Ancestry Of Jats

[PredictablyMalicious]

I've also not stated that AIT is proven beyond doubt. It's not. I'm only asserting that there has been a lot of migration into the Indian subcontinent. And again, Tamils are genetically different from Jats. There's a lot of admixture data to back up my claims.

Go on harappadna.org and check out their spreadsheet.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1l87nGSIYTP-h7m-VKjB-BZcuEoWdz765nU4f_krOdd4/edit#gid=0

Scroll down to 'Tamil' and "Punjabi". Compare different caste groups. Enjoy.

 

[pmaitra]

I've also not stated that AIT is proven beyond doubt. It's not. I'm only asserting that there has been a lot of migration into the Indian subcontinent. And again, Tamils are genetically different from Jats. There's a lot of admixture data to back up my claims.

Go on harappadna.org and check out their spreadsheet.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1l87nGSIYTP-h7m-VKjB-BZcuEoWdz765nU4f_krOdd4/edit#gid=0

Scroll down to 'Tamil' and "Punjabi". Compare different caste groups. Enjoy.

Interesting data-set. So, Bengalis are 27% Baloch. Who would have thought? I'd have expected more Mongoloid (SE Asian + NE Asian) than Baloch, considering geography.

 

[Mad Indian]

Tamil brahmins have similar admixture as North Indian dalits because even though they are brahmins, they mixed with lower caste natives when they migrated south. It's a pretty simple explanation. .

There you go - this blows out the whole shit that Aryans became the Upper castes - since that would have meant that Aryans would have remained the same throughtout india and maintained their superior genes(being invading conquerors) with the same proportion of genes. .ie, upper castes would have been homogenous But that is not so. And South Indian aryans mingled with Dravidians and north Indian aryans dint? See How many holes have you created with this retarded explanation?


I have a much simpler theory- Castes arised as it is - The Indian Population as determined by genetics have AN/ASI mixture of 60/40 % in North India and 40/60% in south India. Thats why there is similiar make up of genetics in the North Indian Dalits and South Indian Brahmins. There was no invasion when Castes formed. If that was the case- the Aryans would have concentrated in North India and there would have been no migrations into the South by Aryans. South India would have been populated by pure Dravidians - purer than the present 60-40mixture and the South Indian brahmins would have had the same amount of ANI genes as the North Indian Brahmins. I know this might be too much for your puny brain to handle but this is the simpler theory and this is what is supported by present day Linguists, Archeologists and most importantly geneticists

I've never said I have European ancestry. I am however noticeably genetically different from you. So you're just trying to shame me into accepting your argument by ascribing to me an assertion I've never made. Good luck on taking down a straw man.

No you are a genius who cant understand genetics and trying to suit facts to your theory than the other way around.

PS: You can believe that [censored]. I have no problem with. But stop polluting this thread with crappy ideas again and again which have already been debunked in this thread, like the shitty article you posted and the shitty idea that Europeans lack M haplogroup.

 

[Mad Indian]

And again, Tamils are genetically different from Jats. There's a lot of admixture data to back up my claims.

Yes they are. But not by much to be of different race of Aryans or dravidians - Indian population is born from mixing of two ancestral groups - ANI and ASI . North Indian being 60-40 mix of ANI-ASI and South Indian being a mixture of 40-60%. And both came to India before 45000BCE - ANI around 60000 BCE and ASI around 45000 BCE.

Its all in the Human genome project done by the USA. You can go check it out.

https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/human-journey/

There was another one which was showing detalis of the haplogroup and the time lines. I will search for it but till then, read on the subjects and ask for doubts. You have not read genetics , I have

 

[pmaitra]

@Mad Indian and @PredictablyMalicious, please keep it civil.

 

[Mad Indian]

Your looks are coded for by your genes. It's obvious that people who look closer to Caucasians are on average more similar genetically to them as well. If you don't understand that you're a moron. NW Indians look closer to Europeans than Tamils. Therefore, NW Indians are genetically closer to Europeans than Tamils are. (You're kind of slow so I suspect you'll end up replying to this with a huge rage-filled wall of text.)

