Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

“Iran” itself is etymologically derived f rom “Aryanam” meaning “(land) of the Ar yans”

Expand Messages
  • Singh - Jat
    Message 1 of 5 , May 21, 2013
    • Nadia
      It seems that DNA studies r not what u would call compatible with layperson s understanding...must have something to do with not having them presented as part
      Message 2 of 5 , May 21, 2013
        It seems that DNA studies r not what u would call compatible with layperson's understanding...must have something to do with not having them presented as part of average school curriculum for those who constitute the adult population in today's world...no matter hopefully the kids of today will have better luck.

        What the hell...it shouldn't stop today's average adult from indulging in these studies anyway...http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130423134037.htm

        Urmila...it is an accepted fact, presumable after taking DNA samples from 500,000 people from 130 countries...that yes...Humans left Africa via Arabia...and did settle on the Indian Subcontinent for an incubating period before spreading to Eurasia and Europe...plus that whole coastal migration all the way to Australia...apparently this is backed up by DNA found in present day South Indian populations which links them directly as heirs to all that African gene diversity...I never knew that Africans possess the most genetic diversity on this planet...somehow I don't think it applies to me even though I was born in Africa :(

        Singh-Jat...skin, eye, hair color r not related to genes per say but environment...101 evolutionary biology...according to which if u were to take a sample of present day africans, with absolutely no genes for blonde hair or blue eyes...and place them in isolation...lets say in Scandinavia and only let them breed with each other...that lack of pesky unbounded sunshine in that climate will inevitable make our sample humans adapt and over course of time all that wonderful pigmentation in skin, eye and hair will gradually erode so that they are left without much color in their skin, eye or hair. 

        As global warming is upon us now...u can now count on the Scandinavians adapting and their skin, eye and hair color getting darker as time goes by...but the question arises are future Scandinavians going to look back and pinpoint this whole process of colorization on those "dark" immigrants from the Southern Hemisphere?...hopefully future generations r going to be much better educated in these matters than us present day humans...who r still being influenced by social agendas than pure science.

        As to that AIT theory...which according to u is a Brahmin insecurity...aren't they in fact the descendants of these so called Aryan's who invaded the Sub-continent, rather than Jats?...so why the insecurity?...its like saying that the White rulers of all the Americas feel insecure too?...and they have a more right to feel insecure since their ancestors stepped of that boat only some 500 years ago...

        But never mind the DNA...I haven't come across any archeological studies that categorically say "Yes" to AIT...perhaps u will be kind enough to post any here if u have.

        As to classifying the Roma people, not "gypsies" by the way, as a "lower caste" people cos they don't have R1a1...whose to say that R1a1 did not arrive on the Indian Sub-continent after the progenitors of the people who are called Roma today had already left?

        DNA is being gathered from current population samples from the Sub-Continent...and results are based on comparative analysis of present human populations...rather than comparing today's indians to those who lived on the sub-continent say 5000 years ago...i guess the down side of  cremating the dead :(...and even if the buried bodies of indian muslims were dug for DNA gathering...what can a few hundred years tell us anyway...that new populations arrived on the Sub-continent?...well written records already provide us with that information since Babur the Turk came to establish his rule in northern part of the Sub-continent.

        Europeans do carry Indian genetic markers...that is how today's geneticists know that the Indian Sub-continent was an incubator for thousands of years before the human population started migrating out...I have read that 75 percent of European population carries these genetic markers...I may have posted a link on this before...probably a few years ago...sorry I don't have this article anymore since I don't spend any time on DNA studies anymore...due to lack of interest on my part...for a simple reason that modern human populations outside of Africa are too similar to each other as human diversity was lost long ago.

        The funniest part is that the Chinese wanted to believe that they were not descended from Homo Sapien but from Homo Erectus...who left Africa way before Homo Sapien, and they based this contention on the fact that their features resembled Homo Erectus not Sapien...they were of course very disheartened to learn that they are just like the rest of us ;)...Homo Sapien...very sad indeed!

        Singh-Jat...u know its possible now to get tested to see if one has Neanderthal DNA...and since Neanderthal's only lived in Europe...u may luck out and be able to prove yourself of European origin after all...that would surely add something to the Aryan Invasion Theory ;)

        By the way for those interested there is German scholarship that considers that Germans are of Aryan descent...but these Aryans are Indian in origin and migrated into Europe...Germans base this on their studies of linguistics...showing how Germanic languages are descended from Sanskrit.

        Not to put a crimp in the German desire to be originally Indian...there are other studies that say Sanskrit and other Indo-European languages r actually derived from a proto-Indo European language, which evolved in what is present day Turkey...and the populations who spoke this language migrated two ways...one into Europe...and the other...towards the Indian Sub-continent. Now does this make us all Turks? ;)

        If u have spent your precious time reading all this...than its been a slice hanging out with u...can't say u r gonna go away with any definite opinions formed though...what can I say?...only time can unfold more...though I have stopped my research into such stuff...I encourage u to search online using different search engines for new information does get posted periodically...and it can be a lot of fun seeing how humans want to pinpoint how they r different from each other...whereas as more and more research just seems to lead to showing how they r all the same...what a uniform species we r :(
        ...and in the words of Pierre Elliot Trudeau..."uniformity leads to intolerance..."

        There wer many migrations into India.  Some of the oldest migrations incubated in the subcontinent and thus populated Asia and Australasia.  
        Now, the Aryan invasion or migration whatever people feel comfortable with is a reality.   The R1a1 found in the tribals have to be analyzed if this was a recent introduction. 
        I know that the Indian media and due to Brahmin insecurity are trying to parrot that this is not because of Aryan invasion.   If R1a1 was indeed had it's genesis in the subcontinent than why is it not uniform in the subcontinent and should have more of a presence there.   Is it not interesting that Sri Lanka which had an Aryan influence via Bengal has a slight more R1a1 prescence that Southern India. 
        Why is R1a1 most strongest in the Punjab region and then when the Barabarians were invading the center of Vedic civilization had to be moved further east to the Ganges valley where R1a1 also has the same highest concentration?
        Many different groups in the India have different genetic makeup.   If the Indians migrated out of the subcontinent then the marks would be seen in Europe and Central Asia but it is non-existant.   It shows a pattern of migration into the subcontinent mostly except for the Gypsies, who migrated out about 1400 years ago.  The gypsies are low caste folks from northern India and they are not R1a1. 
        "Maratha rulers of western India who liberated Punjab after more than 800 years of Muslim rule"  - No, Sikhs ruled Delhi.   The Sikhs rolled back the Pathans and won Kashmir.   The present day borders of Pakistan are because of the Sikhs.  
        Blatantly false propaganda: - "the Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT) ranks as the most enduring.  While the idea has been discredited in serious academic circles"  Let's see which academic circles?  
        The Scythians settled in the northwest regions of the subcontinent. 
        Skin color is based on genes, eyes color is based on genes, hair color is based on genes.   Based on all of these it can be traced that Aryans migrated into the subcontinent.  
        The typical bull regarding AIT is false has been repeated in the Indian media for so long that they are starting to believe it.   Scientist are laughing. 
        So when it comes to everything else in science it is ok but when it comes to AIT or we have our own conjectures.  Huh! 
        Indians are a joke. 
        From: urmila <uduhan@...>
        To: JatHistory@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Friday, April 19, 2013 2:31 PM
        Subject: [JatHistory] Re: Indians And Europeans -read their DNA story
          Dear All,

        As per the most widely accepted theory based on scientific evidence (including DNA), human race originated in Africa and fro there it spread to Europe and Asia. There is no scientific evidence that modern humans first came to India before migrating into Europe.


      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.