Analysis Of Races Mentioned In The Rgveda

03-28-2005, 12:02 PM

QUOTE(mitradena @ Nov 21 2004, 08:28 AM) Mudy,

Hitler stole the Svastika symbol from us.

The word Svastika occurs only in Sanskrit. If the Germans claim the svastika as their own, then why did they "forget" about it for more than 3000 years?

Why suddenly in the 20th century did they remember their "aryan" heritage? 
Dead wrong. The sunwheel swastika has been used by the Norse mythology and social life for many centuries before the Christian invasion. Just because Indians didn't know about it, doesn't mean it didn't exist. It sounds like you guys are trying to avoid a bad name, want something to be not true so badly that you are manipulating facts, very cowardly.

As for Aryanism in Germany, good on them. We must always aim high, and if the Aryans (which run in our blood) were the standard of the Gods, we must aim for it - no matter what its name may be. Personally, I think the Persians (who, as you can see geographically, are racially related to us) are the true Aryans that existed, this can be noted in King Darius' speech. They had dark hair, white skin and generally light coloured eyes. The European Aryan differs, but the standards are still very high. The Blonde haired, Blue eyes ideal of the Europeans, was a Nordic ideal - those of the utmost North. I have no problem if they wish to strive for such a look, ours lie in what are the characteristics of our race.

Adolf Hitler didn't dislike Indians (considering with had an SS Legion) and we have no concern with the Jews, I fail to see what people are getting upset over. Just as we enjoy talking rubbish, so too do Stormfront, thats the point of a message board.

If Indo-European is the term that suits you, I highly recommend you taking a look at this;
<img src='http://radio.weblogs.com/0126951/images/myPictures/2004/06/02/Indo-European%20Family%20of%20Languages.JPG' border='0' alt='user posted image' />

White, Black, Blue I'm not really concerned, the same high and noble blood runs in our veins, we should make the absolute most of it, and most of us do.

Sunder · 03-28-2005, 01:21 PM

QUOTEDead wrong. The sunwheel swastika has been used by the Norse mythology and social life for many centuries before the Christian invasion. Just because Indians didn't know about it, doesn't mean it didn't exist.
A shape such as a Swastika could exist anywhere. There is no debate on that. Can you enlighten me with the following:

1) What was the Sunwheel "Swastika" called? Was it called Swastiko or something similar?
2) How long before the Christian invasion did this exist. I know Christianity itself did not exist too long ago. It's barely 2 millenia old.
3) Did Hitler (or any other European worth his/her name) adopt the nordic "Swastika" as their emblem?

Your arrogant claim that "Just because Indians did not know" contradicts your claim of a central Aryan origin. If there was a central Aryan origin, woulnt Aryans have attibuted Swastika to the central proto-whatever-it-is tribe?

QUOTEPersonally, I think the Persians (who, as you can see geographically, are racially related to us) are the true Aryans that existed, this can be noted in King Darius' speech.

Personally, you are free to think what ever you wish to. There is absolutely no one stopping you from having a personal opinion. But do you have Mitochondrial DNA evidence to back up the claim?

QUOTEWhite, Black, Blue I'm not really concerned, the same high and noble blood runs in our veins, we should make the absolute most of it, and most of us do.
True, it's pure African blood that flows in our veins that we took along with us 150,000 years ago. We then passed this on to the Europeans, Arabs, Chinese and the rest of the world.

03-28-2005, 06:41 PM

QUOTEIf Indo-European is the term that suits you, I highly recommend you taking a look at this;
(IMG:http://radio.weblogs.com/0126951/images/myPictures/2004/06/02/Indo-European%20Family%20of%20Languages.JPG)


I am sick of this "Indo-European" crap. Just another colonial era ploy to appropriate Samskrutha and divide Indians. All these languages borrowed some words from Samskrutha and the people some civilizing ideas from Hindus and now they are trying to strut around laying claim to Samskrutha via this "Indo-European" nonsense.

High time we introduce alternate theories like we did against "Aryan Invasion" theories.

03-28-2005, 06:49 PM

Here is some of what Swami Vivekananda has to say..

