<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Is true that this cultures aint have same number of population ,but i talk more about influence on the world.. Is true that Europe wasnt a unified entity,this cultural unification started whit halstad in 1200Bc and especialy whit greeks starting from 500BC.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Halstead is known to have intruded into western Basque region during iron age, synonymous with the first westward venture west of celts. we are still waiting for witzel's mahaeuropa. i am sure it is hidden somewhere there in romanian hinterlands. Greeks considered themselves connected to mediterranean culture of egypt/mideast much more than northern barbarian land. but they still pale infront of mesopotamia and egypt.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->BUT this is true also for India,for exemple,in neolithic Bengal and Tamil Nadu cultures was dieferent the Indus civilisation. You said that Europe was behind oriental cultures.THis aint true an least not for 7000-3000BC and 1500-2006 period.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not bengal but the northeastern culture is a derivative of the south chinese rice-based culture. ONly the roman and modern period are at levels commensurate with china and egypt, for example.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The existence of large number of megalites from that required a high tehnology is a evidence for this.Also the religion show continuity.The paleolithic Dancing wizard is find also in celtic cult and also in indus pashupati-lord of beasts.Is true that indian paleolithic art is more diverese then european one ,were in paleolithic India you find so much expresivity as in Altamira or Lascaux paintings?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
These megaliths are known are over the world. nothing special about europe in this regard. incidentally, european microlith period is dated tens of millenia behind srilanka and africa and is derivative. as for uniqueness of lascaux and altamira in france and spain, you shoud thank your basque ancestors.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Acording to paleolitic linguistric theory,the IE languages developed in central-asia(a few say middle east),and spread in Europe in 22000BC(the gravetian culture).the gravetian genes represents today 60-70% of european genom. 10% of euro genom belong to europeans came in europe in 40000BC such as basque.The ice age separated europe in several izolated human pokets each forming a linguistic IE family .The central-asians who remain in central-asia develop a form of proto-agriculture,increase large in number,as agriculture suport more people then hunting,and in 15000Bc they reach india.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Indian neolithic derived form central asia, this has to be a joke. no one will believe 15,000 for central asia neolithic, whch is simply made up out of thin air. population of entire kazakstan is harldy comparable to one indian metro. also we should ask why Chinese is not spoken in africa since we are all descended from africa. this is a confusionistic argument which suppresses the fact of multiple waves of movement out of india at various timedepths - m17 being a major one and dated at 10,000 for origin with a later timed movement out of hindu kush- as reported by witzel himself. basque paleolitihc forms 80 % of albino lines. you should ask yourself why the fanatically intractable euro witzels were <i>forced </i>to move the IE center all the way over to central asia - glossed now as S Russia - i am sure it was not done out of the goodness of ther hearts. balkan neolithic is derived by everyone from Mideast/anatolia/hurrian/ mesopotamia etc- all of these are expressly non-IE and this is reflected in the teeming non-IE pelasgian etruscan chechen etc substrate of old europe- which forms 40-60% of greek balkan vocabulary. and no, it is not phoenician egyptian loans from greek period.
Dr. K Elst: <i>In the 19th century, it was not yet realized how the European branches of IE are all full of substratum elements, mostly from extinct Old European languages. For Latin, this includes such elementary terms as lapis and urbs, borrowed from a substratum language tentatively described as âUrbianâ. For Germanic, it includes some 30% of the acknowledged âGermanicâ vocabulary, including such core lexical items as sheep and drink. For Greek, it amounts to some 40% of the vocabulary, both from extinct branches of the Anatolian (Hittite-related) family and from non-IE languages. Update </i>
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->During the ice age the north india was desert or semi-desert cos of ice age.They form the indo-iranian branch of IE.Are some genetics that show a split betwin slavs and indians 8000-15000 years ago.However this studies doesnt show what percent of indians are from central-asia nor what was the population of india prior to 15000bc.This study is incomplete from that point of view.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Here is the joker witzel himself quoting underhill who traces M17 to Hindu Kush, which is still a gross underestimation of its real origin in tribal india, where the related variant clades are found in abundant diversity. from joker list IER:
<i>P. UNDERHILL Is a geneticist at Stanford U., and participant in our yearly Round Tables. He gave an overview of the genetic data presently known for India. ... Of special interest is R1a1-M17 (which he discovered in 1995) and that has often been attributed to the spread of Indo-European (while Hindutvavadins let it originate in India). That is a gross simplification. According to him, it probably arose in the area around the Hindukush around 10,000 BC (+/- 3000 years), and spread eastwards and westwards. It has the largest impact on S. Asia (some 25%), but is found from E. Europe to India.</i>
