What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory-1

[Guest]

Dhu, thanks.

Very interesting excerpts from the "Polarity and Temporality ..." genetics paper. The Interesting Points section especially. I'm a bit confused though when trying to connect the Caution part with the rest of the article. Is the AIT scenario - according to this paper - still a possibility or has it been closed off (in genetics)?

Its statement
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Our reappraisal indicates that pre-Holocene and Holocene-era—not Indo-European—expansions have shaped the distinctive South Asian Y-chromosome landscape.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->seems to go against the AIT, but then<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Therefore, our data do <b>not support models that invoke a <i>pronounced</i> recent genetic input from Central Asia</b> to explain the observed genetic variation in South Asia.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->This is still not helping. Witzel and his team might create a new model, however preoposterous: "a tiny band of Aryan invaders-migrants-acculturists from Central Asia carried all the glorious Indian culture, language, heroism, Vedas and everything that was ever good to India and imposed the caste system on the Dravidians". I can see Witzel do it. No matter how much his field is shaken by these and other discoveries, he finds some tiny thread to hang on to. The probability of him being right is about one in a zillion. But no doubt he'll attempt to use his position as a Harvard professor as leverage to invert the probability into a zillion. [Perhaps that will be his fatal mistake: he might not know enough statistics to know that the probability for any event cannot exceed 1 <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo--> ]

And what does the "far from completely conclusive non-invasion" in the following refer to? Is it referring to the Neolithic farmers invading Europe? Or have they gone back to talking about South Asia and the invasions from Central Asian, seeing as how the subsequent line is referring to R1A1 markers?<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Recently we have had papers about the invasion of Europe by Neolithic
farmers which have suggested that invasion by farmers had little effect. But careful examination shows that the non-invasion is far from completelty conclusive. I must say the whole point lies with the R1A1 markers and some other like the J2 group.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Even if genetics is a precise science, the English language is not: what does that non-invasion refer to?