What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2

[dhu]

Metspalu actually states point blank that the "West Eurasian" component is derived from S Asia :



"do the observed instances of shared ancestry component and selection signals reflect secondary gene flow between two regions, or do the populations living in these two regions have a common population history,[color="#0000FF"] in which case it is likely that West Eurasian diversity is derived from the more diverse South Asian gene pool.[/color]"

[Husky]

[quote name='Virendra' date='14 January 2012 - 08:26 PM' timestamp='1326552537' post='114207']

http://manasataramgini.wordpress.com/200...-genetics/



Excerpts:

hurling venom on the [color="#0000FF"]foreign[/color] and North Indian [color="#0000FF"]brAhmaNa-s[/color] forgetting all the while

[/quote]

[dhu]

Husky,

There is a neo-Jewry counterpart to the modernizing Communist.

These have already penned their Old Testaments with impeccable meticulousness.

[Husky]

I imagine I comprehend what you're saying and I don't disagree (this is assuming I did understand), though my own post here was actually on a different matter. It's not clear, but it was meant to be lengthier. Since I already had difficulty posting something else that day, I hit post on the extant bit above in order to thereafter immediately edit it by adding comments sort of related to it (found this procedure somewhat helps with the posting issues on IF). Eventually I gave up after the second attempt - especially since I brilliantly lost what was in my copy buffer - and intended to come back again "another day" :handwaving: and then typically forgot all about it. And so it stands awkwardly at present.



What I meant to say was:



There is no surprise in Indians on whatever fora screeching that brahmanas (peculiarly brahmanas) are "foreign". This was a long-standing assault even ten years back in Tamizh fora. They are attacking Hindu religion alone. They want to make the Vedam (hence Vedic, Hindoo religion) foreign. The logic is: make the brahmanas foreign, and the consequence is you get to make the Vedas - i.e. the very cornerstone of Hindu religion - foreign.



- Neo-Buddhists are still claiming this (especially those active in TN).

- The Jain Minority Forum - or whatever it's called - was (and probably still is) claiming this. (In the latter's argument, Jainism is the dravoodians' native religion, while brahmanas were the oryan invaders who brought the Vedic religion. An entertaining twist to the old tale.)

- Obviously the pioneers in such thinking are christians (includes cryptochristians), and they have profound influence over both groups above, though the 2 groups don't give the appearance of being conscious of this influence.



There is a pattern to all this missionising. It is that the aim of these absurd claims IS missionising.

1. First - and I'll be using logic internal to the whole Aryan stuff, it does not reflect me - some 75% of the nation is dubbed "Indo-Aryan" (e.g. by the CIA "factfile" on India). 3% or so is clubbed as "Munda", the rest (under 25%) mainly dumped under "Dravoodian".



2. The "north Indian" population falls under that uncoveted 75% - an uncoveted spot, because they are made foreign in one fell swoop. "Ironically" this 75% includes the very whiny Jain Minority Forum and the locus of neo-Buddhism/ambedkarites (which was not originally TN, and may still not be).



3. But Jainism, like Buddhism is demonstrably .... "north Indian". The neo-Buddhists and the JMF can hardly get out of that one, though the JMF has evolved that grand theory of "native dravoodians" of theirs.



4. In order to evict Hinduism and pretend the locals are "actually" "originally" Jain/"ought to be" Buddhist, they have to uniquely dump the Vedam outside of India proper. After all, to win the majority of the inhabitants to their religion (though in the neo-Buddhist case, the adherents don't really pretend to care for their chosen religion beyond paying lipservice to it, and only choose it to antagonise Hindus),

... to win the majority inhabitants, the salesmen can hardly claim that all/most (the 75%) of the locals are all foreign (along with the Vedam). So they do the next best thing: they dump a most convenient minority - the brahmanas - alone outside. Peculiarly (but predictably) them. Since the brahmanas are by definition intimately tied to the Vedam (actually the kShatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras are tied to it also as per the MBh, but this is somehow considered as inadmissable, since the majority of India's inhabitants would be lost again, if this were recognised)

... since the brahmanas are seen as inextricably linked (and recognised as defined by) the Vedam, the logic is: oust the Brahmanas, and you oust the Vedam and completely remove the legitimacy/nativeness of Hindu religion. While still magically keeping Jainism and Buddhism as "native religions", no longer impeded by being "north Indian" (which previously was an accusation and one that affected all famous native religions of India).



