03-10-2006, 02:21 PM
Saying the AIT is disputed is like saying the Holocaust is disputed.
AIT can be disproved in less than a page. The Rigveda itself refutes it. It tells us who wrote it and gives us a a physical description of its most dominant authors. And it dates itself by recording astronomical inscriptions.
The most fundamental issue in the AIT controversy is who wrote the Rigveda. The Rigveda is the work of ten gifted families of thinkers, writers and poets and their descendants. Its most dominant authors, the Angiras, describe themselves matter-of-factly as brown, dark or black. No amount of DNA evidence is going to lead you to this kind of specific information. DNA is irrelevant.
It is not clear why this evidence from the Rigveda itself was not presented to the Committee that reviewed the proposed textbook changes.
AIT can be disproved in less than a page. The Rigveda itself refutes it. It tells us who wrote it and gives us a a physical description of its most dominant authors. And it dates itself by recording astronomical inscriptions.
The most fundamental issue in the AIT controversy is who wrote the Rigveda. The Rigveda is the work of ten gifted families of thinkers, writers and poets and their descendants. Its most dominant authors, the Angiras, describe themselves matter-of-factly as brown, dark or black. No amount of DNA evidence is going to lead you to this kind of specific information. DNA is irrelevant.
It is not clear why this evidence from the Rigveda itself was not presented to the Committee that reviewed the proposed textbook changes.