QUOTEThen there is the other idea that the Shudra caste are surely the aborigines. What are they? They are slaves. They say history repeats itself. The Americans, English, Dutch, and the Portuguese got hold of the poor Africans and made them work hard while they lived, and their children of mixed birth were born in slavery and kept in that condition for a long period. From that wonderful example, the mind jumps back several thousand years and fancies that the same thing happened here, and our archaeologist dreams of India being full of dark-eyed aborigines, and the bright Aryan came from â the Lord knows where. According to some, they came from Central Tibet, others will have it that they came from Central Asia. There are patriotic Englishmen who think that the Aryans were all red-haired. Others, according to their idea, think that they were all black-haired. If the writer happens to be a black-haired man, the Aryans were all black-haired. Of late, there was an attempt made to prove that the Aryans lived on the Swiss lakes. I should not be sorry if they had been all drowned there, theory and all. Some say now that they lived at the North Pole. Lord bless the Aryans and their habitations! As for the truth of these theories, there is not one word in our scriptures, not one, to prove that the Aryan ever came from anywhere outside of India, and in ancient India was included Afghanistan. There it ends. And the theory that the Shudra caste were all non-Aryans and they were a multitude, is equally illogical and equally irrational. It could not have been possible in those days that a few Aryans settled and lived there with a hundred thousand slaves at their command. These slaves would have eaten them up, made "chutney" of them in five minutes. The only explanation is to be found in the MahÃ¢bhÃ¢rata, which says that in the beginning of the Satya Yuga there was one caste, the Brahmins, and then by difference of occupations they went on dividing themselves into different castes, and that is the only true and rational explanation that has been given. And in the coming Satya Yuga all the other castes will have to go back to the same condition.

03-28-2005, 09:30 PM

QUOTEDead wrong. The sunwheel swastika has been used by the Norse mythology and social life for many centuries before the Christian invasion. Just because Indians didn't know about it, doesn't mean it didn't exist. It sounds like you guys are trying to avoid a bad name, want something to be not true so badly that you are manipulating facts, very cowardly.


What a joke!
Svastika is a samkrta word. Hitler clearly borrowed this terminology from Indian sources. Are disputing this? If so why did he call it the svastika instead of the German equivalent of "sun wheel"?

Did the Norsemen call their symbol the "svastika"?
Please answer Sunder's questions before talking nonsense.

Further, the word Arya occurs most frequently in Vedic sources only.
It also occurs rarely in old Persian which as we know is almost the same language as Samskrtam.

Now interestingly the word Aryan (with an "n" in the end) occurs only in South Indian sources, especially among the Namboothiri brahmanas of Kerala.

03-28-2005, 09:37 PM

QUOTEI wonder why none of the Stormfronters didn't come here to debate with you, yet they always poke fun at the Indian visitors that try to set them straight? I suppose they only feel confident to debate with others, when they are only on that forum and when they have their buddies to back them up. If they were alone and to come here, they would probably be too scared.


Most of the stormfront types are low IQ dim witted fools trying to pass themselves as scholars.

QUOTEThis is a bit off topic, but it's hilarious that they just love to claim Bollywood celebrities as the "few Indians that survived the racial pollution caused by the breakdown of the caste system." All of the white people that I know can differentiate a light-skinned Indian from a European. I don't know why it's so hard for these Stormfront WN's? I guess they just can't accept the fact that a non-white person can look better than them, so they try to make up for it by saying that these people are really pure descendants of the glorious blonde-haired and blue-eyed Aryan tribe.

This is because Europeans are extremely addicted to sex. They are basically Asuras and Rakshasas according to the Vedic classification.

So when they see some bollywood actress who is sexually appealing they foolishly think this must be the original "Aryan".

03-29-2005, 12:10 AM

Also look at that graphic depicting Indo-european languages. Indic section is a small part on the right. While the truth of the matter is that in any reasonable metric the Indian section could be bigger than all other combined.

**acharya** · 03-29-2005, 05:09 AM

QUOTE(Ashok Kumar @ Mar 28 2005, 06:40 AM) Also look at that graphic depicting Indo-european languages.Â Indic section is a small part on the right.Â While the truth of the matter is that in any reasonable metric the Indian section could be bigger than all other combined. 
The whole point of creating this chart was to reduce the significance and weigth of the Indic languages in the family and make it insignificant and derivative. This project was started in late 1800s to reduce one of th largest civilization into a insignificant one.