Halstead is known to have intruded into western Basque region during iron age, synonymous with the first westward venture west of celts. we are still waiting for witzel's mahaeuropa. i am sure it is hidden somewhere there in romanian hinterlands. Greeks considered themselves connected to mediterranean culture of egypt/mideast much more than northern barbarian land. but they still pale infront of mesopotamia and egypt.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->BUT this is true also for India,for exemple,in neolithic Bengal and Tamil Nadu cultures was dieferent the Indus civilisation. You said that Europe was behind oriental cultures.THis aint true an least not for 7000-3000BC and 1500-2006 period.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not bengal but the northeastern culture is a derivative of the south chinese rice-based culture. ONly the roman and modern period are at levels commensurate with china and egypt, for example.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The existence of large number of megalites from that required a high tehnology is a evidence for this.Also the religion show continuity.The paleolithic Dancing wizard is find also in celtic cult and also in indus pashupati-lord of beasts.Is true that indian paleolithic art is more diverese then european one ,were in paleolithic India you find so much expresivity as in Altamira or Lascaux paintings?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
These megaliths are known are over the world. nothing special about europe in this regard. incidentally, european microlith period is dated tens of millenia behind srilanka and africa and is derivative. as for uniqueness of lascaux and altamira in france and spain, you shoud thank your basque ancestors.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Acording to paleolitic linguistric theory,the IE languages developed in central-asia(a few say middle east),and spread in Europe in 22000BC(the gravetian culture).the gravetian genes represents today 60-70% of european genom. 10% of euro genom belong to europeans came in europe in 40000BC such as basque.The ice age separated europe in several izolated human pokets each forming a linguistic IE family .The central-asians who remain in central-asia develop a form of proto-agriculture,increase large in number,as agriculture suport more people then hunting,and in 15000Bc they reach india.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Indian neolithic derived form central asia, this has to be a joke. no one will believe 15,000 for central asia neolithic, whch is simply made up out of thin air. population of entire kazakstan is harldy comparable to one indian metro. also we should ask why Chinese is not spoken in africa since we are all descended from africa. this is a confusionistic argument which suppresses the fact of multiple waves of movement out of india at various timedepths - m17 being a major one and dated at 10,000 for origin with a later timed movement out of hindu kush- as reported by witzel himself. basque paleolitihc forms 80 % of albino lines. you should ask yourself why the fanatically intractable euro witzels were <i>forced </i>to move the IE center all the way over to central asia - glossed now as S Russia - i am sure it was not done out of the goodness of ther hearts. balkan neolithic is derived by everyone from Mideast/anatolia/hurrian/ mesopotamia etc- all of these are expressly non-IE and this is reflected in the teeming non-IE pelasgian etruscan chechen etc substrate of old europe- which forms 40-60% of greek balkan vocabulary. and no, it is not phoenician egyptian loans from greek period.
Dr. K Elst: <i>In the 19th century, it was not yet realized how the European branches of IE are all full of substratum elements, mostly from extinct Old European languages. For Latin, this includes such elementary terms as lapis and urbs, borrowed from a substratum language tentatively described as âUrbianâ. For Germanic, it includes some 30% of the acknowledged âGermanicâ vocabulary, including such core lexical items as sheep and drink. For Greek, it amounts to some 40% of the vocabulary, both from extinct branches of the Anatolian (Hittite-related) family and from non-IE languages. Update </i>
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->During the ice age the north india was desert or semi-desert cos of ice age.They form the indo-iranian branch of IE.Are some genetics that show a split betwin slavs and indians 8000-15000 years ago.However this studies doesnt show what percent of indians are from central-asia nor what was the population of india prior to 15000bc.This study is incomplete from that point of view.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Here is the joker witzel himself quoting underhill who traces M17 to Hindu Kush, which is still a gross underestimation of its real origin in tribal india, where the related variant clades are found in abundant diversity. from joker list IER:
<i>P. UNDERHILL Is a geneticist at Stanford U., and participant in our yearly Round Tables. He gave an overview of the genetic data presently known for India. ... Of special interest is R1a1-M17 (which he discovered in 1995) and that has often been attributed to the spread of Indo-European (while Hindutvavadins let it originate in India). That is a gross simplification. According to him, it probably arose in the area around the Hindukush around 10,000 BC (+/- 3000 years), and spread eastwards and westwards. It has the largest impact on S. Asia (some 25%), but is found from E. Europe to India.</i>