02-25-2010, 01:57 AM
N did these jokers in. N is part of the same late asiatic process as R and is distinctly correlated with Uralic. With N in sight, there is no way to deny the reality associated with R. A perfect game of chess.
|
What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2
|
02-25-2010, 02:26 AM
[quote name='dhu' date='24 February 2010 - 08:35 PM' timestamp='1267043270' post='104511']
N did these jokers in. N is part of the same late asiatic process as R and is distinctly correlated with Uralic. With N in sight, there is no way to deny the reality associated with R. A perfect game of chess. [/quote] In plain English? Remember that there are always many unlisted folks browing for knowledge. We communicate among oursleves but more importantly to others.
02-25-2010, 02:56 AM
two links:
New evidence shows populations survived the Toba super-eruption 74,000 years ago and Newly Discovered Archaeological Sites In India Reveals Ancient Life Dhu, I have a question. What if the Bible's story of Garden of Eden is about the Garden and not about the wrath of God? IOW it might document the fact that mankind left India for there is no other garden in the contiguous area? India is the Garden Of Eden they talk about.
India definitely is within the Euro-Abrahamic horizon since the inception but they had to consolidate all the intervening areas before proceeding to India. Just look at two examples:
Actual Indian Roma proceed to Europe in their Vardos: But, it is Egypt which gets blamed. (similar to the damning of Egypt in the OT?). The entire Native American population gets wiped out as they search for Indians: an Indian identity is foisted upon these hapless targets. In both the cases, they manage to obscure the identity of the Indians. It is a sign of deep fixation. Of course, they do find Indians at last... India figures very highly in the euro consciousness in all periods. So why should the consciousness of India dim as we proceed closer to the initiating event, as maintained by the conventional account? Isn't such a stance colored by a belief in original sin, and ignorance as the natural state? We can deny these realities but only by drawing a distinction between the intentional and the unintentional, which itself is problematic, and especially so for the untiring champions of the 'divine plan' and 'will to power'. I think you are remembering that post stating that: references to India in the West have always been concrete, and the reverse representations have not. Quote:you have raised several significant questions. I had at first thought of not adding my bit, as this can perhaps go on into pages. You can blame Ramanaji for redirecting my attention. <img src='http://www.india-forum.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=' Quote:Now I think we are going into more detailed analysis of monotheism per se. I was just responding to the connection to OIT angle. My points were only in respect of primarily the two later strands of what we loosely called the revealed traditions - and their apparent obsession with "conquering" "heathen" India. It is the sense of hostility and the desire to erase Indic "culture" that I was trying to relate. The main problem with the "local" reaction against "conquering Indic cultures" coming out of India theory is as I see it, that OIT had also NE Asian components almost along similar timelines, and we do not see obvious similar developments. So OIT alone would not explain this reaction. If we say it was prior native populations which resented this later expansion - then we have to wait for more genetic evidence, as at the moment, it does seem that the major peopling of the middle -east did indeed happen from western Indian expansions - so that there could not have been sufficient pre-existing populations to carry on social memories of "trauma". So I hypothesized, that there were probably differences in the nature of migrations among the various branches - and some were expelled while others simply move out of necessities not connected to human action, say droughts etc. Mere expansions need not always engender murderous hostility - since another significant and better documented OIT took place in SE Asia, (agreed, much later than the ones you are referring to) before Islam in those parts we do not see any such retaliatory initiatives back on India. Quote:One of the primary arguments used in timing stages of development - rates of mutation - in linguistics, genetics is that current greater diversity of forms should appear at the earlier origin or source. If we extend that logic to philosophies or ideologies (they also mutate - and in fact could have great similarities to language itself) then we can have a theory of why we find the great diversity of religions and faiths or belief systems within the Indian heartland. A reasonable analogy to linguistic/genetic mutation will therefore indicate much greater diversity in the source region than in other areas where people simply carried over these ideas but where therefore they had much less time to "mutate" and proliferate. Of course there would be many other factors that modify this.
