Given that Freddie Mercury was a bisexual who died of AIDS from buggering a man, while Robert Plant is (as far as I can tell) a flaming hetero who nicknamed his pecker “Percy”, I’m gonna have to go with the voice of the Hammer of the Gods on this one.

It is almost surely significantly less.

Less than even 20%? If so, that is pretty bad.

Then Indians are just Australoids, for the most part. It also explains the shapelessness of Indian women.

The intermarriage of 2nd gen Indians with whites, in both Britain and now even the US, seems to be pretty high, though. Particularly IW-WM mixtures. So similar to other 2nd-gen Asian-Americans.

See that Pew data of Asian immigration to the US, particularly Indian immigration. God help us.

That is why I am convinced that Indians are not more than 20% Caucasoid.

It is almost surely significantly less. There is apparently considerable debate about whether the Indo-European Aryans actually settled in northern India back around 2,500 BC, but assuming it did happen, we know that there was considerable genetic mixing between those peoples and the existing Dravidians for a good 3,000 years. And then, about 1,500 years ago, it all froze in place within the caste system, created by the Brahmins for the purpose of securing their own power and position.

So whatever European genetics existed, they pretty much stopped spreading outside of homogamous castes and later sub-castes, and that has remained largely true to this day.

European colonisation did not change things. The Brits considered interracial sexual and marital relations to be an abomination, and their Indian subjects actually hated the idea even more. So the genetic pool of “Anglo-Indians” was, and remains, tiny relative to the overall population.

Interestingly, there are specific very high-achieving sub-populations of Indians whose genetics are generally non-Indian. These include the Parsis, who are basically Persians and are highly successful property owners and businesspeople; the Marwaris, who are basically Rajputs from the northwest of the country and are known for their prowess in business and industry – they use tactics very similar to the Jews and the Chinese; and of course the Anglo-Indian community, which is known for excellent results in a wide variety of fields.

Heck, Sir Ben Kingsley and Sir Cliff Richards are both Anglo-Indian, apparently.

But yes, the basic point remains. Caucasian admixture within Indian genetics is almost surely very small.

That is why I am convinced that Indians are not more than 20% Caucasoid. If the Caucasoid percentage in the Indian admixture were higher, then not only would India have a higher per capita GDP, but Indian women would be better looking (like, say, Iranians), and their buttocks would be the correct shape (again, like Iranians).

Indians are 20% Caucasoid, and 80% Austronesian Australoid. The North might be a bit higher, and the South a bit lower, but the median Indian is just 20% Caucasoid.

Btw, see the latest data on Asian immigration to the US. Indians are growing even faster than the others, with a 142% rise from 2000 to 2019. God help us.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/04/29/key-facts-about-asian-origin-groups-in-the-u-s/ft_2021-04-29_asianorigins_01/

It is less about skin color, and more about other attributes, both mental and physical.