Historic Pics Of The Afghan Army, NOTICE THE CLEAR "WEHRMACHT" INFLUENCE - Page 2

Aryan · 05-10-2004, 20:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jay

it just shows your poor knowledge in races and genetics. You dont have any scientific theories to backup your pure breed aryan theory.

If you get a chance, try to read this book, "The History and Geography of Human Genes," Stanford's L. Luca Cavalli-Sforza. It is supposed to be one of the best books that corrleates genes and population wrt to regions. Read the following chapters about South Asia,

4.6. Prehistory and history in South Asia
4.9. Physical anthropology
4.10. General genetic picture of Asia
4.14. Genetics of South Asia (the Indian subcontinent)
4.16. Geographic maps of single genes
4.17. Synthetic maps of Asia
4.18. Summary of the genetic history of Asia

And after that do let me know, who is pure breed and who is not!!

I wonder what qualifies you to say I have poor knowledge in race and genetics. I'm studing a BA (Hons) in Archaeology and Anthropology, and I've been reading into it for as long as I can remember.

Yea I've read Cavalli-Sforza, as recent as two months ago for work I needed on a paper i was writing. There are far better books I suggest you read, Coon's Origin of Races stands out as one of my favourites. I dont wish to discuss it with you, you are making pointless assertions based upon your own beliefs, I can tell you have no history in archeology, because you doing behave as one.

Jay · 05-10-2004, 21:13 PM

Quote:

I can tell you have no history in archeology, because you doing behave as one.

If only people can discuss in one's own domain!
I cant believe your claim even with the basic genetics knowledge I have! But that explains why you like Coon's racist theory than anything else! If you wish to debate on the gene (DNA) differences between Pakistanis and Indians I'm all for it, u want to continue it here??

May be you might also be exposed to Spencer Well's migration theory too! Even after reading all these stuff you are making bold audacious statements here without properly backing up your arguements! thats why I said you have poor knowledge on this subject!

Aryan · 05-11-2004, 08:04 AM

Quote:

If only people can discuss in one's own domain!
I cant believe your claim even with the basic genetics knowledge I have! But that explains why you like Coon's racist theory than anything else! If you wish to debate on the gene (DNA) differences between Pakistanis and Indians I'm all for it, u want to continue it here??

There are plenty of documented differences within modern India, let alone between India and Pakistan. THe B antigen is a good indicator of racial background. I couldn't find a map of it online but there are significant differences in B antigen presence between Pakistan and India, although similarities exist between northern India and Pakistan. There are also differences between central and southern India. I'll try to scan it in some time and I'll post it here.

Aryan · 05-11-2004, 09:32 AM

Just found a map on the internet. It doesn't look entirely accurate, I don't think the B antigen phenotype extends that far south or east into the subcontinent, contradicting my text, but still the differences in the subcontinent are obvious.

BTW, Aryan race are known to have one of the highest occurances of the B antigen.

Jay · 05-11-2004, 10:30 AM

Exacltly. Your earlier post, this map all just proves what I said!! This is the whole reason I asked you to prove your point!

Atleast 50% are so called Aryan tribes, 30% of Indians are dravidians (Central , South), the rest (North East and pockets throughout India) are all mogoloid, australoid ethnic groups, tribes.

That still beats the population of combined Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan.

Jay · 05-11-2004, 10:34 AM

And whats the lil concentration in Eurasia...isnt that Russia? Didnt you say that Russia didnt have Aryan population??

Aryan · 05-11-2004, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Exacltly. Your earlier post, this map all just proves what I said!! This is the whole reason I asked you to prove your point!

This is a joke. How can me proving my point that the subcontinent is genetically different prove your point that it is similar?

Joker

Quote:

Atleast 50% are so called Aryan tribes, 30% of Indians are dravidians (Central , South), the rest (North East and pockets throughout India) are all mogoloid, australoid ethnic groups, tribes.

I dont know where you pulled your figures from, but most Indians are not Aryan. I've never said that some Indians aren't Aryan, northern regions and Indian Punjab are, although I believe there has been quite a lot of admixture, and Aryan's constitute a much smaller percentage of Indias population, say 30%, of which only 15-20% have not mixed with other races. I understand a lot of migration is occuring in India, and this will further change these demographics.