[Christianism is playing a very dangerous mind game with the neo-Buddhists and the JMF. The latter have no idea how fast the rug can (and will) be pulled from under their feet. Tomorrow. I'm just surprised they can't see it coming. But I suppose christianism does not mean them to. As an aside, I wonder when christianism will retire the neo-Buddhisms, they have outlived their usefulness to christianism already.]





The point is: the fact that this Reich (was it) study's interpretation of the current state of the data has caused entities on whatever India fora to specifically target Brahmanas as "foreign"

(though by implication, it must include Tamizh or more general southern fora that were referred to, as it mentioned brahmanas as being dubbed "north Indian" too - which can hardly be an accusation against northern brahmanas, whereas it IS the usual unsubtle eviction notice issued to southern brahmanas. Though now all Indian brahmanas are additionally being called "foreign" apparently, and no doubt that means the anti-brahminism pattern in TN is set to repeat India-wide at last - clever christianism, how long has it taken to get this far?)

The sentence again: the fact that this latest study's views has caused entities on whatever Indian fora to peculiarly target Brahmanas as "foreign" is neither surprising nor novel. And it's specifically anti-Hindu. (And only against Hindu religion. On the face of it, it's whining against "brahmanas". In reality the target being "only brahmanas" is a diversion: the fact that the whinies don't see/pretend not to see how they are likely very much affected by the same class of conclusions, shows that their goal is as usual the eviction of Hindu religion only. Else they'd be screeching against a substantial 75% of the inhabitants and more).

The whining is therefore still as insensible as before, because at a very minimum, the entire 75% is actually still within the eviction notice - though dravoodianists in TN will not seek eviction of the northern natives from the country, but rather use the latest episode in the "proof" of distinction as an excuse to declare how there is no relation btw N and S and seek a break in order to join into a christian eelam. (Which is the old argument behind the old plan. Determined plans bear fruit eventually. And christianism is nothing if not determined.)





Modern India. People in the distant future may actually remember this era and write many books about it as a turning point.

I find all this curiously fascinating - now that I no longer see it as a tragedy (can't help it: it ceases to be a tragedy when the protagonists are already/mostly dead, and those that remain are largely not the characters you'd be rooting for anyway) -

it's fascinating because we're living in a crucial part of its history. It is truly like no other period in its past, in some key respects. A landmark in time. Particularly for all the reasons one dares not articulate.

[Virendra]

Arabia the First Stop for Modern Humans Out of Africa, Suggests New Genetic Study

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/201...123705.htm

http://popular-archaeology.com/issue/dec...-new-study



Excerpts:

...A new study, using genetic analysis to look for clues about human migration over sixty thousand years ago, suggests that the first modern humans settled in Arabia on their way from the Horn of Africa to the rest of the world...

...Questions surrounding when and where early modern humans first migrated from Africa to populate the rest of the world have long been a focus of debate and study among scientists, where genetic research has played a key role. Now, recent genetic research study results have been released by an international team of scientists. The research, published January 26 by Cell Press in the American Journal of Human Genetics, suggests that modern humans settled first in Arabia more than 60,000 years ago on their way out through the Horn of Africa...

Regards,

Virendra

[dhu]

It turns out that the back to front distribution of 173 versus 17 is a result of wave expansion dynamics and not ice age.



[quote name='dhu' date='03 June 2007 - 10:20 PM' timestamp='1180888944' post='69732']

.....Oppenheimer states the problem of the back-to-front distribution of father (Ruslan-R1b) and son (M17) can only be explained by an ice age intervention and differential time depth (see below). R2 anchors these haplos specifically within South asia.



