Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Ancient History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Ancient History Ancient History Forum - Greece, Rome, Carthage, Egypt, Mesopotamia, and all other civilizations of antiquity, to include Prehistory and Archaeology discussions


Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 6th, 2012, 12:01 AM   #281
Archivist
 
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 189

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua A View Post
You have been provided evidence by Gauda, Hamilcar and myself. You have not engaged with the evidence, keep on ignoring it and then tell us "You've not provided any evidence" On top of that you are being rude and unreasonable. So I am putting you on ignore.
So what are the links and literature I posted? And where is yours? A link to the Times of India to a study we already discussed elsewhere?
I think everyone can see that you are blatantly lying.
And funnily, if you cannot counter the links and literature I give, you start to ignore me.


Edit: Oh, and by coincedence the oldest Swastikas come from the Ukraine...
Einharja is online now  
Remove Ads
Old December 6th, 2012, 02:29 AM   #282
Historian
 
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,655

Quote:
Originally Posted by fick View Post
i wish you only the best in your ignorance.

peace
I beg you my pardon, I looked at the link you provided earlier and contrary to it being evidence against OIT, it is actually evidence for it:
The finding disputes a long-held theory that a large invasion of central Asians, traveling through a northwest Indian corridor, shaped the language, culture, and gene pool of many modern Indians within the past 10,000 years.

That theory is bolstered by the presence of Indo-European languages in India, the archaeological record, and historic sources such as the Rig Veda, an early Indian religious text.

Some previous genetic studies have also supported the concept.

But Kashyap's findings, published in the current issue of the Proceedings of the National Academies of Science, stand at odds with those results.

True Ancestors

Testing a sample of men from 32 tribal and 45 caste groups throughout India, Kashyap's team examined 936 Y chromosomes. (The chromosome determines gender; males carry it, but women do not.)

The data reveal that the large majority of modern Indians descended from South Asian ancestors who lived on the Indian subcontinent before an influx of agricultural techniques from the north and west arrived some 10,000 years ago.


It is impossible a DNA study can reveal where an agricultural technique comes from, there is no such thing as a agricultural technique gene This is a conjecture of the scientist, not what the results are saying. Moreover, the timeframe for the supposed arrival of "Northern people" also supports OIT - if they arrived 10,000 years ago from the north, then obviously the IE people were in India 10,000 years ago, and then India is indisputably the homeland of the IE tribes.

So the matter is settled DNA studies has confirmed India had no migrations prior to 10,000 years of foreign DNA. There was no invasion/migration into India. The very earliest evidence of migrations of foreign DNA into India is 600BCE when India was invaded by the Persians and then the Greeks, and this is clear history.
Joshua A is online now  
Old December 6th, 2012, 02:47 AM   #283
Archivist
 
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 223

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua A View Post
I beg you my pardon, I looked at the link you provided earlier and contrary to it being evidence against OIT, it is actually evidence for it:
The finding disputes a long-held theory that a large invasion of central Asians, traveling through a northwest Indian corridor, shaped the language, culture, and gene pool of many modern Indians within the past 10,000 years.

That theory is bolstered by the presence of Indo-European languages in India, the archaeological record, and historic sources such as the Rig Veda, an early Indian religious text.

Some previous genetic studies have also supported the concept.

But Kashyap's findings, published in the current issue of the Proceedings of the National Academies of Science, stand at odds with those results.

True Ancestors

Testing a sample of men from 32 tribal and 45 caste groups throughout India, Kashyap's team examined 936 Y chromosomes. (The chromosome determines gender; males carry it, but women do not.)

The data reveal that the large majority of modern Indians descended from South Asian ancestors who lived on the Indian subcontinent before an influx of agricultural techniques from the north and west arrived some 10,000 years ago.


It is impossible a DNA study can reveal where an agricultural technique comes from, there is no such thing as a agricultural technique gene This is a conjecture of the scientist, not what the results are saying. Moreover, the timeframe for the supposed arrival of "Northern people" also supports OIT - if they arrived 10,000 years ago from the north, then obviously the IE people were in India 10,000 years ago, and then India is indisputably the homeland of the IE tribes.