It is painfully obvious that there was a layered settlement of eurostan from Asia:
1. Paleolithic IJ from ME 2. Holocene R from Greater India. Holocene N from East Asia K and F expansion in interior Asia is carelessly backdated from the seminal colonization of eurostan at 40K. The originating locus for the westwards migrations shifts progressively Eastwards: R1b C.Asia R1a Afpak R2 Bengal Nichols notices this as well. Kentum migrates out from C Asia. Iranian/Satem from Afpak. Lastly the classical sanskrit/mittani/Sindoi migrations from interior India. It seems to be saturation-dependent migration out of India. Saturation of the euro periphery.
[url="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1244654/Study-finds-Britons-descended-farmers-left-Iraq-Syria-10-000-years-ago.html"]Most Britons descended from male farmers who left Iraq and Syria 10,000 years ago (and were seduced by the local hunter-gatherer women) [/url]
By David Derbyshire That is the actual title.
03-03-2010, 09:07 AM
[url="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/how-settler-farmers-fathered-europes-males-1872887.html"]How settler farmers fathered Europe's males[/url]
Quote:Most Britons descended from male farmers who left Iraq and Syria 10,000 years ago (and were seduced by the local hunter-gatherer women)Dailymail titles aside, just like biblicals (christians, muslims) will argue that this "proves" adam-and-eve etcetera (though it actually does the opposite), many western oryanists will similarly choose to read this as vindication: their oryanism already claims Mesopotamia (and its civilisation) in its origins. [quote name='dhu' date='03 March 2010 - 09:15 AM' timestamp='1267587446' post='104740'] [url="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/how-settler-farmers-fathered-europes-males-1872887.html"]How settler farmers fathered Europe's males[/url][/quote]Silly title is going to confuse people, example response: "So they didn't father Europe's females....?" But anything in there explaining how the ancient Syro-Iraqis introduced the European casta system after invading and subjugating the adivasis of Europe and stealing their wyfmen, and driving the aboriginal men to the Basque regions (or to Ireland)? An interesting side-effect will be that some Europeans/Americans, who will assume that the ancient inhabitants of say Iraq were Arabs, will get offended to have Arabian ancestry.
[quote name='Husky' date='03 March 2010 - 08:00 PM' timestamp='1267626122' post='104771']But anything in there explaining how the ancient Syro-Iraqis introduced the European casta system after invading and subjugating the adivasis of Europe and stealing their wyfmen, and driving the aboriginal men to the Basque regions (or to Ireland)?
[/quote] These felloews approach every topic through the prism of theology. In many cases, theology is a defense mechanism, in others a lever for a propaganda point. And every topic is turned into a personal test. For example, Central Asia harbors lines that are ancestral to the europeanist ones; but because there are ALSO intrusive E Asian lines in C Asia, these fellows are given an opportunity to frame C Asia as a mix of normative European and E Asian lines. And this framework then affords an opportunity to DEDUCE a casta system and sequence of herrenvolk movements from Europe into C Asia (not attested until advent of czarist monotheism, and even then feebily so). But when questioned individually, they will (when feeeling generous) admit a C Asian origin for individual European lines. Through the "rigor" of concrete linguistic relationships, they can transform any set of facts into a framework purporting their pack think.
The theory is gone. I don't know how these jokeroos can survive this. If R1b itself is holocene and represents a massive intrusion from Zagros, then how can they propose R1a1 into India from Europe during the same timeframe; and that too with India posing a much greater challenge and obstacle (compared to the ME). And the direct evidence has yet to be considered. It is another uber fantasy.
The smarter ones are keeping quiet - but it will be to no avail. The theory cannot be resurrected now. Further resolution will be local only; the transcontinental clades have already been elucidated.
03-09-2010, 10:29 AM
The fact that an earlier haplotype like D is in high frequency in Tibet and Himalaya sugest that himalayan area was inhabited pretty earlier.
