Questions for those who believe that Aryans came out of India

specul8

Ad Honorem
Oct 2016
2,334
Australia
#41
The pictures you post cover most of your posts, there's hardly anything worthy to read. The OP had asked questions for which I have posted answers. What's your claim to fame?
You made a mess of that.

Just take one question at a time in one post and answer that. Maybe then you won;t mess up ?
 

specul8

Ad Honorem
Oct 2016
2,334
Australia
#43
Quite easy, what are your counter arguments against what I wrote (I know I am asking for too much)?
When you can clearly answer the questions then there might be substance to address. Just take the first question, make an answer to post to that and take care with the quoting procedure .
 

specul8

Ad Honorem
Oct 2016
2,334
Australia
#44
No. No one understands but only you. You are confusing between pre-Vedic and Vedic. For Vedic to exist, there must have been a pre-Vedic. It is from pre-Vedic that Old Avestan arose. Two daughter of pre-Vedic - Vedic and Old Avestan. They were followed by New Avestan and Classical Sanskrit. But you would not understand this. You have your biases to battle with.
See ! I can understand this ^ easily.

I cant understand the gibberish 'Vedic is Vedic' ... that is a construction in his own head and NOT what was written about .

Typical ! Obfuscation , twisting, out of context comments, and a comment that refers to my lack of comprehension in not understanding the rubbish written This is the way the OOI argument is often run .
 

Aatreya

Ad Honorem
Dec 2014
3,267
USA
#45
No. No one understands but only you. You are confusing between pre-Vedic and Vedic. For Vedic to exist, there must have been a pre-Vedic. It is from pre-Vedic that Old Avestan arose. Two daughter of pre-Vedic - Vedic and Old Avestan. They were followed by New Avestan and Classical Sanskrit. But you would not understand this. You have your biases to battle with.
There is absolutely no confusion. There is no pre-Vedic that is an ancestor to Vedic and Avestan. I cited examples, did you not read?
 

Aatreya

Ad Honorem
Dec 2014
3,267
USA
#47
Few come back, most take citizenship of the more prosperous or profitable country. That is why you find naturalized Indians in Hong Kong, Singapore, Kenya, Uganda, South Africa, Australia, New Zealnd, Europe, UK, USA, Canada, etc., or in Antigua, Barbados , Malta, Cyprus, Canary Islands, etc.
So you know that Indians did migrate in the past too. Good progress!
 

Aatreya

Ad Honorem
Dec 2014
3,267
USA
#49
See ! I can understand this ^ easily.

I cant understand the gibberish 'Vedic is Vedic' ... that is a construction in his own head and NOT what was written about .

Typical ! Obfuscation , twisting, out of context comments, and a comment that refers to my lack of comprehension in not understanding the rubbish written This is the way the OOI argument is often run .
You keep posting rubbish, unwanted pictures and meaningless rants, and expect me to feed you with the information you want to read? Go get a basic education of Indian literature and then talk.

I told Avestan and Vedic are in reality not two sibling languages, but Avestan is Vedic language itself in a distorted form. So it makes no sense saying Avestan is close to Vedic, and Tamil is not. A more meaningful comparison would be to take German and Tamil, and compare them to Vedic.

As I said, your posts are not worth the bytes used.
 
Likes: Onkar

Aupmanyav

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
4,843
New Delhi, India
#50
So you know that Indians did migrate in the past too. Good progress!
Normally they were traders who quickly returned home after their trade was done. Our ways were so very different that staying back was not normal. That is why we do not find temples in the lands that we traded with, South East Asia being an exception. There we stayed for good.
 

Similar History Discussions