Aryan Invasion Hypothesis

[Pratap]

Some people deny relation between genes and languages. Just take a look at this. The diagram represents sub clade of haplogroup R1a that is R1a1a

Take a look at figure properly. The areas where Indo European languages are spoken, only they show high frequency of R1a1a. Places like Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Saudi Arabia or Burma have it in few degree and they speak non Indo European languages. The fact is that in pre modern age without literacy, language can travel only by movement of people.

Highest frequency is found in India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Eastern Central Europe. @shinoj

Please observe that this sub clade is almost absent in Britain, Germany, Spain and France. They have R1b so your conspiracy theories should rest now. If British or their neighbours do not have high R1a1a , it means that theory of Aryan Invasion has nothing to do with them. For last 60 years, Britain or Spain, France are out of race so far as urheimat is concerned.

 

[Pratap]

Take a look at this link

The Human Genetic History of South Asia

The conclusions are directly opposite to what OIT says.

 

[SPIEZ]

Tamil? Just 100 years old.

Tamil just 100 years old

Please refer to this video:

 

[Pratap]

@A chauhan

You have called papers of 2009 as old( as if genetic conclusions are so wrong in few years) so let me ask you to read this paper of November 2012.
I hope you will now not demand papers of 2014

http://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_13974104525237&key=0da3f17dd3d3d8e710fb25246bc6e80c&libId=1b7c3285-5d4d-496c-81cb-90f5dc932bfd&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fhistorum.com%2Fancient-history%2F14226-where-when-did-indo-european-languages-originate-15.html&v=1&out=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dnatribes.com%2Fdnatribes-digest-2012-11-01.pdf&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fhistorum.com%2Fancient-history%2F14226-where-when-did-indo-european-languages-originate-12.html&title=Where%20and%20When%20did%20Indo-European%20Languages%20Originate%20-%20Page%2015%20-%20Historum%20-%20History%20Forums&txt=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dnatribes.com%2Fdnatribes-d...2012-11-01.pdf

 

[Pratap]

Tamil just 100 years old

Please refer to this video:

I talked about Tamil identity. I have read texts of Tamil like Silpaddikaram which were written around 400 AD so do not teach me basics. The man attacked me in a violent manner( he has no arguments), so I talked about identity. Tamil language might be 2300 old but a Tamil identity wherby all tamilians, rich and poor, brahmins and untouchables and atheists and religious ones, came to be embraced by that identity is just 100 or 130 years old and that too due to British.

Please read whole post and then understand its context rather than picking up a portion.

 

[TimeToScoot]

Thank you Mr. Village bumpkin as easily described by Elst. AIT is taught from all responsible platforms whereas OIT is taught by Hindu nationalists who are neither well versed in Sanskrit or any other classical language. These go to USA , are insulted by whites and in revenge, start shipping ideas to India suffering from massive inferiority complex.

So, you respond to a Discovery Channel presentation by squirming babble. Kudos! It is purely your misconception that the AIT is taught at all responsible platforms. In fact, this was the case until 1995 when the Invasion theory collapsed due to ZERO archaeological evidence of any invasion. Some historians however stuck to the basic theory by renaming it as a migration theory. Some back home have even termed it the Aryan Tourist theory *Chuckles* As of today, the theory is on the ventilator only kept alive by colonial historians whose life long work and reputations are at stake primarily Witzel and co. There are a few documentaries on the lost city discovered in the Gujarat produces by renowned western academics who don't subscribe to the AIT/AMT anymore. And yes, you have your knowledge of genetics thoroughly screwed up. Kindly find time to go back to school again.

 

[shinoj]

Look, it happened in this manner. There was a haplogroup R which many people consider to have emerged in India. This R splitted( splitting means at one time into two or more in case of genetics) into two different haplogroups that is R1 and R2. This took place somewhere around 23000 BC .
R2 is out of discussion. R1 haplogroup further splitted into two babies at same time that is 16500BC . The two babies are R1a and R1b.
Your theory requires that first R1 gave birth to R1a in India and then it travelled to Europe giving birth to R1b. Right?

If R1 gave birth to R1a in India, then it no longer remains in picture. Then we have only R1a and R1b can not come out of R1a. That is the problem.
R1 splitted somewhere giving birth to R1a and R1b at same time.

Just understand that R1 once splitted into R1a could not have remained as R1 and to argue that R1b came out of R1a is quite wrong. Now if R1b is not in India, how could its twin sibling( assume mother is dead with birth ) be born in India?

See splitting does not happen from parent into two, when a mutation happens parent remains same, the only difference is a new haplotype or a genepool is created

When there is a black halotype and on that mutation happens it creates a new one, say for example black and red,now there are two black and black and red,


Now if another mutation happens on black it will now lead to black and black and blue

Now suppose the last mutation would happened on the black and red it would lead to black red and blue along with black and red

For details Wikipedia to halotype, I can't coz I am on cell

 

[Pratap]

Another link for those who want it.