You are a moron. I am again saying this - the phenotype is bs and it is not hard science. Were you smart enough to attend science classes? Do you remember Mendel's genetics? Do you remember the tall vs short pea plants experiments? Do you remember how mixing a tall and a short plant produced only Tall plants in the first generation? Do you remember How tall tea plants outnumber small ones 3-1 in the second generation? Do you remember that among the tall plant only one third of them bred true while the remaining 2/3rd bred along the 3-1 tall-short ratio in the third generation? SO a tall plant can be geno-typically pure or it can be a hybrit. So calling Phenotype to say that all the tall plants are the same is retarded . If you have not read it, I dont blame you. Science is not for idiots who dont wish to learn.

Go learn that Mendelian inheritance and then come back and claim shit that Phenotypes are important.

If you can understand from Mendelian genetics why phenotypes matter much less compared to genotypes, then you might actually have a chance of understanding the genetics behind what I am talking about . Because the genetics I am talking about is far more advanced than the basic mendelian one they teach in schools. The mendelian genetics deals with only single gene traits. Even that has so many problems with its phenotypes and genotypes as his own experiments showed.

The inheritance of height and skin colour is deteremined by polygenic inheritance .And of course, the mendelian inheritence deals only with Dominance and recessive genes. The Expression of height and colour involve the other types of gene expression like Codominance. All these make the phenotypes all the more useless in scientific analysis because they so many varying genotypes can have the same phenotype.

And until you learn about genetics, keep your stupid mouth shut.

 

[Mad Indian]

And while we are at the Phenotype BS , let me show another reason why it is BS- Aryans are supposed to be the European/Germans who were tall , blond and fair. How many of your European relatives in your family have blonde hair and blue eyes? Where did the Blue eyes and Blonde hair of the North Indians disappear into?

@PredictablyMalicious Genius sir, answer this plzzzz. Would like to know how many blonde haired blue eyed North Indians are there.

 

[pmaitra]

And while we are at the Phenotype BS , let me show another reason why it is BS- Aryans are supposed to be the European/Germans who were tall , blond and fair. How many of your European relatives in your family have blonde hair and blue eyes? Where did the Blue eyes and Blonde hair of the North Indians disappear into?

@PredictablyMalicious Genius sir, answer this plzzzz. Would like to know how many blonde haired blue eyed North Indians are there.

I have not seen @PredictablyMalicious claim that people in his family have blonde hair and/or blue eyes. If he did, then please quote him. If he has not, then why drag his family into this?

 

[Mad Indian]

. If he did, then please quote him. If he has not, then why drag his family into this?

I dint drag his family , he did. Once he claimed that he is much more similiar to europeans - that assumes his familiy is too. Also it is generous of me that I give him the chance to prove his theory atleast using his family members as a I am pretty sure he is neither blonde nor blue eyed

I have not seen @PredictablyMalicious claim that people in his family have blonde hair and/or blue eyes

Of course he wont. Thats called cherry picking - leaving out the garbage aspects of the AIT which can be ridiculed and only present the ones which cant be disproven with present evidence

The oirginal AIT/AMT was that Aryans were Europeans/Germans who came to India and invaded the IVC and gave India its civilisation. It was not about the Mediterranean Black haired greek coloured Europeans coming into India.

 

[PredictablyMalicious]

You are a moron. I am again saying this - the phenotype is bs and it is not hard science. Were you smart enough to attend science classes? Do you remember Mendel's genetics? Do you remember the tall vs short pea plants experiments? Do you remember how mixing a tall and a short plant produced only Tall plants in the first generation? Do you remember How tall tea plants outnumber small ones 3-1 in the second generation? Do you remember that among the tall plant only one third of them bred true while the remaining 2/3rd bred along the 3-1 tall-short ratio in the third generation? SO a tall plant can be geno-typically pure or it can be a hybrit. So calling Phenotype to say that all the tall plants are the same is retarded . If you have not read it, I dont blame you. Science is not for idiots who dont wish to learn.

Go learn that Mendelian inheritance and then come back and claim shit that Phenotypes are important.

If you can understand from Mendelian genetics why phenotypes matter much less compared to genotypes, then you might actually have a chance of understanding the genetics behind what I am talking about . Because the genetics I am talking about is far more advanced than the basic mendelian one they teach in schools. The mendelian genetics deals with only single gene traits. Even that has so many problems with its phenotypes and genotypes as his own experiments showed.

The inheritance of height and skin colour is deteremined by polygenic inheritance .And of course, the mendelian inheritence deals only with Dominance and recessive genes. The Expression of height and colour involve the other types of gene expression like Codominance. All these make the phenotypes all the more useless in scientific analysis because they so many varying genotypes can have the same phenotype.

