What you're suggesting is that anyone who had ancestors existing contemporaneously with a fragment of Rome is...therefore white?

Its nonsense. Virtually anyone who had children 2000 years ago is the ancestor of virtually everyone alive today. There is nothing special that the Baltic Crusaders did to pagan Lithuanians that imparted whiteness on them, at the point of a sword. Whether or not Byzantium stood at the time had no difference to the Baltic Crusade. I am telling you that whiteness is not a factor of being touched by Rome, you cannot bend or falsify history to make that fit

Edit - just still trying to get my head round what is honestly one of the more retarded takes in this thread.

So you're saying that if the Turks in Asia minor were faster at capturing istenpolis/Istanbul and wiping out the ERE...that if the Turks did that quicker - say, completing their conquests earlier than the Baltic crusade or the christianisation of the Norse - then because Rome didn't exist any more, neither the Norwegians or Lithuanians would be considered "white" today?