Brief communication: New Y-chromosome binary markers improve phylogenetic resolution within haplogroup R1a1 - Pamjav - 2012 - American Journal of Physical Anthropology - Wiley Online Library

 

[Pratap]

So, you respond to a Discovery Channel presentation by squirming babble. Kudos! It is purely your misconception that the AIT is taught at all responsible platforms. In fact, this was the case until 1995 when the Invasion theory collapsed due to ZERO archaeological evidence of any invasion. Some historians however stuck to the basic theory by renaming it as a migration theory. Some back home have even termed it the Aryan Tourist theory *Chuckles* As of today, the theory is on the ventilator only kept alive by colonial historians whose life long work and reputations are at stake primarily Witzel and co. There are a few documentaries on the lost city discovered in the Gujarat produces by renowned western academics who don't subscribe to the AIT/AMT anymore. And yes, you have your knowledge of genetics thoroughly screwed up. Kindly find time to go back to school again.

This delusion is common among your circles. Go through my links and then ask all those genetic scientists, linguists to go back to school.

 

[Pratap]

See splitting does not happen from parent into two, when a mutation happens parent remains same, the only difference is a new haplotype or a genepool is created

When there is a black halotype and on that mutation happens it creates a new one, say for example black and red,now there are two black and black and red, it would have led to black red and blue along with black and red


Now if another mutation happens on black it will now lead to black and black and blue

Now suppose the last mutation would happened on the black and red it would lead to black red and blue along with black and red

For details Wikipedia to halotype, I can't coz I am on cell

The split was from black to purple and red and red is absent in India. Give me a source saying that R1a splited out of R1 and then R1b came out of R1.
All scientists agree that both R1a and R1b are of similar age that is around 18000 years old.

 

[Pratap]

This figure represents splitting of various haplogroups and their movements.

 

[shinoj]

This figure represents splitting of various haplogroups and their movements.

This picture represents propoganda and nothing else

 

[TimeToScoot]

Below are some of the seals and artifacts found while excavating the Harappan sites.

So, before the imaginary Aryans invaded the Harappans were already practicing Hinduism. Magical!

 

[Pratap]

@Time To Scoot

So, you respond to a Discovery Channel presentation by squirming babble

Discovery channel is just a babble in itself.

Kudos! It is purely your misconception that the AIT is taught at all responsible platforms.

Read my posts on page number 78 and 79.

In fact, this was the case until 1995 when the Invasion theory collapsed due to ZERO archaeological evidence of any invasion

In Hindu nationalist circles it was never a theory but just an invention by British. Keep out archaeology here.

Some historians however stuck to the basic theory by renaming it as a migration theory. Some back home have even termed it the Aryan Tourist theory *Chuckles* As of today, the theory is on the ventilator only kept alive by colonial historians whose life long work and reputations are at stake primarily Witzel and co.

Apart from Kazanas, show me a single professor( out of thousands) who supports your theory. Witzel means nothing, he is just a hindu hating Indologist and nothing more.

There are a few documentaries on the lost city discovered in the Gujarat produces by renowned western academics who don't subscribe to the AIT/AMT anymore

Gujarat has nothing to do with this. What if there was a great city in Gujarat? Rigveda knows chariots and no chariot anywhere before 3000 BC( horse drawn ones).

And yes, you have your knowledge of genetics thoroughly screwed up. Kindly find time to go back to school again.

We are living in democracy so even a rickshaw puller can say same to any scientist.

 

[Pratap]

This picture represents propoganda and nothing else

Never mind. Produce some correct figures showing migration from India to Europe somewhere around 4000 BC as you claimed.

 

[Pratap]

Below are some of the seals and artifacts found while excavating the Harappan sites.

So, before the imaginary Aryans invaded the Harappans were already practicing Hinduism. Magical!

Large parts of common Hinduism are borrowed from Harappans.

 

[Pratap]

A concise summary of genetics and relation of Indo Iranians

The Indo-Iranian migrations have resulted in high R1a frequencies in southern Central Asia, Iran and the Indian subcontinent. The highest
frequency of R1a (about 65%) is reached in a cluster around Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and northern Afghanistan. In India and Pakistan, R1a ranges
from 15 to 50% of the population, depending on the region, ethnic group and caste. R1a is generally stronger is the North-West of the
subcontinent, and weakest in the Dravidian-speaking South (Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh) and from Bengal eastward. Over
70% of the Brahmins (highest caste in Hindusim) belong to R1a1, due to a founder effect.
Maternal lineages in South Asia are, however, overwhelmingly pre-Indo-European. For instance, India has over 75% of "native" mtDNA M and R
lineages and 10% of East Asian lineages. In the residual 15% of haplogroups, approximately half are of Middle Eastern origin. Only about 7 or 8%
could be of "Russian" (Pontic-Caspian steppe) origin, mostly in the form of haplogroup U2 and W (although the origin of U2 is still debated).
European mtDNA lineages are much more common in Central Asia though, and even in Afghanistan and northern Pakistan. This suggests that the
Indo-European invasion of India was conducted mostly by men through war, and the first major settlement of women was in northern Pakistan,
western India (Punjab to Gujarat) and northern India (Uttar Pradesh), where haplogroups U2 and W are the most common.