And until you learn about genetics, keep your stupid mouth shut.

I'm being very nice. You should reciprocate. It's very prole and low class to call names.

Phenotypic patterns across populations are certainly indicative of genotypic patterns. If Mendel saw a field full of tall plants beside one that has mostly short plants, he'd conclude that on average the two differ at some genes. You're talking about individuals when I'm talking about populations. Are you so dense that you conflate the two? And I've already substantiated my claims that Tamils have a different admixture profile. So we don't have to rely on my intuition. I've backed up my claim.

 

[PredictablyMalicious]

I dint drag his family , he did. Once he claimed that he is much more similiar to europeans - that assumes his familiy is too. Also it is generous of me that I give him the chance to prove his theory atleast using his family members as a I am pretty sure he is neither blonde nor blue eyed



Of course he wont. Thats called cherry picking - leaving out the garbage aspects of the AIT which can be ridiculed and only present the ones which cant be disproven with present evidence

The oirginal AIT/AMT was that Aryans were Europeans/Germans who came to India and invaded the IVC and gave India its civilisation. It was not about the Mediterranean Black haired greek coloured Europeans coming into India.

Just because Hitler misappropriated the term Aryan, suddenly it makes him right?

I never said I believe in the original conception of AIT. All I've said is that there's been migration in and out (mostly in) and that Jats look different from Tamils , on average because they have different genetic admixtures. (I know you have a hard time understanding the concept of average so I'll emphasize it).

Your average Jat looks closer to Europeans than your average Tamil. Do you now what 'closer' means? Your average Jat isn't blonde and blue eyed but still looks closer to the average European than does a Tamil. And a lot closer to the average Iranian/Middle Eastern. And this finding is explained by the difference in admixture between the average Jat and the average Tamil. What part don't you get? It's all very simple.

When someone says Indians look more like white people than do Chinese, they don't mean that Indians exactly resemble Europeans. It's a spectrum. Middle Eastern people look closer to Europeans than do North Indians. Neither is blonde and blue eyed on average but this has no bearing on the assertion, which is obviously true.

 

[Khagesh]

Genetics or Archeogenetics or Quasi-archeaogentics like that of Reich et al, is not about ‘similarity of phenotypes’ or even ‘lineage’.


Please don't mind it but, If you really really, went to read Reich and Moorjani for that reason, you probably deserve a role in Mungeri Lal Ke Haseen Sapne more than anything else.


1) if you have read about Mendelian inheritance and then read these genetic studies you will realize that even recessive genes are inherited and are part of lineage because even these can at times make their appearance felt


2) Y chromosome based studies ignore your Nana ji which could also be a part of your dominant appearance (~25% of appearances). And remember there are as many Nana ji(s) in any given lineage as there are individuals.


3) X chromosome based studies completely ignore your Dadi ji (~25% of appearances). Same logic as #2 point above.


4) Appearnces are mostly likely not even resident on your Y or even the last residual sex-determining X chromosome. These are mostly about sex determination and only crazy people will claim that they are a male/female because they belong to a certain ‘lineage’. Ghanta. And since there are 23 pairs of chromosomes so these quasi-archeaogenetic studies by Reich etc have about 1/23 relevance to your lineage. Combined with point #2 an #3 you can see your own lineage quite well, I guess, by now.


5) Almost all parameters of appearances are polygenic in nature ie. have several different genetic loci controlling it. Most of them not even located on the last XX and XY pair. Combined with all above points you can guess how you look has how much relevance to where your ‘ancestors’ came from.


6) Appearances linking to ‘lineages’ or ‘ancestors’ as stated by these quasi-archeaogenetic studies by Reich etc is horse manure also because there is no fucking way that all the appearances related genes are going to be falling in place as dominant genes or expressive recessive pairs, in lock step with each other. Your origin or invasions do not determine why your sharp nose goes with white skin and your rounded nose goes with yellow skin and your mixed sharp/round nose goes with black skin. There is a different mechanics for that to happen and origins/invasions/cultural exhanges is not that. Genes have an probability based inheritance pattern. So your white/black skin gene may or may not have any relation with your sharp/round nose gene. All genetic pairs on paired chromosomes that in their polygenic nature, determine appearance etc, are going to have an equally-likely basis of expression. So admixture does imply that all the polygenes that determine your looks will be randomly distributed.