So the matter is settled DNA studies has confirmed India had no migrations prior to 10,000 years of foreign DNA. There was no invasion/migration into India. The very earliest evidence of migrations of foreign DNA into India is 600BCE when India was invaded by the Persians and then the Greeks, and this is clear history.
sorry, 19% of indians are from the middle east and they brought farming and the language see:

Population Differentiation of Southern Indian Male Lineages Correlates with Agricultural Expansions Predating the Caste System

Tribes and castes were both characterized by an overwhelming proportion of putatively Indian autochthonous Y-chromosomal haplogroups (H-M69, F-M89, R1a1-M17, L1-M27, R2-M124, and C5-M356; 81% combined) with a shared genetic heritage dating back to the late Pleistocene (10–30 Kya), suggesting that more recent Holocene migrations from western Eurasia contributed <20% of the male lineages.

and see:

India Acquired Language, Not Genes, From West, Study Says

Most modern Indians descended from South Asians, not invading Central Asian steppe dwellers, a new genetic study reports.
The Indian subcontinent may have acquired agricultural techniques and languages
—but it absorbed few genes—from the west
, said Vijendra Kashyap, director of India's National Institute of Biologicals in Noida.
The finding disputes a long-held theory that a large invasion of central Asians, traveling through a northwest Indian corridor, shaped
the language, culture, and gene pool of many modern Indians within the past 10,000 years.

Click the image to open in full size.

so the only haplogroup that indian scientists admit came from the west was j2 and they admit the language came from the west. j2 is a group of the first farmers of course. they also brought idols etc from syria to india and then the danubians brought theirs. everything in india shows up well after it does everywhere else. those are the facts.

Last edited by fick; December 6th, 2012 at 03:04 AM.
fick is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 04:50 AM   #284
Historian
 
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,655

Sigh, you can't predict agricultural techniques from DNA studies.

It is blatantly obvious there is no evidence supporting AIT, so its proponents clutch at straws.

What I don't understand why in a post-colonial world anybody would support this colonial and racist propaganda theory? Do you still believe Black people are biologically less intelligent than white people too?
Joshua A is online now  
Old December 6th, 2012, 06:17 AM   #285

Midas's Avatar
Γορδιεϝαις the Phrygian
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Scandinavia, Balkans, Anatolia & Hatay
Posts: 3,331
Blog Entries: 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua A View Post
Sigh, you can't predict agricultural techniques from DNA studies.

It is blatantly obvious there is no evidence supporting AIT, so its proponents clutch at straws.

What I don't understand why in a post-colonial world anybody would support this colonial and racist propaganda theory? Do you still believe Black people are biologically less intelligent than white people too?
This is typical responses one gets when arguments do not exist. Let me tell you something. Most people here do not see it as a colour or race thing. In fact we're all aware that the ones responsible for our languages have little to do genetically with us. So to proove a racial superiority through an IE homeland is futile. The IE homeland or any linguistic homeland has nothing to do with the greatness of the Indian, Hittite, Persian, Greek or Egyptian civilizations. I think any sensible human being acknowledge that.
Midas is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 07:29 AM   #286
Archivist
 
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 223

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua A View Post
Sigh, you can't predict agricultural techniques from DNA studies.

It is blatantly obvious there is no evidence supporting AIT, so its proponents clutch at straws.

What I don't understand why in a post-colonial world anybody would support this colonial and racist propaganda theory? Do you still believe Black people are biologically less intelligent than white people too?
so there is no such thing as paleolithic and neolithic lineages? wow. in all those papers i read that use the term paleolithic and neolithic lineages... what should i be mentally replacing those terms with according to you?

personally i don't believe the ait theory as proposed either. i think the only way to resolve anything is through finding the telltale constructions of proto indo-european mythology. we all have the same ones.
fick is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 08:07 AM   #287

beorna's Avatar
αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν
 
Joined: Jan 2010
From: Lower Saxony
Posts: 12,900

Quote:
Originally Posted by fick View Post
sorry, 19% of indians are from the middle east and they brought farming and the language see:

Population Differentiation of Southern Indian Male Lineages Correlates with Agricultural Expansions Predating the Caste System

Tribes and castes were both characterized by an overwhelming proportion of putatively Indian autochthonous Y-chromosomal haplogroups (H-M69, F-M89, R1a1-M17, L1-M27, R2-M124, and C5-M356; 81% combined) with a shared genetic heritage dating back to the late Pleistocene (10–30 Kya), suggesting that more recent Holocene migrations from western Eurasia contributed <20% of the male lineages.

and see:

India Acquired Language, Not Genes, From West, Study Says

Most modern Indians descended from South Asians, not invading Central Asian steppe dwellers, a new genetic study reports.
The Indian subcontinent may have acquired agricultural techniques and languages
—but it absorbed few genes—from the west
, said Vijendra Kashyap, director of India's National Institute of Biologicals in Noida.
The finding disputes a long-held theory that a large invasion of central Asians, traveling through a northwest Indian corridor, shaped
the language, culture, and gene pool of many modern Indians within the past 10,000 years.

Click the image to open in full size.

so the only haplogroup that indian scientists admit came from the west was j2 and they admit the language came from the west. j2 is a group of the first farmers of course. they also brought idols etc from syria to india and then the danubians brought theirs. everything in india shows up well after it does everywhere else. those are the facts.
where are these maps from, please? They are very good!
beorna is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 08:10 AM   #288
Archivist
 
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 223

Quote:
Originally Posted by beorna View Post
where are these maps from, please? They are very good!
that is from Vijendra Kashyap's original report
fick is offline  
Old December 6th, 2012, 09:15 AM   #289

Midas's Avatar
Γορδιεϝαις the Phrygian
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Scandinavia, Balkans, Anatolia & Hatay
Posts: 3,331
Blog Entries: 3

Those maps are truly great!

However, we should keep distance from DNA studies when talking about linguistics. In any case, those results can be used when DNA is brought as an argument for OOI. First of all, J2 is not native to India and I doubt that Greeks and Persians brought it. If that was the case, where is E1b1b or J1 or G2a etc that Greeks and Persians would carry? The only trace of E1b1b is found in small amounts amongst the Burusho, but only in them. From the other side around, where is L, H and the Os in Europe? Does that ring a bell now?

Fick, you just saved us from tons of time, giving answers to the OOI DNA arguments about R1a. Many thanks!
Midas is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 02:07 AM   #290
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Sep 2012
From: varanasi uttar pradesh, india
Posts: 1,610

@ Einharja

this is your statement

You only grasp at the straw that is the Saraswati, which is mentioned with multiple meaning in a collection of liturgic writings that have been written down after hundred of years of oral tradition. The RV is not a historical record but contains stories of which we do not know how exactly they happened.


Rigveda is not a historical book but do know that it is most important text of Indo European studies in bronze age .

I do not propose OIT as there are many problems in this regard like chariots, linguistics and affinity with iranians in same time frame.

having said that , I do not think that you should disregard saraswati as no one and yes i repeat no one has questioned " oral tradition " of vedas so you may have hundred ways of resolving the issue rather than abusing the whole text.


for start , saraswathi might not be same ghaggar hakra river and things like that .


infact, show me a single recognized scholar who questions that saraswathi is mentioned in Rigveda and is of 1200 bc .

the problem is the identification of saraswati with ghaggar and that can be done in many manners .
avantivarman is offline  
Closed Thread

  Historum > World History Forum > Ancient History

Tags
indoeuropean, languages, originate


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Where do the Hebrews originate from? Nick Ancient History 43 March 20th, 2014 11:34 PM
When and where did the Star of David Originate? Salah General History 5 March 18th, 2010 11:41 AM
The Etruscan’s are the founding Romans. Where did they originate? laketahoejwb Ancient History 9 February 21st, 2010 10:16 PM
Salutations from an Indo-Canadian Lord_of_Gauda New Users 15 November 30th, 2009 07:06 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.