<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Unlike his son M17, Ruslan does not lurk at the threshold of Eastern Europe.  In fact he is very much commoner in the west, reaching 86 per cent in the Basques and similar...  <b>This back-to-front distribution of father and son suggests that the former may have arrived in Europe earlier. </b> As we shall see in chapter 6, <b>this can be explained by the ice age.  </b><b>Suffice it to say here that although M17 may be a relative newcomer to Europe, </b>his father Ruslan is possibly the strongest male marker line for the original  Early Upper Paleolithic invasion of western Europe form the east around 33,000 years ago.  Between them, this father and son team account for 50 per cent of extant male lines today.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->



not only r2 but also P:



<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Yet<b> Ruslan's genetic father P,</b> whom I shall call Polo...,<b> is confined to India, pakistan, Central Asia, and America.  </b>Study of the geographical distribution and the diversity of genetic branches and stems again suggests that Ruslan, along with his son M17, arose early in South Asia, somewhere near India and subsequently spread.....<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->



so there you have it. K (Krishna), P, and R2, the entire gamut of beatified progenitors of M17, have a distribution centering around India. To placate Semino, Oppenheimer goes with an older age for M17 but he clearly takes the pain to mention the lower estimates and chastise Semino:



"Semino and colleagues <span style='color:blue'>dispense with genetic dating </span>and have both M17 and his father, M173, as part of an archeologically dated Paleolithic movement from the east to west 30,000 years ago."



Clearly this is in conflict with his own opinion that there was a time gap in the migration events of 173 and 17: "Suffice it to say here that although M17 may be a relative newcomer to Europe, [/B]his father Ruslan is possibly the strongest male marker line for the original Early Upper Paleolithic invasion of western Europe form the east around 33,000 years ago."



again he takes the pains to mention:



footnote 34 p 393 "other methods of calculation yield much lower estimates." - concerning M17.

footnote 35 p 393 " Quintana-Murci et al .. tentatively suggests that the expansion into Europe started only around 5,000 years ago with the advent of farming." - concerning M17.

footnote 11 p 415 "Later post-glacial expansions into that region could have the same effect - Semino et al.." - concerning M17 in Carpathian region.

.....

[/quote]

[Guest]

Dhu ji, Husky ji and other gurus,

I am reading through the posts in this thread. I am not a geneticist. So is it possible for anyone to kindly explain the current argument about R1a1 being Euroean? some blogs by Europeans are already claiming victory quoting 2009 Reich's paper as well as this paper:

The Indian origin of paternal haplogroup R1a1(*) substantiates the autochthonous origin of Brahmins and the caste system. Sharma S. et al.

to say that R1a1 is basically a Brahmin gene. This argument is very similar to above post by Husky ji, how Brahmins and thus vedas and sanskrit are being given a foreign origin.



Please be kind to me and kindly explain what is this R1a1 business about? is this the same marker as R gene which Oppenheimer states to have Indian subcontinent as origin? if so, why is that after Reich's paper Europeans are now claiming that it's origins are European? did the origin change early holocene? Some put the origin of R1a1 in Hungary. I understand high diversity in India makes it's presence in India to be old, but again Europeans too are claiming the diversity of R1a1, so I am confused. Kindly clarify as if you are talking to a guy with very basic understanding of genes if you can. I am sure many like me are as confused as well.



Please look at the following blogs, he puts the origin of R1a1 in Hungary

http://olemski.blogspot.com/2011/09/viki...opeer.html

[G.Subramaniam]

@Nag, the whites are facing cognitive dissonance to accept they have Indian ancestry



The white skin color gene SLC24A5 is derived from upper caste Indian version of SLC24A5 and evolved only at 4000 BC



R gene is ancestral to R1A, R1B and R2

[Guest]

[quote name='G.Subramaniam' date='07 June 2012 - 09:34 PM' timestamp='1339118787' post='115040']

@Nag, the whites are facing cognitive dissonance to accept they have Indian ancestry



The white skin color gene SLC24A5 is derived from upper caste Indian version of SLC24A5 and evolved only at 4000 BC



R gene is ancestral to R1A, R1B and R2

[/quote]



Subramanmiam garu, thank you, that is a good point. They cant shake off their color. Even if they argue that Brahmins are aryans, it leads to a contradiction with regards to this color gene. Thanks again, I will search about this SLC24A5.But how do we know SLC24A5 direction of movement is from Indian castes to Europeans? is it from the argument that skin color gene transformed from black->dark brown->white chronologically? do you have any references which discusses the chronology of SLC24A5 mutation?