03-09-2010, 10:42 PM
[quote name='dhu' date='04 March 2010 - 10:12 AM' timestamp='1267677273' post='104795']
The theory is gone. I don't know how these jokeroos can survive this. If R1b itself is holocene and represents a massive intrusion from Zagros, then how can they propose R1a1 into India from Europe during the same timeframe; and that too with India posing a much greater challenge and obstacle (compared to the ME). And the direct evidence has yet to be considered. It is another uber fantasy. The smarter ones are keeping quiet - but it will be to no avail. The theory cannot be resurrected now. Further resolution will be local only; the transcontinental clades have already been elucidated. [/quote]
03-09-2010, 10:46 PM
It was discussed on IF long time back. A very recent expansion time for R is a nightmare for gora. And this is precisely what the data is showing.
03-10-2010, 07:58 PM
[quote name='dhu' date='09 March 2010 - 10:54 PM' timestamp='1268154963' post='105001']
It was discussed on IF long time back. A very recent expansion time for R is a nightmare for gora. And this is precisely what the data is showing. [/quote] Dhu, a few days ago, the Y-DNA of King Tut was found to be R1B R1B seems to start in Iran and go south of the caspian sea on both sides of the mediterranean Many Berbers have R1B too The basques are R1B too Meaning the original R1B language was non-IE On wiki, the earliest dates of R1A is 14000 BC in India and 9000BC for Poland Assuming at 9000BC, the slavs were in Af-pak and migrated with IE-Satem and at 5000BC, went into R1B areas as an IE speaking elite the satem-centum switch is likely to have happened at this point Satem = R1A, Centum = R1B For example the sentence The wolf mother is Vrkasya Matam in Sanskrit and Vilkos Matina in Lithuanian both R1A, Satem Whereas in Greek and Latin, both R1B, it is Lupum Mater I think Centum languages are like Malayalam A large amount of Sanskrit words but ultimately rooted in Tamil Thats why the excercise to find proto-IE is a fools errand It may be easier to find Proto-Satem
03-10-2010, 11:16 PM
GS,
Kentum may just be a rider at the tip of the overarching expansion out of Afpak. Talageri and Nichols propose an unified expansion out of S Asia with Kentum at the northern edge and appropriate remnants in India. And R1a1 is an exact corollary to such an expansion. In contrast , the euro proposals consist of herrenvolk movements in every which direction (as dictated by expediency). And they cannot correlate to any expansion phenomenon at all. Satem may just be an in situ transformation of the kentum, which started even as kentum was expanding from C Asia into European.
03-11-2010, 08:25 AM
Y-DNA shows an Aryan invasion of Europe
Western Europe is 70% R1B, 10% R1A The mt-DNA on the other hand is mostly pre-existing hunter-gatherers The Euros killed off most of the men and raped the women Same R1B phenom is seen in latin america
03-11-2010, 09:52 AM
Non-IE R1b out of Zagros/Iran/ME/Anatolia strengthens an IE dispersal via R1a1 out of S Asia. Rather than correlating multiple discrete movements out of india, we only need to envision one unified expansion (with local variation in that expansion contributing to the kentum-satem distribution).
R1a1 age (especially in Europe) will probably come down with further revision. R1b is being touted as Neolithic out of ME. R1a1 out of S Asia may be the same, with possibly an even later date for expansion compared to R1b.
03-11-2010, 07:00 PM
I dont believe Kentum is ancient R1B
The basques, King Tut, Berbers all R1B speak non-IE R1B got IE language as part of Aryan Invasion / Elite replacement from slavic R1A and possible kentum developed at this point |
' />
' /> ) : maybe we should consider the possibility that at least some of the OIT migrations had a strong component of enforced migration or expulsions of Indic tribes and groups who either lost out over territorial resources or could not compete with those who remained. For reasons of migrations we can look at modern migrations - and we can reasonably assume thatsimilar causes drove people in the past. Druhyas, Panis - there are clear narratives of Indic groups losing out or being expelled who settle increasingly more and more to the west. [color="#0000FF"]Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)