03-29-2005, 01:11 PM

QUOTE(Sunder @ Mar 28 2005, 01:21 PM) <div class='quotetop'>QUOTEDead wrong. The sunwheel swastika has been used by the Norse mythology and social life for many centuries before the Christian invasion. Just because Indians didn't know about it, doesn't mean it didn't exist.
A shape such as a Swastika could exist anywhere. There is no debate on that. Can you enlighten me with the following:

1) What was the Sunwheel "Swastika" called? Was it called Swastiko or something similar?
2) How long before the Christian invasion did this exist. I know Christianity itself did not exist too long ago. It's barely 2 millenia old.
3) Did Hitler (or any other European worth his/her name) adopt the nordic "Swastika" as their emblem?

Your arrogant claim that "Just because Indians did not know" contradicts your claim of a central Aryan origin. If there was a central Aryan origin, woulnt Aryans have attibuted Swastika to the central proto-whatever-it-is tribe?

QUOTEPersonally, I think the Persians (who, as you can see geographically, are racially related to us) are the true Aryans that existed, this can be noted in King Darius' speech.

Personally, you are free to think what ever you wish to. There is absolutely no one stopping you from having a personal opinion. But do you have Mitochondrial DNA evidence to back up the claim?

QUOTEWhite, Black, Blue I'm not really concerned, the same high and noble blood runs in our veins, we should make the absolute most of it, and most of us do.
True, it's pure African blood that flows in our veins that we took along with us 150,000 years ago. We then passed this on to the Europeans, Arabs, Chinese and the rest of the world. </div>
1) The name may have been different or the same, who cares. It's the same symbol.

2) I'm not sure of this, perhaps you could do some of YOUR OWN RESEARCH.

3) Yes, perhaps you have heard of the Thule Society?
<img src='http://www.intelinet.org/swastika/thulesoc.gif' border='0' alt='user posted image' />
The image shows the swastika more as a Nordic rune, Hitler merely straightened the edges.

We share a common link, that is proven by the language tree which is upheld by Linguists. How much of that link left is reallly visible, as we are the strongest to have still maintained our ancient culture without falling into the traps of Semitic religions.

Central Aryan Origin? There is no doubt that Caucasians have influenced our genetic make up, look at it geographically. You also cannot put aside that there were people (proto-europeans perhaps) that were predating the Aryans. The sunworshippers were orignally Indo-Europeans, even the Native American tribes of America resemble this, since they are part Caucasian and part Asiatic. This means, they could've spread outwards from Iran, "Caucasus"

Iran means "Land of the Aryans", you can do all the genetic evidence bla bla bla you want, but you are wasting your time. This doesn't make them superior/inferior, but only that they have taken that label.

As for the African rubbish, thats exactly what it is.

Sunder · (This post was last modified: 03-29-2005, 01:58 PM by Sunder.)

QUOTE(Vikram @ Mar 29 2005, 01:11 PM) 1) The name may have been different or the same, who cares. It's the same symbol. 
I do care, and I do require an answer from you if you are serious about your theory. else take your story elsewhere. By your line of argument circles exist in every civilization and hence Hindus cannot be credited the invention of Zero. This kind of logic is laughable and hence cannot go around in the guise of an "argument".

QUOTE2) I'm not sure of this, perhaps you could do some of YOUR OWN RESEARCH.
I have absolutely no motive nor the means to do my research to debunk an already invalid statement. As you made the claim, the onus is upon you to provide the data, else please accept that you are stating your gut-feeling without any data to back it up.

QUOTEWe share a common link, that is proven by the language tree which is upheld by Linguists. How much of that link left is reallly visible, as we are the strongest to have still maintained our ancient culture without falling into the traps of Semitic religions.
With the discovery of Ancient cities - 9000 years or older - off the coast of Gujarat and a 7000 year old city as far as Poompuhar in Tamilnadu, the whole Aryan Dravidian theory does not hold water. There is a common link for the Indo European Language system, and the origin more indic than nordic or slavic.

QUOTECentral Aryan Origin? There is no doubt that Caucasians have influenced our genetic make up, look at it geographically. You also cannot put aside that there were people (proto-europeans perhaps) that were predating the Aryans.
This is laughable. You have to read Stephen Oppenheimer's bradshawfoundation articles, and journey of mankind. Caucasians have influenced zilch genetically. They are the descendants of Indians and not the other way around. Check this out:
http://www.bradshawfoundation.com/journey/ (This study is backed up on DNA evidence and not some half-baked linguistic evidence.

Linguistic evidence has the following logic: I speak english, I come from India, hence english originated from India. This is what Proto-indo-whatever theory does.

QUOTEAs for the African rubbish, thats exactly what it is.
I really AM sorry to have thought that you were a serious & poster with some intellectual-integrity.