Thanks for the gyan.

[G.Subramaniam]

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2...kin-color/





« Hyper-evolution

The hot blooded evolve faster? (proteins that is) »

SLC24A5 – more than just skin color?



Over the past few weeks I’ve been looking closely at all the skin color related genes in humans which have been studied over the past few years. A little over two years ago the evolutionary biologist Armand Leroi wrote:

We don’t know what the differences are between white skin and black skin, European skin versus African skin. What I mean is we don’t know what the genetic basis of that is. This is actually amazing. I mean, here’s a trait, trivial as it may be, about which wars have been fought, which is one of the great fault lines in society, around which people construct their identities as nothing else. And yet we haven’t the foggiest idea what the genetic basis of this is. It’s amazing. Why is that?

Armand wrote that in the spring of 2005. In December of that year a paper was published in Science, SLC24A5, a Putative Cation Exchanger, Affects Pigmentation in Zebrafish and Humans. The authors concluded that:

Based on the average pigmentation difference between European-Americans and African-Americans of about 30 melanin units, our results suggest that SLC24A5 explains between 25 and 38% of the European-African difference in skin melanin index.



SLC24A5 is manifested in disjoint polymorphisms in Africans and Europeans. At one location on this gene where almost all Europeans have an adenine, almost all Africans have a guanine

[G.Subramaniam]

The A variant is derived, while the G is ancestral. That is, a mutation from G → A occurred at some point in the past, and A increased in frequency in a subset of the world’s populations. When did the increase in frequency occur? It seems fairly recently, Voight et. al. picked up a signature of selection around SLC24A5 though it is nearly fixed in Europeans and so is not an ideal target for their methods (which tend to be best at detecting partial sweeps). This would imply a time scale of less than 10,000 years. Another researcher has reported that the SNPs around SLC24A5 imply a selective event as recent as 5,800 years before the present! I’ve heard from people looking at the frequencies on other populations besides Europeans that a) it is extant at high frequencies across North Africa and Western Asia and <img src='http://www.india-forum.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cool.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='B)' /> there is a signature of selection.

There is of course one population which I’ve talked about in regards to SLC24A5 already, and that’s South Asians. It seems that about 1/3 of the variation in skin color within this group can be explained by polymorphism on this gene; that’s around the same range as the between-group difference for Africans and Europeans.

[G.Subramaniam]

The A/G ratio for South Asians was 0.820/0.180 in one survey; which included Tamils, Gujaratis, and Telugus. Another study gave the following ratios for Sinhalese and Tamils from Sri Lanka for A/G: 0.50/0.50 and 0.293/0.707 respectively. Finally, the South Asian genome association study has the following ratios for the lightest and darkest quintiles respectively for A/G: 0.90/0.10 and 0.51/0.49. The population was pooled across Punjabis, Gujaratis, Bengalis and Sri Lankans.

The figures for South Asia have me scratching my head a little. It seems pretty clear that SLC24A5 has an association with skin color; it works across Africans and Europeans and it works within South Asians. Nevertheless, why exactly does it exist at such high frequencies as far south as Sri Lanka? And why didn’t it make it to East Asia? Are the South Asian frequencies the result of a selective sweep which started to the north; or is this an endogenous allele which fixed in Europe later? (one would to look at the markers around the South Asian loss of function variant) It does have a northwest to southeast gradient in South Asia, that seems pretty evident.

[G.Subramaniam]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SLC24A5



It has been estimated that the threonine allele became predominant among Europeans 5,300 to 6,000 years ago [5].

[dhu]

The selection gradient points to migration of the mutated form of SLC24A5 Out-of-India. The mutation is 100% selective in Europe (along with Lactase persistence). Invariably, 100% selection in any area means that the mutation arose in the opposite where the heterozygotes predominate. There are a number of papers making ridiculous and stretched arguments against the evidence of the selection gradient.