Northeast India is mongoloid, southern and central are Australoid-Negroid. I think modern Northern India is a mixture of all three.

Jay · 05-11-2004, 11:18 AM

Quote:

This is a joke. How can me proving my point that the subcontinent is genetically different prove your point that it is similar? Joker

Oh yeah, may be go and look at the Alexandar yada yada thread! You said Pakistan is different from North India other than Punjab. you just ate your own words and said some northern regions and Punjab now. Whats next?? The whole of Indians are from mars?? crow!!

Quote:

I dont know where you pulled your figures from, but most Indians are not Aryan. I've never said that some Indians aren't Aryan, northern regions and Indian Punjab are,

Looks like the archealogy student needs to take more high school courses in map reading and geography!

Quote:

Aryan's constitute a much smaller percentage of Indias population, say 30%, of which only 15-20% have not mixed with other races.

So where did you pull that from?? Any thing to prove your numbers? Even if its 30% that roughly 300 million, which is twice the size of Pakistan.Or if I go by YOUR pure bred theory it still has 150-200 million people, which is again bigger than Pakistan. So go take a hike!

Quote:

Northeast India is mongoloid, southern and central are Australoid-Negroid. I think modern Northern India is a mixture of all three.

Wrong. South and Central India has lot of indegnious tribes like the Thodas, Badugas etc that are entirely Australoid.

Aryan · 05-11-2004, 11:29 AM

Quote:

You said Pakistan is different from North India other than Punjab. you just ate your own words and said some northern regions and Punjab now.

I don't recall in what context I said that, even if I did, but I certainly wouldn't say northern parts of India are not Aryan...I've always said they have been

Quote:

Looks like the archealogy student needs to take more high school courses in map reading and geography!

I don't get what was wrong with my map reading...

Quote:

So where did you pull that from?? Any thing to prove your numbers? Even if its 30% that roughly 300 million, which is twice the size of Pakistan. So go take a hike!

I don't know the exact make up of India, but I feel it's around that much. I'll find some exact figures if I can...jst for you

Quote:

South and Central India has lot of indegnious tribes like the Thodas, Badugas etc that are entirely Australoid.

And?

Jay · 05-11-2004, 15:50 PM

Quote:

I don't recall in what context I said that, even if I did, but I certainly wouldn't say northern parts of India are not Aryan...I've always said they have been

Thats the whole point of this arguement. joker

Quote:

I don't get what was wrong with my map reading...

Okay tell me what states form "North India", compare this with the "Aryan" antigen map you posted and tell me how many states have pure aryans. So far you havent done it right!!

Quote:

I don't know the exact make up of India, but I feel it's around that much. I'll find some exact figures if I can...jst for you

Even by your math there are more Aryan's in India than in Pakistan. So take your racist spremacy theory to dump and be there.

Quote:

South and Central India has lot of indegnious tribes like the Thodas, Badugas etc that are entirely Australoid.

And?

Is it written in Semitic?? Read it in the context,

Quote:

Northeast India is mongoloid, southern and central are Australoid-Negroid. I think modern Northern India is a mixture of all three.
Wrong. South and Central India has lot of indegnious tribes like the Thodas, Badugas etc that are entirely Australoid.

Aryan · 05-11-2004, 17:31 PM

Quote:

Okay tell me what states form "North India", compare this with the "Aryan" antigen map you posted and tell me how many states have pure aryans. So far you havent done it right!!

The purpose of the map was to disprove the idea that all Indians were of one race.

Quote:

Even by your math there are more Aryan's in India than in Pakistan. So take your racist spremacy theory to dump and be there.

Aryans in India are an endangered species, mixture with other non-Aryan races is effectively removing them. The caste system is no longer observed as prudently as it was in history. Pakistan on the other hand is virtually a pure Aryan nation, same with Iran and Afghanistan.

Quote:

Is it written in Semitic?? Read it in the context,

Australoid isn't a "full" racial group like the big three. Its just the term used to describe certain people who don't fit into the big three. The term Australoid-Negroid is common.

Jay · 05-11-2004, 17:35 PM

Quote:

The purpose of the map was to disprove the idea that all Indians were of one race.

And who claimed that Indians were one race?? In that case, even Pakistan is not that pure, starting from Mushraff.