03-29-2005, 03:49 PM

QUOTE(Sunder @ Mar 29 2005, 01:57 PM) <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Vikram @ Mar 29 2005, 01:11 PM) 1) The name may have been different or the same, who cares. It's the same symbol. 
I do care, and I do require an answer from you if you are serious about your theory. else take your story elsewhere. By your line of argument circles exist in every civilization and hence Hindus cannot be credited the invention of Zero. This kind of logic is laughable and hence cannot go around in the guise of an "argument".

QUOTE2) I'm not sure of this, perhaps you could do some of YOUR OWN RESEARCH.
I have absolutely no motive nor the means to do my research to debunk an already invalid statement. As you made the claim, the onus is upon you to provide the data, else please accept that you are stating your gut-feeling without any data to back it up.

QUOTEWe share a common link, that is proven by the language tree which is upheld by Linguists. How much of that link left is reallly visible, as we are the strongest to have still maintained our ancient culture without falling into the traps of Semitic religions.
With the discovery of Ancient cities - 9000 years or older - off the coast of Gujarat and a 7000 year old city as far as Poompuhar in Tamilnadu, the whole Aryan Dravidian theory does not hold water. There is a common link for the Indo European Language system, and the origin more indic than nordic or slavic.

QUOTECentral Aryan Origin? There is no doubt that Caucasians have influenced our genetic make up, look at it geographically. You also cannot put aside that there were people (proto-europeans perhaps) that were predating the Aryans.
This is laughable. You have to read Stephen Oppenheimer's bradshawfoundation articles, and journey of mankind. Caucasians have influenced zilch genetically. They are the descendants of Indians and not the other way around. Check this out:
http://www.bradshawfoundation.com/journey/ (This study is backed up on DNA evidence and not some half-baked linguistic evidence.

Linguistic evidence has the following logic: I speak english, I come from India, hence english originated from India. This is what Proto-indo-whatever theory does.

QUOTEAs for the African rubbish, thats exactly what it is.
I really AM sorry to have thought that you were a serious & poster with some intellectual-integrity. </div>
Your whole argument is void, becuase I actually have no idea what you are arguing about? That Aryans originated in India?

I never said Hindus cannot be credited, they most certainly are. But that doesnt' disprove that we are some what Caucasians. These people may have been from elsewhere, but their culture and religion DEVELOPED completely in India. The Aryans were wandering warriors, no doubt they would breed with native populations. As I said, look at it geographically, it's pretty logical. People search for warmer climates, North men would wander south to achieve that, thus influencing the genetic make up of people. I don't see how this degrades Indian people now? We are the only people that are able to uphold these excellent beleifs and cultural practices, showing that our ancestors were indeed strong.

I beleive strongly that there were downward migrations, finding a few cities doesn't disprove Caucasoid blood. It only means they were there early, or an early type of people such as the ones who had mixed to make the Dravidian people (Proto-Europeans, Mediteraneans etc.)

As for Stephen Oppenheimer, what can I say? I've read some of his work, his theories don't prove why some races are dominant to others, why we are inequal and why Africans are still living in trees and eating each other. Since they are so old and ancient, perhaps you'd think they would've evolved by now. If you wish to have you ancestry belonging to Negroids then that is your choice, I frankly see nothing of theres in our culture, not an influence neither a racial link.

To me you sound like some Hinduvta supporter, or some staunch Nationalist who doesn't want to have "omg white blood" because of some experience you had as a child or what? Gandhi disliked Africans, so I seriously doubt such a learned man would have such beleifs if we were from Africa.

03-29-2005, 03:58 PM

Races of India

03-29-2005, 08:27 PM

Myth of the Aryan Invasion

Demise of the Aryan Invasion Theory

Aryan Invasion Theory is a hoax

Quotes -

<b>Real Meaning of the word Arya </b>

<i>In 1853, Max Muller introduced the word 'Arya' into the English and European usage as applying to a racial and linguistic group when propounding the Aryan Racial theory. However, in 1888, he himself refuted his own theory and wrote: </i>

<b>" I have declared again and again that if I say Aryas, I mean neither blood nor bones, nor hair, nor skull; I mean simply those who speak an Aryan language... to me an ethnologist who speaks of Aryan race, Aryan blood, Aryan eyes and hair, is as great a sinner as a linguist who speaks of a dolichocephalic dictionary or a brachycephalic grammar." (Max Muller, Biographies of Words and the Home of the Aryas, 1888, pg 120). </b>

<b>The Myth of Aryans and Non-Aryans</b>

By Swami Vivekananda

"The mind jumps back several thousand years, and fancies that the same things happened here, and our archaeologist dreams of India being full of dark eyed aborigines, and the bright Aryan came from - the Lord knows where. According to some, they came from Central Tibet, others will have it that they came from Central Asia. There are patriotic Englishmen who think that they were all black haired. If the write happens to be a black haired man, then the Aryans were all black haired.

