What DNA Says About Aryan Invasion Theory -2

[dhu]

GS,

From Oppenheimer's TRE p 226:

"Certain broad genetic divisions within Asia became clear to geneticists before the focus on mtDNA and Y markers. As expected, the Caucasoid regions of West Eurasia were found to group together, with some overlap on the Indian subcontinent. There was a clear separation form East Eurasia, which in turn..
Such studies have not helped much to trace origins..."

That is because autosomal studies cannot show descent.

The ASI argument is similar to whether Dravidian is adstratum or substratum in Vedic. The argument works at rhetoric level as long as time depth is kept out of the picture.

Following is a comment from poster on varnam.in (AIT believer, he conceeds that the ASI interpretation is problematic and that ANI did migrate into C Asia and Europe, but, as usual, ushers in Aryans based on usual linguistic and caste system arguments, Linguistic argument was taken care by Talageri, Caste system argument by Balu...

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->jk-

i get the feeling that people think in terms of only one migration and that confuses the issue. MtDNA and Y chromosome data shows that Indians and Eurasians (Europeans) share many of these lineages and most of them show greater diversity in India. That would suggest that these lineages were founded in India and between 40K and 20K Eurasia were peopled by migrations from India. So a component of ANI- European genetic similarity – maybe a major one- would be due to these ancient migrations from India to Eurasia.

That however does not mean there were no later migrations from Eurasia into India in historical times beginning with the advent of agriculture and continuing post Indus Valley collapse. A component of the ANI-European similarity – relatedness according to caste is hard to explain otherwise- as is the linguistic and archaeological evidence.....<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->