<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->You should find the site who show that europeans are more similar whit arabs,not whit indians.This gona be the main proove that was no aryan invasion.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
honsol, there is no need for this. euros are quiet enthusiastically and voluntarily blazing a new kinship with semites to stave off unnecessary association withe indians, and where the indian connection is too obvious, an iranian connection will be substituted. for example y haplo J, which is renfrew's "anatolian" marker, has been brought into a complex with haplo I, resulting in the new marker "IJ", although neither is a derivative of the other. basically, this hijacks the neolithic marker J to the euro side. in addition we have their hairspitting smokescreen about J1 and J2 subclades, necessary to avert an iranian, south caspian, zagros origin for J (dubbed Jahangir by Oppenheimer), ultimately it is from baluchistan (mehrgarh).... (this is an oppenheimer footnote. i will post it below)
E3b the neolithic horn of africa marker does not intrude into india. and the standard ME neolithic package of J2 and E3b is lacking the E3b component in india. i think this would indicate joining together of baluchi and African-semitic neolithic streams in the ME, which is perfectly sensible.
anatolia is quite brimming with non-ie hurrian and other caucasian-chechen, etc languages. this does not stop the euros from imagining a neolithic IE euro origin in anatolia (now glossed as EUROPE). this obtusity is the only option left after R has been unequivocally shown to originate in S asia, with Kurds carrying even R2 from bengal.
lies of these albinos are unsurpassed.
Semitic is regularly associated with post ice age colonization of upper tracts of the ME from africa. postualting a parallel situation for indic out of S asia is taboo however. we can repeat instances for ice age dispersal effects on austronesian (sunda) and north american languages. postulate the same for indic out of india and all hell breaks lose.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
honsol, there is no need for this. euros are quiet enthusiastically and voluntarily blazing a new kinship with semites to stave off unnecessary association withe indians, and where the indian connection is too obvious, an iranian connection will be substituted. for example y haplo J, which is renfrew's "anatolian" marker, has been brought into a complex with haplo I, resulting in the new marker "IJ", although neither is a derivative of the other. basically, this hijacks the neolithic marker J to the euro side. in addition we have their hairspitting smokescreen about J1 and J2 subclades, necessary to avert an iranian, south caspian, zagros origin for J (dubbed Jahangir by Oppenheimer), ultimately it is from baluchistan (mehrgarh).... (this is an oppenheimer footnote. i will post it below)
E3b the neolithic horn of africa marker does not intrude into india. and the standard ME neolithic package of J2 and E3b is lacking the E3b component in india. i think this would indicate joining together of baluchi and African-semitic neolithic streams in the ME, which is perfectly sensible.
anatolia is quite brimming with non-ie hurrian and other caucasian-chechen, etc languages. this does not stop the euros from imagining a neolithic IE euro origin in anatolia (now glossed as EUROPE). this obtusity is the only option left after R has been unequivocally shown to originate in S asia, with Kurds carrying even R2 from bengal.
lies of these albinos are unsurpassed.
Semitic is regularly associated with post ice age colonization of upper tracts of the ME from africa. postualting a parallel situation for indic out of S asia is taboo however. we can repeat instances for ice age dispersal effects on austronesian (sunda) and north american languages. postulate the same for indic out of india and all hell breaks lose.