Of late there have been attempts to prove that the Aryans lived on the Swiss lakes. I should not be sorry if they had been all drowned there, theory and all. Some say now that they lived at the North Pole. Lord bless the Aryans and their habitations. As for as the truth in these theories, there is not one word in our scriptures, not one, to prove that the Aryans came from anywhere outside of India, and in ancient India was included Afganistan. There it ends.

All the theory that the Shudras caste were all non-Aryans and they were a multitude, is equally illogical and equally irrational. It could not have been possible in those days that a few hundred Aryans settled and lived there with a few hundred thousand slaves at their command. These slaves would have eaten them up, made "chutney" of them in five minutes.

The only explanation can be found in the Mahabharatha, which says, that in the beginning of Satya Yuga there was only one caste, the Brahmanas, and then by difference of occupation they went on dividing themselves into castes, and that is the only true and rational explanation that has been given. And in the coming of the Satya Yuga all the other castes will have to go back to the same condition. The solution to the caste problem in India, therefore, assumes this form, not to degrade the higher castes, not to crush out the Brahmana."

Comment: There is no evidence whatsoever that whites or proto-europeans had ANYTHING to do with Indian culture and tradition. Posting random pictures of Indians with good looks is no solid proof.

PS: I am currently debating with Bill White about AIT.

03-29-2005, 10:01 PM

QUOTEThe Aryans were wandering warriors, no doubt they would breed with native populations. As I said, look at it geographically, it's pretty logical. People search for warmer climates, North men would wander south to achieve that, thus influencing the genetic make up of people.


Yes, let us look at this logically. The human body is designed for warm climate not cold climate, because we can live naked in the tropics but not in the cold north. So this means that man originated in the warm south not the cold north.

Read the genetic evidence posted by Sunder and provided an intellectual analysis of that if you can.

03-29-2005, 11:50 PM

QUOTEwhy we are inequal and why Africans are still living in trees and eating each other. Since they are so old and ancient, perhaps you'd think they would've evolved by now. If you wish to have you ancestry belonging to Negroids then that is your choice, I frankly see nothing of theres in our culture, not an influence neither a racial link.

One factor that drives "civilization" is contact with other people, flow of ideas, and yes.....the mixing of bloodlines. Why does the flora, fauna and even the original aboriginals of Australia are rather unique in many respects? Why do we find the strangest species in the Galapagos Isles......simply because they had been isolated in all respects.
The same argument holds for the Negroid Africans who were trapped in the equatorial jungles....boxed in by the seas, the Sahara and the difficult jungles. Your derision for "Africans" and racial prejudices are very apparent by now...and so is your ignorance by painting all "Africans" in a broad brush. If "African"s were so undermenschen, then what are the Egyptians, the Mali kingdom, the Berbers, the Nabatheans, ancient Zinj, Carthage (they had Semitic roots, but still)....they all had pretty ancient civilizations. They may not have been as grand as Rome or something, but they had functioning civilizations and were NOT barbarians like most of their contemporary Europeans

There were large scale migrations at the coming of the Ice age AND when the glaciers receeded..... the entire globe was affected. Every man Jack and his nosy aunt were moving about in search of better pastures.....not just caucasian men who migrated to bless this land with their "oh-so-pure-and-superior bloodline".

****
I guess you are desperate for *some* sort of association with the Caucasian race so as to offset your inferiority complex or something.... Chill out bhai, no matter what you claim, their a$$es are whiter than ours....The last time a self hating Desi used this argument to get citizenship in the US, his case was dismissed by the court on insufficent grounds. What he claimed about the Aryan-Caucasian theory is just that, a theory. It is possible that Indians and Europeans be of the same stock at some point in history, but to tout that as THE overriding matter is IMO pathetic. There's a bit of everybody in everybody... if you dig deep enough.

