed, with many more Japanese than Americans having IQs over 150.

In conclusion, Ethnic Triangles and Pyramids are very useful for relating, organizing, and displaying large amounts of data. However, when dealing with more subjective questions, such as the interpretation of ethnic and sociological data, it's important that good techniques, open minds, and common sense prevail. Facts, and the understanding of facts, are the basis of knowledge. The withholding of facts constitutes a coverup that does no one any good . . and can do considerable harm by forcing our society down a road paved with the fabrications of special interests or of misguided do-gooders. In the next century, America will be hard pressed by tough competition from Europe, Japan, and yes, even China and Russia when it finally dawns on them that an economy expecting "from each according to his ability" will never compete with our profit-motive system. However, even America can become another of the world's mediocre countries if our foresight is clouded by rose-colored glasses and veils of deceit. If our economy, our quality of life, and quality of American, are to remain among the world's frontrunners, then the facts, good or bad, must never be buried. Tough decisions have a much better chance of being correct decisions if they're based on the best knowledge available. It's our hope that our Ethnic Triangle or Pyramid will help tell it like it is - to the ultimate benefit of America and mankind.

© 1987 Oscar Falconi, Box 3345, Saratoga CA 95070, U.S.A.
("United States vs. Japan" © 1998)



Our Ethnic Triangle (or Pyramid) can also be used to display the titles or names that have evolved for the different racial mixes over the centuries. Many of the particular mixes have different names depending on time, locality, and culture. But the list below, in UPPER CASE letters, (referring to the numbers in the triangle, Fig. 14) gives the best combination of names that are in keeping with the original historical terms and yet have no ambiguities. Names in lower case letters are also found in the literature, but if used, can cause confusion, and are only listed for reference. Only a few names referring to Asian mixes were found, and so the complication of using a pyramid was avoided. They're listed separately at the end.

Fig. 14. Ethnic Triangle of Racial Mixes.

                                      W     B     I     A
                                    ***** ***** ***** *****
 1. AMERICAN INDIAN, red indian                   1
 2. MESTIZO-CLARO                    1/4         3/4
 3. CHINO (no Asian blood)                 1/2   1/2
 4. ZAMBO-CLARO                      1/8   3/8   1/2
 5. CHINO-OSCURO                     1/4   1/4   1/2
 6. BROWN-MESTIZO                    3/8   1/8   1/2
 7. BROWN-MESTIZO                    7/16  1/16  1/2
 8. MESTIZO, Half-breed              1/2         1/2
 9. MULATTO-OSCURO                   1/4   1/2   1/4
10. CHINO-CLARO                      1/2   1/4   1/4
11. CREOLE, Quarter-breed            3/4         1/4
12. BLACK (100%, no White blood)            1
13. BLACK QUINTERON                  1/16 15/16
14. ZAMBO-NEGRO, Black Quarteron,    1/8   7/8
     Black Quadroon, Sacaira
15. ZAMBO, Sambo, Black Terceron,    1/4   3/4
     Griff-Zambo, Griffe, Creole
16. MARABOU, Zambo                   3/8   5/8
17. MULATTO                          1/2   1/2
18. Mulatto                          9/16  7/16
19. Mulatto                          5/8   3/8
20. QUADROON, Cuarteron, Terceron,   3/4   1/4
21. OCTOROON, Quadroon, Quarteron,   7/8   1/8
     Quintero, Metis, Metice
22. MEAMELOUC, Quinteron, "White"   15/16  1/16
23. DEMI-MEAMELOUC                  31/32  1/32
24. SANG-MELE                       63/64  1/64
25. WHITE, Caucasian                  1
    CHINO-BLANCO                     1/2               1/2
    ZAMBO-CHINO                            1/2         1/2
    CHINO-CHOLO                                  1/2   1/2
    DARK CHINO                       1/4   1/4         1/2
    ASIAN, Oriental, Yellow                             1


