Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
coffee_rules

De-colonizing Aryan Invasion Theory

Recommended Posts

A great series of lectures on the "Myth" of Aryan Invasion/Migration theory - the politics, the academic saazish and Left historians denying the Hindu, it's roots in Indus valley Civilization or soon to be called Indus-Saraswathi Civilization - A 5-part lecture by Michel Danino (Amrita University)

 

Attention to all those arguing about AIT, here's the linguistic, archaeological, scientific, generic and even astronomical proofs refuting the tall claims of Western Indologists

 

The growing evidence in recent research is from OIT (Out of India Theory), where the whole western civilization/people came from India SC.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

summary ? @coffee_rules  

 

my guess ( non scientific )  :-

 

a) dravidians / south indians  =  native injians + arab

b) north indians =  native injians + iranian =

 

when i stayed in tippasandra/blore , i use to goto hotel urabn behind manipal hospital for dinner ..

many arabs stay there with their family ( usually their family member will be undergoing some treatment at manipal ) and 99% of them with regular hair  can easily as south indians or darker indians 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, velu said:

summary ? @coffee_rules  

 

my guess ( non scientific )  :-

 

a) dravidians / south indians  =  native injians + arab

b) north indians =  native injians + iranian =

 

when i stayed in tippasandra/blore , i use to goto hotel urabn behind manipal hospital for dinner ..

many arabs stay there with their family ( usually their family member will be undergoing some treatment at manipal ) and 99% of them with regular hair  can easily as south indians or darker indians 

Aryan Invasion in 1500 bc:

 

1. No Archeological evidence, there are no objects these people got from their places of origin. No mention of any earlier place in Rigveda. All geography is around SapthaSindhu/Gujarat area and Samudra mentioned. 

2. RigVeda/South Indian ancient literature (Tamil Sangam) doesn't mention anybody coming from foreign land or a fight witj different cult that pushed people down south. Dasa/Dasyu is an interpretation of people with Dark ages who are culturally different and not  about race. They are not the original inhabitants of the region.  Tami; Sangam talks highly of Vedic gods, there is no evidence of NIs pushing SIs as played by DMK ideologies

3. Indus valley civilization/a lot of evidence on Saraswathi river mentioned by 18th century indologists. If Sarawathy river died in 1900 BC, end of Indus valley civilization, how come Rigveds speaks about Saraswathi river in the same east to west seq. If Aryans had come from Central Asia and wrote Rigveda, they would mention them in the order they come across these rivers and not the other way around. Rigveds speaks about Sarawathi river dying/endig, in that case, it would be possible for Rigveda to be written in late Indus valley civilization time and hence they could around the same time. That's why Indian Historians oppose Saraswathi river existence

4. There is a lot of evidence of cultural continuation from IVC to Vedic times of GangaValleyCivilization 1 mil BC. Iconography (Swastika, Om, Pashupati, Yoga, etc), Watch the 3rd part, very interesting. The open space  in the middle of a house (Kerala homes) is a Harappan continuation, likewise worship of peepal tree and mother goddesses.

5. Lastly Genetic science - Ancient Indians living as old as 50000 years, migrated to Central Asia and EU, and not the other way around. There is no genetic science that differentiates between NI and SI. Features like skin color is not related to genes, but the proximity or exposure to sun. 

6. Archeological-Astronomy - trying to time the litreture based on the position of the equinox (precision of equinox returns every 27000 years), hence time is cyclical as per Rigveda and not linear like in the Bible. Some date Rigveda to as back 4000 BC based on the astronomy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bones / Skeletons found in IVC in studies done in 90s with latest advance in science show they are the same as those in Punjab, haryana and Gujarat. Shows Hindus/Vedic people are a continuation of IVC.  Genetic research proves people migrated out of this region and hence a lot of EU languages has common words with Sanskrit. Latest theory is there was a mother of languages (PIE - Proto Indo European) which gave birth to Sanskrit as well as EU languages. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/17/2019 at 7:56 PM, coffee_rules said:

5. Lastly Genetic science - Ancient Indians living as old as 50000 years, migrated to Central Asia and EU, and not the other way around. There is no genetic science that differentiates between NI and SI. Features like skin color is not related to genes, but the proximity or exposure to sun. 

6. Archeological-Astronomy - trying to time the litreture based on the position of the equinox (precision of equinox returns every 27000 years), hence time is cyclical as per Rigveda and not linear like in the Bible. Some date Rigveda to as back 4000 BC based on the astronomy. 

I made it very clear in the earlier thread too that the MOST LATEST Scientific Study about Genetic Science is proving absolutely other conclusion. It is also telling why earlier scientific studies made this huge error. 

 

Let me quote from my earlier thread once again:

 

Here is the most modern study, published in 2017 in the peer-reviewed journal called ‘BMC Evolutionary Biology’.. You can read about it in this article:

//

https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/how-genetics-is-settling-the-aryan-migration-debate/article19090301.ece

 

How genetics is settling the Aryan migration debate

... 

Until recently, only data on mtDNA (or matrilineal DNA, transmitted only from mother to daughter) were available and that seemed to suggest there was little external infusion into the Indian gene pool over the last 12,500 years or so.

New Y-DNA data has turned that conclusion upside down, with strong evidence of external infusion of genes into the Indian male lineage during the period in question.

