Exposing ait lies on iranian agriculturalists :
Folks these jagros neolithic got ancestry from Northwest Indian sub-continent. the the (Iran) farmers had not arrived from anatolian farmer community of the as aitfags claim to , we will shortly see ...
“The mitochondrion of GD13a (91.74X) was assigned to haplogroup X, likely to the sub-haplogroup X2, which has been associated with an early expansion from the Near East and has been found in early Neolithic samples from Anatolia, Hungary and Germany.” (
Llorente 2016)
“GD13a did not cluster with any other early Neolithic individual from Eurasia in any of the analyses.” (
Llorente 2016)
“We further investigated the relationship between GD13a and Caucasus Hunter-Gatherers using D-statistics to test whether they formed a clade to the exclusion of other ancient and modern samples (Table S4). A large number of Western Eurasian samples (both modern and ancient) showed significant excess genetic affinity to the Caucasus Hunter-Gatherers, whilst none did with GD13a. Overall, these results point to GD13a having little direct genetic input into later European populations compared to its northern neighbours.”
Thus the oldest Iranian Agriculturists of the Ganj Dareh had not directly migrated to eurofags, although their mitochondrial DNA X2 certainly contributed to the modern eurofags population. Clearly, the Ganj Dareh DNAs were not the gross representative of the Iranian Neolithic, but they represent a segment which was very small and did not make much impact on later eurofags, caucasus orsteppyfags. It might have represented just a small number of the emigrants from a single village in Balochistan or other parts of northwest South Asia (pre-modern India), and might have represented only a tiny fraction of genetic variation which South Asia had at that time. On the other hand, the people reaching the other locations in Zagros (Iran) at Neolithic might have originated from other villages of present-day porkyland/ Afghanistan resulting in differences (diversity) in genetic composition within the Zagros Neolithic populations.
“The individual analysed here was part of burial 13, which contained three individuals, and was recovered in level C in 1971 from the floor of a brick-walled structure. The individual sampled, 13A (referred to as GD13a throughout the text), was a 30–50-year-old female; the other individuals in the burial unit were a second adult (13B) and an adolescent (13). The site has been directly dated to 9650–9950 cal BP, and shows intense occupation over two to three centuries. The economy of the population was that of pastoralists with an emphasis on goat herding. Archaeobotanical evidence is limited but the evidence present is for two-row barley with no evidence for wheat, rye or other domesticates. This implies that the overall economy was at a much earlier stage in the development of cereal agriculture than that found in the Levant, Anatolia and Northern Mesopotamian basin.” (
Llorente 2016)
This information refutes the claim by ait cucks that the Mehrgarh farming culture had been borrowed from Anatolia (Turkey) through Iran (Ganj Dareh). The date cited above gives a date of 7,850 BC (mean). It may be noted that the Mehrgarh oldest layer has a date of 8,707 BC (mean).
While the Ganj Dareh Iranian people had only two-row barley (see above) at 7850 BC, the Mehrgarh had six-row barley at 8700 BC, which is an advanced stage of agricultural development and domestication of barley (
Upinder Singh 120; Jarrige 2008).
Lorenzo Costantini has shown that the plant assemblage of Period I is dominated by naked six-row barley which accounts for more than 90% of the so far recorded seeds and imprints. He has also pointed out the sphaerococcoid form of the naked-barley grains with a short compact spike with shortened internodes and small rounded seeds.
According to him, such characteristics in the aceramic Neolithic levels can be ascribed to probably cultivated but perhaps not fully domesticated plants. Domestic hulled six-row barley (H. vulgare, subsp. vulgare) and wild and domestic hulled two-row barley (H. vulgare subsp. spontaneum and H. vulgare subsp. distichum) have also been recorded, but in much smaller quantities. According to Zohary quoted by R.H. Meadow, the distribution of wild barley extends today to the head of the Bolan Pass. It is therefore likely that local wild barleys could have been brought under cultivation in the Mehrgarh area. Costantini has also identified a small amount of domestic einkorn (hulled: Triticum monococcum), domestic emmer (hulled: T. turgidum subsp. dicoccum) and a free-threshing form which can be referred to as Triticum durum (Fig. 10).”
See -https://www.academia.edu/7147498/J_F_Jarrige
See -
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/059568v1.full
Thus, these people of Iran had arrived here about 1000 years after the Mehrgarh culture had taken off. The Ganj Dareh site had been occupied for only a short period of 100 to 300 years (mean 200 years). On the other hand, the Mehrgarh shows a continuous occupation for a long and continuous period till recent times. It may be noted that the domestication of the goat is not possible to take place in 200 or 300 years and about a thousand years is required for the features of domestication to start appearing on the skeletons of the animals. Clearly, the people of Ganj Dareh were not local, and had arrived from somewhere else.
Then if you look at ,
“ADMIXTURE and outgroup f3 statistics identified Caucasus Hunter-Gatherers of Western Georgia, just north of the Zagros mountains, as the group genetically most similar to GD13a (Fig. 1B,C), whilst PCA also revealed some affinity with modern Central South Asian populations such as Balochi, Makrani and Brahui (Fig. 1A and Fig. S4).” (
Llorente 2016)
This shows that Ganj Dareh coming from a region within the locations of Brahui, Baluchistan and Makaran of South Asia, now in porkystan. Mehrgarh was in modern-day Baluchistan all well within boundaries of GREATER BHARAT !!!
Refer to my post on greater Bharat -
https://defenceforumindia.com/threads/aryan-invasion-theory.1403/page-99#post-1803978
What about other characters of the Ganj Dareh lady? This paper also
noted the skin colour of the Ganj Dareh lady:
“She lacked the derived variant (rs16891982) of the SLC45A2 gene associated with light skin pigmentation but likely had at least one copy of the derived SLC24A5 allele (rs1426654) associated with the same trait. The derived SLC24A5 variant has been found in both Neolithic farmer and Caucasus Hunter-Gatherer groups suggesting that it was already present at an appreciable frequency before these populations diverged. Finally, she did not have the most common European variant of the LCT gene (rs4988235) associated with the ability to digest raw milk, consistent with the later emergence of this adaptation.” (
Llorente 2016).
Clearly, she had the light skin colour gene SLC24A5 allele which produces light skin colour in the eurfogas and the Bhartiyas .
This gene was not found in the eurofags until late the Bronze Age. It was not present in the La Branda human of 5000 BC. However, it was found present in many euofags between 3000 BC and 1000 BC (Allentoft). This means the Ganj Dareh were not ancestral to the early Neolithic people of the north of Black Sea who entered East Europe replacing the hunter-gatherers at about 5000 BC.I have earlier showed that the light skin colour gene SLC24A5 originated in India long back, and it migrated to other places including even ethiopia from India earlier.
See -
https://www.nature.com/articles/nature14507
Also , this research paper concludes that
the Iranian Neolithic people from Wezmeh Cave were related to the modern north western Indian and Afghan people, particularly the Zoroastrians of Iranian origin now living in Bharat.
“These people are estimated to have separated from Early Neolithic farmers in Anatolia some 46–77,000 years ago and show affinities to modern day Pakistani and Afghan populations, but particularly to Iranian Zoroastrians.”
Clearly, the Zagros (Iran) farmers had not arrived from Anatolian farmer community of the Anatolia Neolithic. In fact, they are deeply related to the BHARTIYA population.
See -
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/353/6298/499.full