 

[Mad Indian]

Speak for yourself. I have an identity which is oldest identity in world. What is your identity? Indian? Just 100 years old.
Tamil? Just 100 years old.

OBC or MBC? Just 50 years old.

Hindu? Just 600 years old.


It is you who suffer from identity crisis. My identity is much older than all these British invented identities like Hindu or Indian or Tamil so I fail to understand how I suffer from identity crisis.

See you are showing more proofs of Identity crisis. I am a Indian, Tamil, South Indian, Hindu , OBC, Doctor and a lot more and all are my identities and have no problem accepting my ancestral land is/was in India for the past several thousand decades.

But look at you- you think you are the product of Europeans

Anyway, I dint quote you or mention you to have identity crisis, did I hit a nerve?

And where have you talked anything that makes sense? Have you provided any proofs for your AIT other than talking non-sensical your wet dreams of wanting the white Europeans as your ancestors? Every linguistic shit you talked had been debunked in the video I posted and earlier I had posted several genetic studies debunking AIT/AMT. Even shit bags like Romila thoppar have a hard time substantiating AIT

But I said, its hard to convince a Paki with identity crisis that his ancestors are converted Hindus and not Arabians, You are no different- Wannabe

 

[Mad Indian]

Journal of Human Genetics - The Indian origin of paternal haplogroup R1a1[ast] substantiates the autochthonous origin of Brahmins and the caste system


The observation of R1a* in high frequency for the first time in the literature, as well as analyses using different phylogenetic methods, resolved the controversy of the origin of R1a1*, supporting its origin in the Indian subcontinent. Simultaneously, the presence of R1a1* in very high frequency in Brahmins, irrespective of linguistic and geographic affiliations, suggested it as the founder haplogroup for the population. The co-presence of this haplogroup in many of the tribal populations of India, its existence in high frequency in Saharia (present study) and Chenchu tribes, the high frequency of R1a* in Kashmiri Pandits (KPs—Brahmins) as well as Saharia (tribe) and associated phylogenetic ages supported the autochthonous origin and tribal links of Indian Brahmins, confronting the concepts of recent Central Asian introduction and rank-related Eurasian contribution of the Indian caste system.

 

[TimeToScoot]

Discovery channel is just a babble in itself.

Some revelation there from Mr. Mickey Mouse.

In Hindu nationalist circles it was never a theory but just an invention by British. Keep out archaeology here.

The kind of babble one has to subject oneself to because the babbler hasn't even bothered to read the genesis of this theory. It was initially postulated as a means to explain the caste system and the invaders(fair skinned upper castes) were supposed to have come from Egypt. It was much later that Max Mueller postulated the Aryan Invasion theory as it was known until 1995. Oh and by the way, do you folks know how this moron arrived at the dating of the Rig Veda? Purely by fluke. Since he was a devoted Christian like most colonialists were he believed the earth was 6000 years old (Bible says so!). So in his scheme of things the world only began in 4004BC. LOL. And this is how Rig Veda is assumed to have been written sometime around 1500BC. The AIT is basically a story cooked up by early supremacist colonialists and kept alive by hate filled blokes like Witzel. If Science can prove today that the world indeed started at 4004BC I'm willing to accept 1500BC as the dating of the Rig Veda. Now don't be surprised if Mr. Mickey Mouse starts padding this thread with scientific data to prove that the planet is only 6000 years old.

Apart from Kazanas, show me a single professor( out of thousands) who supports your theory. Witzel means nothing, he is just a hindu hating Indologist and nothing more.

If you've heard Kazanas 's lecture on YouTube he mentions that he taught the AIT as a fact for 18 years until he began to research it in 1997 himself. So Kazanas was himself on the other side before he made a shift. What is my theory by the way? I haven't postulated any theory yet. As for the names there are 10s of them. Pick up a book some day and you'll be disappointed as to how many Western scholars themselves rubbish this theory as an absurd colonialist fantasy.

We are living in democracy so even a rickshaw puller can say same to any scientist.

You and I could be having this conversation with me living in communist China as well. Kindly learn to give analogies consistent with a fairly high IQ. Else silence is always golden.

Large parts of common Hinduism are borrowed from Harappans.

Never heard of anyone make such an absurd claim before. Is this a product of your feeble IQ or has any scholarship made such a claim? I'm fairly well versed with most aspects of the AIT debate and if you think you can take me for a ride with your laughable claims you're dead wrong.