Sunder · 03-30-2005, 01:28 AM

QUOTEAs I said, look at it geographically, it's pretty logical. People search for warmer climates, North men would wander south to achieve that, thus influencing the genetic make up of people. I don't see how this degrades Indian people now? We are the only people that are able to uphold these excellent beleifs and cultural practices, showing that our ancestors were indeed strong.
Geographically, it's not quite logical, because you can see migrations from Asia into North America around the Ice age. Also geographical evidence is not strong if it is in conflict with DNA evidence. Please read thru Oppenheimer's books before you harp about European blood. European blood is not any more pure than a monkey's blood. Each species unto itself. So please do not bring this European = great, and african = tree-huggers theory here. It's not only racist, it is also demeaning to the great tribes of Africa.

I would say that Europeans are not advanced because they did not (and do not) have a concept of co-existence with nature. They are depleting nature like there is no tomorrow, they have paved way for nuclear bombs and mass scale destructions. They are the ones who are superstitious enough to believe the earth is flat, and hell-fire really exists. You talk of ancestry of such degenerate tribes.

QUOTEI beleive strongly that there were downward migrations, <b>finding a few cities doesn't disprove Caucasoid blood</b>. It only means they were there early, or an early type of people such as the ones who had mixed to make the Dravidian people (Proto-Europeans, Mediteraneans etc.)
See how quickly you dismissed a groundbreaking discovery as "finding a few cities". You did not even pause to think about the implication or significance of such a discovery. You quickly claim that these MUST have been caucasians who ran all the way to build cities in South India (thus taking away credit that Indian Ancestors of the causasians are more than capable of raising well built cities.) You will have to back up your statement above with DNA evidence. Even the european academics do not believe that Caucasians migrated to South India 9500 years ago. You seem to be a Christian fanatic or a Nazi-admirer for your vehement and staunch attachment to Whiteblood. I only believe in red-blood.

QUOTEAs for Stephen Oppenheimer, what can I say? I've read some of his work, his theories don't prove why some races are dominant to others, why we are inequal and why Africans are still living in trees and eating each other. Since they are so old and ancient, perhaps you'd think they would've evolved by now.
You now change track from the validity of Oppenheimer's theory on descendancy. You did not say whether you agree of disagree that Indians are the ascendants of Caucasians. Now you directly shoot off in a tangent and talk about "dominance". well, as I mentioned above, the Caucasians are no more special than east-timorians or the antarctican penguins.

I quote from the movie Troy, Briseis says to Achilles:
<b>Briseis:</b> Stop! Too many men have died today! If killing is your only talent, that's your curse. I don't want anyone dying for me.

If europeans' only talent is destruction of anything non-european, then it's their curse, not their greatness.

QUOTEIf you wish to have you ancestry belonging to Negroids then that is your choice, I frankly see nothing of theres in our culture, not an influence neither a racial link.
I HAD to laugh uncontrollably for a while. Ancestry cannot be wished for. It is inherited. By wishing I had a great heritage I cannot get one overnight. On the other hand, YOU are in denial of your ancestry, and that your ancestors were capable of influencing the Europeans. The day you learn to respect yourself, you will learn to respect truth.

QUOTETo me you sound like some Hinduvta supporter, or some staunch Nationalist who doesn't want to have "omg white blood" because of some experience you had as a child or what?
I AM a Hindu, and I support Truth. Yes, I support the One True Religion, the Religion of the Vedas. I am a staunch Nationalist, and an unflincingly explicit one at that. Do you have a problem with that? About the 'omg white blood' the only white blood I have seen are in cockroackes. I am definitely not a descendant of Cockroackes. If you are, then suit yourself. <!--emo& Wink

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /> (sorry I had to take your line of argument here.)

QUOTEGandhi disliked Africans, so I seriously doubt such a learned man would have such beleifs if we were from Africa.
My sincere sympathies are with Gandhi.

03-30-2005, 01:40 AM

QUOTEAbout the 'omg white blood' the only white blood I have seen are in cockroackes. 
<!--emo& Big Grin

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /> <!--emo& Big Grin

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' />

Do Pakroaches have green blood?

Sunder · (This post was last modified: 03-30-2005, 01:45 AM by Sunder.)