7) Ancestors also does not imply ‘origins’ because ancestors imply multiple origins. That is why the hopelessly admixed populations of current India constitute a different and identifiable genetic pool far away from the European and/or Far Eastern Genetic pool. Basically all Indians except some very small trace quantity groups are more close to each other than they are to outsiders – sharp/round noses notwithstanding.


8) Similarity of appearances also does not imply ‘cultural’ exchange or even the exchange of genetic material or even invasions/migrations, since what applies on the Western front of India should logically also apply on the eastern front or southern or northern front of India. How many migrations/invasions/cultural exchanges do you want to postulate.


I think I will stop. This is Mul-maas ka mahina and 8 is a good number for this month.


Sorry if I made you feel less important and destroyed your entitlement victor/victim syndrome. Really sorry about that. I am feeling sorry since yesterday. Since when I did some Mazak-udao of that Chinese member. Sorry Bhagwan ji.


Ideally the researchers working on these quasi-archeaogenetic studies like Reich, Moorjani etc should not have mentioned cultural idioms like lineage and ancestors or invasions or exchanges etc. But the mention should not be disheartening either, because these researchers studying these genetics actually started out on the framework of AIT/AMT and today they have successfully made a self-correction in their understandings based on the evidence they themselves sought out and chased down.


For people who think why their sharp noses bears resemblences to Europeans and for people who are upset that theirs does not, my advise is you may try to read early papers on such genetic studies (96/98 period). Researchers used to talk about nebulous ideas like ‘Pre-caucasoid’. These were not defined or defined in nebulous terms like the ‘general caucasoidness of the mass of the Indian populations’ . WTFH – general caucasoidness, what the hell that means. I guess such ideas were in formative stages and I personally suspect that this will ultimately turn out to be true because after all Indians are the fathers and mothers of the rest of you guys outside of India . Europeans basically owe their sharp noses to Punjabis while the Chinese probably owe their strange eyes to our north-eastern populations. These European and Far eastern looks, being only the highly specialized forms of relatively well admixed Indian genetic material. When I say India please think in terms of Akand Bharat and not restrict yourself to the India starting on 1947.

Remember the M lady and the N lady came into India together. Logically follows that they came into India alongwith their husbands and all the offsprings admixed well.

 

[Peter]

2) Y chromosome based studies ignore your Nana ji which could also be a part of your dominant appearance (~25% of appearances). And remember there are as many Nana ji(s) in any given lineage as there are individuals.


3) X chromosome based studies completely ignore your Dadi ji (~25% of appearances). Same logic as #2 point above.


.

Y chromosome based studies do ignore ones`s maternal relatives but X chromosome based studies do not ignore paternal or maternal relatives.
Anyway this is a meaningless thread IMO. We are all Indians and that is how it should be.

 

[Khagesh]

Y chromosome based studies do ignore ones`s maternal relatives but X chromosome based studies do not do so.
Anyway this is a meaningless thread IMO. We are all Indians and that is how it should be.

X chromosome my mistake. Cannot even correct it now. But thanks for point out.

Mitochondrial ones is the correct reasons. And obviously you can get your mitochondria only from your mother who gets it only from her mother (your nani ji) who got it only from her mother (your par-nani) who got it only from her mother (your lakad-nani) so on and backforth.

I don't think anybody has used X chromosomes because all of them are X ones and of similar dimensions. Kuan kaun sa hai kisi ko pata hi nahi chalega.

But yes just like Mt haplogroups take into account only the Nani ji, the Y chromosome haplogroups take into account only the Dada ji. Both study types, ignore 3 other equally important lineages that form the real you at just one level of generatioin change - from your parents to your grandparents - 50% genetic evidence becomes a mere 25% genetic evidence with just one generation change.

You can easily imagine how much is ignored as you go even further back in time.

 

[Khagesh]

I've also not stated that AIT is proven beyond doubt. It's not. I'm only asserting that there has been a lot of migration into the Indian subcontinent. And again, Tamils are genetically different from Jats. There's a lot of admixture data to back up my claims.

Go on harappadna.org and check out their spreadsheet.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1l87nGSIYTP-h7m-VKjB-BZcuEoWdz765nU4f_krOdd4/edit#gid=0

Scroll down to 'Tamil' and "Punjabi". Compare different caste groups. Enjoy.