"The world passed from barbarism to civilization at that time when 
it was touched in Israel by the lucid radiance of the Hebrew mind."
Dr. Abba Eban at: Georgetown University, 9 April 1957 - and also at: The University of Texas, 3 January 1977 (but with "in Israel" removed)


Jew (European, American). . . . . 115 Asian (in the U.S.) . . . . . . 108 East Indian (from India, in the U.S.) 108 U.S. White (Northern European, Urban) 105 U.S. White (Southern European). . . 100 U.S. White (Rural, South) . . . . 95 U.S. Black (North and West). . . . 90 Hispanic-American . . . . . . . 90 U.S. Black (Rural, South) . . . . 85 Hispanic, Illegal Immigrant . . . 80 American Indian . . . . . . . 80 Laplander . . . . . . . . . 75 Australian Aborigine (full-blooded) . 70 Equatorial Guinea . . . . . . . 59
This listing is offered as a starting point for further study or for use with our Ethnic Triangle or Pyramid. The I.Q.'s are only approximate, as is the listing order itself. Some studies, for instance, place the American Indian above the Black, and the Northern Black above the Southern White. However other studies don't. My feeling is that the above order is correct. For instance, Black unemployment hovers around a high 15% or so, but American Indian unemployment is over 50%! The interpretation of Indian statistics is always very difficult, however, due to their other problems: gov't subsidies, alcoholism, and the highest birthrate and population increase of all ethnic groups in the United States. In any event, it seems the American Indian, for whatever reason, either can't or won't emerge as a reliable worker, and never has. It was thus necessary, from the very beginning, to import Blacks despite the plethora of Indians near at hand.*

The Australian Aborigine, also, is cursed with the problems of subsidies, alcoholism, and high birthrate. They are thought to be the most primitive race on earth and are fortunately just 1% of all Australians (but 7% of the prison population). Despite heroic attempts to devise fair I.Q. tests, they consistently test out between 70 and 85, depending upon tribe and the amount of White blood.**

It has also been found that their ability to learn slows considerably at age 10 or 12. It's quite obvious that Australia should do all in its power to discourage their proliferation before their inevitable assimilation, especially since White Australians are reproducing at less than 90% the rate necessary even to maintain zero White population growth!

The quality of billions of future Aussies is at stake. And there's evidence their government is aware of this. For instance Australia chooses their immigrants with great care. Until recently no orientals were accepted, just whites. I don't believe it was thought orientals were inferior, but only that a yellow Australia was feared.

To my mind, the major evidence of the Australian government's awareness of the need to discourage the proliferation of Aborigines is by how they choose to ignore the pioneering work of Archie Kalokerinos, MD, in preventing the Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS or Crib Death). Dr Kalokerinos found that small daily supplements of vitamin C would bring the death rate among infant Aborigines from as high as 50% down to ZERO! He wrote a book, "Every Second Child", 1974, Nelson (Australia) Ltd., describing in detail how he saved 100s of Black infants in his practice in a small area of Eastern Australia. If the government would act on Dr Kalokerinos' research and vast clinical experience, 1000s of Black babies would live to proliferate that otherwise would have died. Is the government acting responsibly? Superficially, their actions appear scandalous. But from the logic of this booklet, we can understand why Australia has no choice but to ignore Kalokerinos!


* A contemporary observation, from "The History of Slavery and the Slave Trade", p.96, by W.O.Blake (Columbus, Ohio) 1858:
"According to all accounts, never was there a race of men more averse to labor, or constitutionally more unfit for it, than these native American Indians. They are described as the most listless, improvident people on the face of the earth, and though capable of much passive endurance, drooped and lost all heart whenever they were put to active labor. Labor, ill-usage, and the small pox together, carried them off in thousands, and wherever a Spaniard trod, he cleared a space before him."..."As early as 1503, a few negroes had been carried across the Atlantic; and it was found that not only could each of these negroes do as much work as four Indians, but that, while the Indians were fast becoming extinct, the negroes were thriving and propagating wonderfully."