The reason for the difference in mtDNA and Y-DNA data is obvious in hindsight: there was strong sex bias in Bronze Age migrations. In other words, those who migrated were predominantly male and, therefore, those gene flows do not really show up in the mtDNA data. On the other hand, they do show up in the Y-DNA data: specifically, about 17.5% of Indian male lineage has been found to belong to haplogroup R1a (haplogroups identify a single line of descent), which is today spread across Central Asia, Europe and South Asia. Pontic-Caspian Steppe is seen as the region from where R1a spread both west and east, splitting into different sub-branches along the way. ...

 

//

 

Also read it too

 

In light of this latest research, it seems that this discussion has indeed already been settled. It may be against the wishes of the Hindutva supporters, but scientific approach should not be religiously biased. 

 

 

I also wondered when the Caste System began, and why devils are almost always Dark Skinned, while Hero gods are always fair skinned (except for Kali) in stories in Hindu religious texts. 

 

====

 

The caste system is believed to have been established by the Aryans. The fair skinned Aryans who occupied parts of India established the caste system.

The community Sudras was of the locals who were subdued by the Aryans and the other were the descendants of Aryans with locals.

In Hindu religious stories there are many wars between the good Aryans and the dark skinned demons and devils. The different Gods also have dark skinned slaves. There are stories of demon women trying to seduce good Aryan men in deceptive ways. There were also marriages between Aryan heroes and demon women. Many believe that these incidences really occurred in which, the gods and the positive heroes were people of Aryan origin. And the demons, the devils and the dark skinned slaves were in fact the original residence of India whom the Aryans coined as monsters, devil, demons and slaves. Normally the date given to Aryan invasion is around 1500 BC. But according to Hinduism experts some of the events in Hinduism occurred much earlier. Some of the events like the great war in the Mahabharta epic is believed to have occurred (based on astronomical research) 7000 years ago.

link

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alam Dar, don't quote me TheHindu sources. This is a debate of scientists not social sciences degree pass grads.

 

You don't have any thing to say about the last part of the video where the research points to no generic evidence to caste system.

 

See this debate... Read Koenraad Elst and other writers, Subhash Kak is a scienctist who has written a lot of papers. 

 

Fair Skinned Aryan Myth... it is useless to argue with people like you who don't have an open mind. Kuch padha dekha nahin.. you copy past sources from obscure commie agenda rags. 

 

Listen to people from scientific background.. on this issue..

 

 

 

 

Edited by coffee_rules

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, coffee_rules said:

Alam Dar, don't quote me TheHindu sources. This is a debate of scientists not social sciences degree pass grads.

I am afraid that you have missed the message totally. 

TheHindu is not the source of this scientific study, but only quoting it. 
 

The name of Study is:  A genetic chronology for the Indian Subcontinent points to heavily sex-biased dispersals

It has been peer reviewed and published in journal BMC Evolutionary Biology’.

Here is the direct link to this complete study: https://bmcevolbiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12862-017-0936-9

 

Why the old Studies were wrong? 

Here is the reason:
//

Until recently, only data on mtDNA (or matrilineal DNA, transmitted only from mother to daughter) were available and that seemed to suggest there was little external infusion into the Indian gene pool over the last 12,500 years or so. New Y-DNA data has turned that conclusion upside down, with strong evidence of external infusion of genes into the Indian male lineage during the period in question.

The reason for the difference in mtDNA and Y-DNA data is obvious in hindsight: there was strong sex bias in Bronze Age migrations. In other words, those who migrated were predominantly male and, therefore, those gene flows do not really show up in the mtDNA data. On the other hand, they do show up in the Y-DNA data

//

 

The thorniest, most fought-over question in Indian history is slowly but surely getting answered: did Indo-European language speakers, who called themselves Aryans, stream into India sometime around 2,000 BC – 1,500 BC when the Indus Valley civilisation came to an end, bringing with them Sanskrit and a distinctive set of cultural practices? Genetic research based on an avalanche of new DNA evidence is making scientists around the world converge on an unambiguous answer: yes, they did.

 

Quote

See this debate... Read Koenraad Elst and other writers, Subhash Kak is a scienctist who has written a lot of papers. 

Ok, let us see how these anti Aryan-Dravidian theory scientists are going to answer this Latest research, which I presented above, which is obviously proving the Aryan-Dravidian issue completely without any doubts now. 

 

It is common sense that no scientist could now deny it in the light of this latest research. 

 

I don't know what else should I say, while the proof here is itself so clear that no room for any further discussion is left. 

 

If you really want to contradict this study, then you have to bring the videos/articles/studies which specifically discuss these scientific proofs, and then bring counter scientific proofs to contradict this study. I already searched, but found no reply from the opponents against this latest study. 

 

 

Edited by Alam_dar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, panther said:

Where can we find aryans today?

How do we know if someone is aryan?

Aryan could be found in DNA. 

 

But it would have not been important, but the arrival of Aryans in India has been linked to the beginning of Hindu Religion, Caste systems, and North South (Aryan/Dravidian) divide, thus things became complicated. 

 

Now many South Indians want to have their Dravidian identity and want to get out of the control of the North Indians. They want more autonomy. Thus this Aryan Dravidian divide is highlighted. 

 

And then Dalits and perhaps Shudras too are against religion and the caste system which was the main cause of their oppression for thousands of years. Therefore, it is very important for them to claim that Hindu religion along with Caste system was initiated by the Aryans. 

 

And for the North Indians, it is opposite. They want to keep South with themselves, and perhaps also want to impose Hindi upon them, thus they don't want South Indians to go for their separate identity of Dravidians. 

 

And especially for the Hindutva supporters, it will be a big blow politically if it is proven that Hindu religion along with Caste system was initiated by the Aryans. Thus they have to oppose it in every way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

Guest, sign in to access all features.

×