Do you even read the data you proffer.

Guys, the data attached by the esteemed poster is supposed to be a data about Relatedness between various jatis/varna/states/countries/skin colors with other jatis/varna/states/countries/skin colors.

Here is the comparative for your royal highness. Hope the Jahanpanah does not fall from Takht-e-Sulaiman seeing his relatedness with southie SDRE kalus.

Please note that Sikhs and hindus also are clubbed with muslims for his analysis because north Indian muslims and non muslims are same genetic stock as Pakis. Thus sikhs/hindus are a reasonable representative of the genetics of Paki muslims also, with some exceptions . Furthermore there is not a large enough granular data for non-brahmins. Sorry about that but I guess chalta hai. Main bhi north Indian Hindu hi hun. Just enjoy.

I don't know how to determine how much inward migration took place from Caucasian lands into say Pakiland. But I am very sure of how much happened from south India. .......................

 

[Mad Indian]

I'm being very nice. You should reciprocate. It's very prole and low class to call names.
.

You called me slow first. Stop taking moral high ground when you have none.

Phenotypic patterns across populations are certainly indicative of genotypic patterns. If Mendel saw a field full of tall plants beside one that has mostly short plants, he'd conclude that on average the two differ at some genes. You're talking about individuals when I'm talking about populations. Are you so dense that you conflate the two? And I've already substantiated my claims that Tamils have a different admixture profile. So we don't have to rely on my intuition. I've backed up my claim.

Thats why I said stop talking out of your ass in subjects you dont know, and in this case genetics. This is what I hate the most- arguing with ignorant morons who are so full of their own shit that they refuse to learn even when given the chance . Mendel's experiement shows the importance of genotype over phenotype, and specially on charecters like people's looks and appearances, which is all the more complex because of its polygenic inheritance. And what is this bull shit that I am talking about Individuals and you about population ?- I am talking about populations genius, population of tall plants who are genetically two different populations though they are phenotypically a single population group -.ie the tall plants

One small example for your stupid brain on why phenotype comparison/study as a reliable data on population is retarded over genetics studies - Obama is brown in colour. Shave his head and he will pass off as an Indian. This is despite the fact that neither of his parents are Indians. So does he belong to the browns in India?

 

[Mad Indian]

Just because Hitler misappropriated the term Aryan, suddenly it makes him right?

Listen genius, its not about Hitler. Its about Max muller. He was the one who propesed the AIT in original form, which is that Saxons of Northern Europe came to India as the aryans. So you dont know what the fuck you are even arguing for do you? Pathetic

I never said I believe in the original conception of AIT. All I've said is that there's been migration in and out (mostly in) and that Jats look different from Tamils , on average because they have different genetic admixtures. (I know you have a hard time understanding the concept of average so I'll emphasize it).

I dont have any problems with understanding that you are a severely identity crisised retard who does not understand what you yourself post, who constantly changes goal posts. Of course what you are saying is correct genius - we all migrated into India from Africa at different times and of course there is genetic difference between Jats and Tamils- being composed of ANI/ASI of 60/40 and 40/60 respectively and ANI and ASI came into India about 45000 years ago. What is being contested is the timeline of the migration and the validity of AIT which claims that AIT/AMT happened in the 3000bce and that it happened from Europe into India. Now you have changed the goal post three times

Your average Jat looks closer to Europeans than your average Tamil. Do you now what 'closer' means? Your average Jat isn't blonde and blue eyed but still looks closer to the average European than does a Tamil

Another reason why I consider you an idiot and asked you to learn genetics before talking crap. If the Europeans indeed had come into India- even some of the North Indians would show the typical european traits of Blue eyes and blond hair. At least a very small %. You remember the Mendel studies which show that the Geneticially mixed tall trees produced on inbreeding 25% pure Tall plants and 50% mixed Tall plants and 25% pure short plants? You would have such pure blue eyed north Indians and pure blond haired North Indians. Why does that not happen to be so in real life? Because your theory is full of shit

And Jats look similiar to Arabs than Tamils. This must be proof that -Jats were the product of Arab fucking by this genius logic

When someone says Indians look more like white people than do Chinese, they don't mean that Indians exactly resemble Europeans. It's a spectrum. Middle Eastern people look closer to Europeans than do North Indians. Neither is blonde and blue eyed on average but this has no bearing on the assertion, which is obviously true.

