09-10-2009, 08:22 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-dhu+Sep 9 2009, 09:45 PM-->QUOTE(dhu @ Sep 9 2009, 09:45 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Nag,
They cannot show a geographical cline for R in the direction that they so desperately want. Their only alternative is to show a heirarchial cline in India itself which buttresses the argument that there is a social (caste) heirarchy in india - which can only be explained by an ait type scenario. This is a patently theological assumption about there being "religion" in India with certain sections acting as the agents of historical, religious (and also linguistic) change.
[right][snapback]101191[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Like you said lower genetic diversity doesn't prove AIT. That too studying a small group and extrapolating to a larger group with great diversity, I feel is nothing but scientific unfairness. I also found that many of the supporters turn very belligerent when encountered with genetic proof.
They cannot show a geographical cline for R in the direction that they so desperately want. Their only alternative is to show a heirarchial cline in India itself which buttresses the argument that there is a social (caste) heirarchy in india - which can only be explained by an ait type scenario. This is a patently theological assumption about there being "religion" in India with certain sections acting as the agents of historical, religious (and also linguistic) change.
[right][snapback]101191[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Like you said lower genetic diversity doesn't prove AIT. That too studying a small group and extrapolating to a larger group with great diversity, I feel is nothing but scientific unfairness. I also found that many of the supporters turn very belligerent when encountered with genetic proof.