QUOTE(Ashok Kumar @ Mar 30 2005, 01:40 AM) <div class='quotetop'>QUOTEAbout the 'omg white blood' the only white blood I have seen are in cockroackes. 
<!--emo& Big Grin

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /> <!--emo& Big Grin

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' />

Do Pakroaches have green blood? </div>
<img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='laugh.gif' /> Good one <img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='laugh.gif' />

03-30-2005, 03:12 AM

QUOTE(Sunder @ Mar 30 2005, 01:28 AM) <div class='quotetop'>QUOTEAs I said, look at it geographically, it's pretty logical. People search for warmer climates, North men would wander south to achieve that, thus influencing the genetic make up of people. I don't see how this degrades Indian people now? We are the only people that are able to uphold these excellent beleifs and cultural practices, showing that our ancestors were indeed strong.
Geographically, it's not quite logical, because you can see migrations from Asia into North America around the Ice age. Also geographical evidence is not strong if it is in conflict with DNA evidence. Please read thru Oppenheimer's books before you harp about European blood. European blood is not any more pure than a monkey's blood. Each species unto itself. So please do not bring this European = great, and african = tree-huggers theory here. It's not only racist, it is also demeaning to the great tribes of Africa.

I would say that Europeans are not advanced because they did not (and do not) have a concept of co-existence with nature. They are depleting nature like there is no tomorrow, they have paved way for nuclear bombs and mass scale destructions. They are the ones who are superstitious enough to believe the earth is flat, and hell-fire really exists. You talk of ancestry of such degenerate tribes.

QUOTEI beleive strongly that there were downward migrations, <b>finding a few cities doesn't disprove Caucasoid blood</b>. It only means they were there early, or an early type of people such as the ones who had mixed to make the Dravidian people (Proto-Europeans, Mediteraneans etc.)
See how quickly you dismissed a groundbreaking discovery as "finding a few cities". You did not even pause to think about the implication or significance of such a discovery. You quickly claim that these MUST have been caucasians who ran all the way to build cities in South India (thus taking away credit that Indian Ancestors of the causasians are more than capable of raising well built cities.) You will have to back up your statement above with DNA evidence. Even the european academics do not believe that Caucasians migrated to South India 9500 years ago. You seem to be a Christian fanatic or a Nazi-admirer for your vehement and staunch attachment to Whiteblood. I only believe in red-blood.

QUOTEAs for Stephen Oppenheimer, what can I say? I've read some of his work, his theories don't prove why some races are dominant to others, why we are inequal and why Africans are still living in trees and eating each other. Since they are so old and ancient, perhaps you'd think they would've evolved by now.
You now change track from the validity of Oppenheimer's theory on descendancy. You did not say whether you agree of disagree that Indians are the ascendants of Caucasians. Now you directly shoot off in a tangent and talk about "dominance". well, as I mentioned above, the Caucasians are no more special than east-timorians or the antarctican penguins.

I quote from the movie Troy, Briseis says to Achilles:
<b>Briseis:</b> Stop! Too many men have died today! If killing is your only talent, that's your curse. I don't want anyone dying for me.

If europeans' only talent is destruction of anything non-european, then it's their curse, not their greatness.

QUOTEIf you wish to have you ancestry belonging to Negroids then that is your choice, I frankly see nothing of theres in our culture, not an influence neither a racial link.
I HAD to laugh uncontrollably for a while. Ancestry cannot be wished for. It is inherited. By wishing I had a great heritage I cannot get one overnight. On the other hand, YOU are in denial of your ancestry, and that your ancestors were capable of influencing the Europeans. The day you learn to respect yourself, you will learn to respect truth.

QUOTETo me you sound like some Hinduvta supporter, or some staunch Nationalist who doesn't want to have "omg white blood" because of some experience you had as a child or what?
I AM a Hindu, and I support Truth. Yes, I support the One True Religion, the Religion of the Vedas. I am a staunch Nationalist, and an unflincingly explicit one at that. Do you have a problem with that? About the 'omg white blood' the only white blood I have seen are in cockroackes. I am definitely not a descendant of Cockroackes. If you are, then suit yourself. <!--emo& Wink

--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /> (sorry I had to take your line of argument here.)

QUOTEGandhi disliked Africans, so I seriously doubt such a learned man would have such beleifs if we were from Africa.
My sincere sympathies are with Gandhi. </div>
Denial of Ancestry? I just accept the true one. Not some theory created by a Jew. Indians are a Caucasian subspecies, I wonder how they ended up there.

**acharya** · 03-30-2005, 03:16 AM

<b> Indians are a Caucasian subspecies</b>

Can you explain this?

Indian population has been populated over a period of 100000 years atleast -

Login




Remember me Lost Password?