Middle easterners are not claiming that they were produced by Europeans fucking their moms like the morons with pathetic self esteems here do. Duh

 

[Mad Indian]

@PredictablyMalicious I am sorry that I have responded to your calling me dense and slow, in kind, with words like retard and moron. But if you insist on asking the same stupid questions and refuse to learn, I will let you stew in your own European ancestry filth. I have nothing to gain by clearing identity crisis of random canadians on Internet.

But if you indeed are interested to actually learn something, Start asking actual questions and drop this know it all attitude specially in fields like genetics where you know nothing and I will stop responding with moron and retard.

You need humility to learn new concepts and ideas - I am saying this as a former AIT believer since that was the crap that was taught to us by the Dravidian govt of TN. Whether you want to learn or not is something up to you.

 

[pmaitra]

Listen genius, its not about Hitler. Its about Max muller. He was the one who propesed the AIT in original form, which is that Saxons of Northern Europe came to India as the aryans. So you dont know what the fuck you are even arguing for do you? Pathetic



I dont have any problems with understanding that you are a severely identity crisised retard who does not understand what you yourself post, who constantly changes goal posts. Of course what you are saying is correct genius - we all migrated into India from Africa at different times and of course there is genetic difference between Jats and Tamils- being composed of ANI/ASI of 60/40 and 40/60 respectively and ANI and ASI came into India about 45000 years ago. What is being contested is the timeline of the migration and the validity of AIT which claims that AIT/AMT happened in the 3000bce and that it happened from Europe into India. Now you have changed the goal post three times





Another reason why I consider you an idiot and asked you to learn genetics before talking crap. If the Europeans indeed had come into India- even some of the North Indians would show the typical european traits of Blue eyes and blond hair. At least a very small %. You remember the Mendel studies which show that the Geneticially mixed tall trees produced on inbreeding 25% pure Tall plants and 50% mixed Tall plants and 25% pure short plants? You would have such pure blue eyed north Indians and pure blond haired North Indians. Why does that not happen to be so in real life? Because your theory is full of shit

And Jats look similiar to Arabs than Tamils. This must be proof that -Jats were the product of Arab fucking by this genius logic



Middle easterners are not claiming that they were produced by Europeans fucking their moms like the morons with pathetic self esteems here do. Duh

Max Müller said that the Saxons of Northern Europe came to India as the Aryans?

In which work of his did he say that?

I strongly recommend people to read about Max Müller and try to understand him. He was neither racist, nor held Indians in disdain. Quite to the contrary, he held a very esteemed opinion about Indians. As a matter of fact, he made one remark about South Indians where he praised them for preserving the purity of the language that came directly from the Indo-European language family.

It is indeed very sad that our country, and its people, are being fed a lot of manufactured gibberish about historical figures, gibberish that resort to slandering them, and accusing them of things which would have been considered benevolent and contrarian to common European attitudes towards Indians in the days of colonialism.

 

[Razor]

Again- Buddhism spread from an advanced civilisation/culture to less advanced cultures of the time - Tibet , SEA and and so on.

I wonder why you did not mention China. They were an "advanced culture", they were receptive to buddhist ideas.

Again you are back to square one, now claiming that there was actual migration of Aryans into India , which has been debunked by peer reviewed genetic research. Seriously, if you can just get over your preconceptions and take a step back, you will notice AIT/AMT is a fucked up theory. You dont have to do these somersaults between migrations and cultural migrations just to suit your theory as and when needed.

Again, in this own thread, you have not made up your mind on whether the culture was the one which has migrated into India(Sanskrit and Hinduism) or Aryans themselves migrated with their culture and language and taught it to stupid natives.

You are not making your mind as it is convenient to shift goal posts from cultural migrations to actual migrations as and when needed

I already told you why I'm not able to make up my mind, because there are no hard and fast rules here. It could go either way (not enough evidence.)
And while we are at it, post all the points of your theory (OIT or whatever else it) complete with patterns of migrations, their dates, language transmission models, so on and so forth.
Please also include details about how the ANI/ASI studies are integrated into your theory. Go ahead, make up your mind. :thumb:

Egypt had Islam spread to it through conquest and hence with it part of the language, and Kerala still does not speak Arabic.
Exactly - Cultural migration would not bring with it the language . There is no place where it was so. Thats why Aryan migration being only a cultural migration is BS as it would imply Sanskrit being indeigenous while Aryans brought in Hinduism. And of course in all cases, the migration was from a high culture to a low culture civilisation..