** The question as to whether American I.Q. exams are biased against Blacks was put to rest in 1982 when a blue-ribbon committee of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences "strongly rejected charges that standardized tests discriminate against Blacks, even though Blacks on the average score far below Whites". (Study Rejects Bias Charges in Job Tests", Washington Post, March 3rd 1982, p.A2.)



In the 20 censuses taken of the United States, each one has asked about color or race. Even the first census of 1790 asked only one's name, age, and race. By the time of the last census, in 1980, some 36 different races and nationalities were listed to help determine the racial and national character of America. The information was considered very important, and was so stated on contemporary census guides for enumerators (census-takers).

What follows is a brief summary of the questions asked in each census referring to race, color, and/or nationality. Often, specific instructions spelled out for the enumerator how these questions were to be handled or interpreted. It's fascinating to follow how guidelines changed with time, and how certain groups of people, or mixtures of groups, were classified differently from census to census. We see, for instance, how it wasn't until 1960 that Italians were officially considered White. But Mexicans, despite their large fraction of Indian blood, were considered full White by 1940. The American Indian, a race on its own, was treated differently. Separate census forms have been used since 1880 for those living on reservations. "Indians not taxed" are those roaming in unsettled country or living under government care on reservations. Words in quotations are capitalized as they appeared originally.

1790: Free Whites; All Other Free Persons (mostly Indians and free Blacks); Slaves.

1800: Free Whites; All Other Free Persons Except Indians Not Taxed (mostly free Blacks); Slaves.

1810: Same as 1800.

1820: Free Whites; Foreigners Not Naturalized; All Other Persons Except Indians Not Taxed; Slaves.

1830: Free White Persons; Aliens (Foreigners Not Naturalized); Free Colored Persons; Slaves. In toting up the deaf, dumb, and blind, slaves and Free Colored Persons were combined.

1840: "Insane and idiots" were enumerated for the first time. It was found that their prevalence among free Negroes was about 11 times higher than among slaves! In fact, these afflictions among Negroes decreased from Maine to Louisiana with mathematical precision (and gave the South official credence and a persuasive argument for the unsuitability of Negroes for freedom). In Maine, one in 14 Negroes was either a lunatic or an idiot. In New Hampshire, one in 28; Massachusetts, one in 43; Connecticut, one in 184; New York, one in 257; & in New Jersey, one in 297. But in Virginia, we have one in 1229; South Carolina, one in 2447; and in Louisiana, one in 4310! To this day, no satisfactory explanation has been given for these startling figures, which were questioned at the time. John C Calhoun, though admitting errors, felt the errors canceled. I would have guessed the census figures to have found opposite results for several reasons: 1. Modern statistics show Northern Blacks to be superior to Southern Blacks. 2. A greater fraction of White blood existed in Northern Blacks, even in 1840. 3. A Northerner, because of his pro- abolition bent, would less likely label a Negro a lunatic or an idiot. 4. A Negro must have exhibited some form of prowess to achieve his freedom. This would have been a positive contribution to the Northern Black gene pool. (On the other hand, slaveholders may have freed lunatics and idiots and sent them North.) Any articles, references, or comments shedding light on this fascinating question would be greatly appreciated. Please email: [email protected] Thank you.

1850: White; Black; Mulatto; Slave. From the instructions: "It is very desirable these distinctions be carefully regarded." A separate "Schedule No. 2" was introduced for slaves. Only the name of the slaveholder was asked - "Where there are several owners to a slave, the name of one only need be entered, or when owned by a corporation or trust estate, the name of the corporation or trustee." - "In the case of slaves, numbers are to be substituted for names." - "Insert the number of slaves who, having absconded within the year, have not been recovered." - "If slaves be found imprisoned convicts, mention the crime in column 8."

1860: Same as 1850, including all quotations.

1870: White; Black; Mulatto; Chinese; Indian. "The word "Mulatto" is here generic, and includes quadroons, octoroons, and all persons having any perceptible trace of African blood. Important scientific results depend upon the correct determination of this class."