The mutation probably arose in association with leprosy in the Indus Valley.

[G.Subramaniam]

[quote name='dhu' date='09 June 2012 - 10:59 PM' timestamp='1339262514' post='115066']

The selection gradient points to migration of the mutated form of SLC24A5 Out-of-India. The mutation is 100% selective in Europe (along with Lactase persistence). Invariably, 100% selection in any area means that the mutation arose in the opposite where the heterozygotes predominate. There are a number of papers making ridiculous and stretched arguments against the evidence of the selection gradient.



The mutation probably arose in association with leprosy in the Indus Valley.

[/quote]



My earlier post seems to imply that SLC24A5 modern form arose in Tamils, with a 30% ratio, ratio climbing to 50% for Sinhalese and perhaps 75% for Punjabis and 100% in Europeans

[Guest]

Dhu ji,

100% selection in any area means that the mutation arose in the opposite where the heterozygotes predominate.

Is it possible for you to kindly further explain how does one fix the direction of mutation? for a lay man who has very elementary genetic knowledge, seems like mutation took place in Europe because of the need to adjust to cooler climates, given the peopling happened from Africa to South Asia earlier so one can say that from Sumbrahmanmiam ji's posts above the G->A might have taken place due to a necessity to adjust to a new place, so this might have happened in higher latitude as compared to the Indian subcontinent? am I correct in understanding?



Subrahmanmiam ji:



So threonine allele's presence is because of G->A mutation? wiki only mentions threonine. Are there any references which I refer to about this gradient?

Thanks again.

[dhu]

Almost always, the mutation originates in the center and gets "fixed" in the periphery.

These are the diagrams explaining it:

http://www.nature.com/nrg/journal/v10/n1...32_F1.html

http://www.nature.com/nrg/journal/v10/n1...32_F2.html

--------------



Actually, you will not find anyone arguing for European/steppe origin of R:



Entire forums have disappeared overnight as soon as incontrovertible evidence emerged:

http://dna-forums.org/

[color="#0000FF"]"Subject: Re: [DNA] RES: Doesn't anyone care that dna-forums.org hasdisappeared? "[/color]

[dhu]

Also, there is evidence that the keepers of the holy mecca are directly descendant from S Asia/Iran.

[G.Subramaniam]

[quote name='Nag' date='10 June 2012 - 07:10 AM' timestamp='1339291958' post='115073']

Dhu ji,





Is it possible for you to kindly further explain how does one fix the direction of mutation? for a lay man who has very elementary genetic knowledge, seems like mutation took place in Europe because of the need to adjust to cooler climates, given the peopling happened from Africa to South Asia earlier so one can say that from Sumbrahmanmiam ji's posts above the G->A might have taken place due to a necessity to adjust to a new place, so this might have happened in higher latitude as compared to the Indian subcontinent? am I correct in understanding?



Subrahmanmiam ji:



So threonine allele's presence is because of G->A mutation? wiki only mentions threonine. Are there any references which I refer to about this gradient?

Thanks again.

[/quote]





So threonine allele's presence is because of G->A mutation? = Yes



What my post says is that among Tamils, the A version of SLC24A5 emerged to the extent of 30%

And as you went to northern latitudes, such as Sinhalese ( Oriya migrants ), it went to 50%



The lightest quintile of Indians ( Punjabis, brahmins, kashmiris, upper castes etc )

had A / G ratio of 90% / 10%



The darkerst quintile of Indians ( dravidian speakers, tamils, telegus, etc )

had A / G ratio of 50% / 50%



Among white europeans, A / G ratio is 99.9% / 0.1%



So you can see the start of the mutation in south India, slowly getting selected more in north India and reaching fixation in whites



This mutation started 10k years ago in India



'Could it be changes in diet? Could it be wearing clothes? Could it be infection? I really don’t know.' excerpt from my post



My guess is it started with wearing clothes, a lot of the body even in south India got removed from sun-light, and the skin exposed to sun had to lighten to get in more Vit-D

[G.Subramaniam]

http://anthropology.net/2008/11/10/check...equencess/



Has map of SLC24A5, as you can see, it is identical all the way from Punjab to Europe