Talking about KL.
What about malayalam?
Malayalam vocabulary used to be quite similar to tamil and it was called malayala mozhi. After an influx of brahmins, and a few centuries later it is called malayala bhasha and about 70% of the vocabulary is either of sanskrit origin or exactly the same as sanskrit.

Err no. Actually When Constantine was making Xtianity the official religion, Xtianity was already on the rise and his kingdom was already splintered by the religious divide. Constantine simply backed the winning horse. And Xtianity , no matter how barbaric is arguably much more culturally superior to Roman pagans and of course having the roman emperor back you is something that is not small

Hmm.
Constantine took up xtianity because it was useful, as simple as that.
During the 1st two centuries xtianity was persecuted in Roman lands, but xtianity had strong appeal among the masses due to several reasons and novel ideas like a man dying for the sins of common man, similar to soldier dying for the nation. Your point was that xtianity had the force of culture behind it but xtianity in this aspect has the same relation as buddhism to "hinduism". It spoke against the prevailing jewish culture and it was not with the help of jewish culture that it spread in roman lands initially. AFTER the initial spread the political elite so the usefulness of xtianity as a means to control people more effectively.

And Finally, I dont understand why you do all these mental somersaults with Migration, Invasions, Cultural Migration and what not when there is not a single evidence to show that any of them are true and when there is mountain of evidence to show that AMT/AIT is crap.

This is what I meant by people with serious identity issues. Indians have become so much slaves to the British propaganda and have constructed their very identity around it that now they refuse to learn the truth right in front of them

A kills B and buries body in C's courtyard; doesn't mean that the non-somersault version of C killed B, is true.
When investigating something all possibilities should be considered.

Sorry I ignored since I thought it would be of no use reading it . So you really dont know how the age of the haplotype is determined? I am going to reply to this question in hope that it is not a waste of my time.

Age of the haplotype is determined by the no. of variations it has - the greater the no. of variations , the greater is the age of the haplotype. The reasoning goes like this-

A is the parent population with 1A Y haplotype . Now it has 1 genetic mutation. Then a part of A moves to some other place and lives there seperately and forms the new population B. Now lets say that A had another mutation during the time when B moved on. So the Population A will have two kinds of 1A Y haplotype - one with 1 mutation and one with 2 mutations. Since Population B had migrated already before the second mutation , it wont have the second mutation and so it will only have one type of mutation as was the case when they migrated. So A will have two subsets of 1A haplotype while B will have only one subtype. If a part of this new population again migrates to B, then B also will have some amount of the new mutations but the frequency will be lower than that of the parent population A. So the higher the frequency of variations and higher the diversity, the older the haplotype is.

Since Indian Y haplotype has more genetic variations than Caucasian/central asian Y haplotype which in turn is higher than varitations in European Y haplotype, it is impossible that Y haplotype arose from Europeans and migrated into India, while it is highly likely that it was the other way round.

You say for eg: That a part of A separates and forms B. And then you say that a mutation has occurred in A.
Can a genetic mutation not happen in B too (and thereby increase its variations) at the same time that it happened in A? Why or why not?

And while we are at the Phenotype BS , let me show another reason why it is BS- Aryans are supposed to be the European/Germans who were tall , blond and fair. How many of your European relatives in your family have blonde hair and blue eyes? Where did the Blue eyes and Blonde hair of the North Indians disappear into?

@PredictablyMalicious Genius sir, answer this plzzzz. Would like to know how many blonde haired blue eyed North Indians are there.

I already mentioned earlier that "aryans" here does NOT refer to germanic people. Central Asia is not in Germany or Europe.
Half your posts have some europe this, europe that. You really need to get this europe fascination out of your head for a while.

Besides blonde hair and blue eyes, if I'm not mistaken, are recessive traits, right?
So they can go on without being expressed for a while?

Also correct me if I'm not wrong, the researches haven't fully established the causes of variations in human hair and eye colors, right?
I mean I have seen some people who as kids had light brown hair which later changed to black as they grew up. Yes melanin increase but why/how? Maybe testosterone. Dunno/.