1880: Same as 1870, including the above "Mulatto" quote.

1890: White; Black; Mulatto; Quadroon; Octoroon; Chinese; Japanese; Indian. "Be particularly careful to distinguish between blacks, mulattos, quadroons, and octaroons. The word "black" should be used to describe those persons who have three- fourths or more black blood; "mulatto", those persons who have from three-eighths to five- eighths black blood; "quadroon", those persons who have one-fourth black blood; and "octoroon", those persons who have one-eighth or any trace of black blood." Unfortunately, except for a few isolated counties, all of the records of the 1890 census were destroyed by fire in January 1921. Pity, since this was the only census to have distinguished between Blacks, Mulattos, Quadroons & Octaroons. Totals are known, but names, addresses, etc., are lost.

1900: White; Black ("negro or negro descent"); Chinese; Japanese; Indian (broken down as to fraction of Indian and White blood).

1910: White; Black; Mulatto; Chinese; Japanese; Indian (broken down as to fraction of Indian, White, and Negro blood); Other ("Write on left- hand margin the race of the person so indicated.").

1920: Same as 1910.

1930: White; Negro; Indian; Chinese; Japanese; Mexican. "A person of mixed White and Negro blood was to be returned (counted) as Negro, no matter how small the percentage of Negro blood; someone part Indian and part Negro also was to be listed as Negro unless the Indian blood predominated and the person was generally accepted as an Indian in the community. A person of mixed White and Indian blood was to be returned as an Indian, except where the percentage of Indian blood was very small or where he or she was regarded as White in the community. For persons reported as American Indian, they are to indicate the tribe and degree of Indian blood. It was decided that all persons born in Mexico, or having parents born in Mexico, who were definitely not White, Indian, Negro, etc., would be returned as Mexicans. Any mixture of White and some other race is to be reported according to the race of the parent who was not White; mixtures of colored races were to be listed according to the father's race, except Negro-Indian, discussed above."

1940: Same as 1930, except Mexicans are listed as White unless they were mostly Indian or some race other than White.

1950: White; Negro; Indian (Full blood, ½ to full, ¼ to ½, less than ¼); Japanese; Chinese; Filipino; Others (specify).

1960: White; Negro; American Indian; Japanese; Chinese; Filipino; Hawaiian; Part-Hawaiian; Aleut; Eskimo; Other. "Puerto Ricans, Mexicans, or other persons of Latin descent are to be classified as "White" unless they were definitely Negro, Indian, or some other race. Southern European and Near Eastern nationalities are also to be considered White. Asian Indians (from India) are to be classified as "Other", with "Hindu" written in."

1970: White; Negro or Black; American Indian (print tribe); Japanese; Chinese; Filipino; Hawaiian; Korean; Other (Print race). The enumerator's manual included a long list of possible written-in entries and how they were to be classified: for example, "Chicano", "La Raza", "Mexican-American", "Moslem", or "Brown" were to be changed to White, while "Brown (Negro)" would be considered as Negro or Black for census purposes.

1980: White; Black or Negro; Japanese; Chinese; Filipino; Korean; Vietnamese; American Indian (print tribe); Asian Indian (from India); Hawaiian; Samoan; Guamanian; Eskimo; Aleut; Spanish/Hispanic (broken down further into: Mexican, Mexican-American, Chicano, Puerto Rican, Cuban, or other Spanish/Hispanic); Other (Specify). You were also asked to state your ancestry, and given the following examples: "Afro-American, English, French, German, Honduran, Hungarian, Italian, Jamaican, Irish, Korean, Lebanese, Mexican, Polish, Nigerian, Ukrainian, Venezuelan, etc."

© 1987 Oscar Falconi, Saratoga CA 95070 U.S.A.
("United States vs. Japan" © 1998)

Visitors since installing this counter Jan 1996.

Back to Wholesale Nutrition's Products
Back to Wholesale Nutrition's Miscellaneous Item's

Home Page

Web Pages