Quote:

Aryans in India are an endangered species, mixture with other non-Aryan races is effectively removing them. The caste system is no longer observed as prudently as it was in history. Pakistan on the other hand is virtually a pure Aryan nation, same with Iran and Afghanistan.

Quack, quack, quack!

Quote:

Australoid isn't a "full" racial group like the big three. Its just the term used to describe certain people who don't fit into the big three. The term Australoid-Negroid is common.

I didnt say the other way. And no australoids and australoid-negroids are not the same.

Aryan · 05-11-2004, 17:38 PM

Okay, I typed in "races of India" and this is the first result that came up...

http://members.tripod.com/~tanmoy/bengal/races.html

Quote:

mtDNA
Early mitochondrial DNA (which is maternally inherited) studies indicated that a vast number of Indian mtDNA lineages cluster with the East Asians, probably reflecting the proto-Dravidian. They also seem to be closely related to African (e.g. Ethiopian) populations, probably indicative of the Australoid-Veddoid substratum.

Modern studies indicate that the major mtDNA lineages in India belong to the typically asian M haplogroup, whose Indian variety probably originated around 48000 +/- 1500 years before present (i.e. about 46000 BC). This haplogroup shows no statistically significant linkage with caste as a whole. The lineages in this haplogroup do not segregate according to linguistic family, but some specifically Indian lineages (e.g. M3) correlate with the upper castes.

The second most common haplotype, the U2i, separated from an West Eurasian lineage around 53000 +/- 4000 before present (i.e. about 51000 BC). This one is strongly correlated with caste; the upper castes having these in the highest proportion. A small fraction of the Indian population (about 5-10%) belongs to lineages (W,H,K in upper castes; J,T in other castes) also common in Europe, and which have more recent divergence dates. They probably have caste linkages, but the data set is, as yet, too small to be definite. Also, the divergence times have not been estimated, so it is difficult to pinpoint which migration this refers to.

Previous research, which had not detected the caste linkage of the European haplotypes had concluded that, assuming they were largely of Western Eurasian origin (e.g. in accord with the Dravidian-protoElamite or the Indo-european hypothesis), the divergence time is about 9300 +/- 3000 BP (i.e. about 7300 BC), which is deduced as an average over various number of unknown founders (i.e. gradual migration model, rather than concentrated invasion model). Some minor geographical gradients from the Punjab to the Andhra in distribution of European haplotypes also needs further study.

Y chromosome
The Y chromosome (which is paternally inherited) data is broadly similar. India groups clearly with the South/Southeast Asia cluster. The major European haplotype is pretty rare, but some European haplotypes are found amongst the upper castes, and in Punjab and Pakistan. A North African/Middle Eastern variety is found at low levels all over India, but many of the Indian haplotypes seem to be of Indian origin, possibly due to genetic drift in small endogamous units. The interesting aspect is the much stronger caste linkage in the genetic distance between the Indian and European populations found in these studies compared to those dealing with the maternally inherited mtDNA, though control over statistical and systematic errors is still lacking; as also estimates of divergence times.

Autosomal DNA
A similar caste linkage is also found in the autosomal studies: overall upper caste Indians are significantly closer to Europeans than other Indians. However, divergence times estimates are still lacking.

Now will you please leave it!

Jay · 05-11-2004, 17:49 PM

duh? whats your point? I didnt say that the whole of India is Aryan race anywhere in my arguement. You said Pakistan is Aryan and I said we have more Aryans than you, whih I and you have proved it over and over and again. All my question is then why are you harping your aryan supremacy theory in this case??

Jay · 05-11-2004, 17:53 PM

And yeah I've been through this a number of times! I've read the differences between the aryans, dravidians and the others, especially a lot about the dravidian and their genetics.

Go read/see Spencer Wells documentary - Journey of Man. He found out a marker in Madurai (South Indian city) which happened some 40,000 years ago.

So, still I dont see a point in your last post!!

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Interview with PLAAF LGen Liu Yazhou	Officer of Engineers	The Field Mess	34	05-10-2007 15:44 PM
Srilankan army suffers record losses	starsiege	South Asian Defense Topics	137	11-25-2006 06:37 AM
The Strange Case of Mr. Hyde and Dr. Jekyll: General Pervez Musharraf	indianguy4u	South Asian Defense Topics	0	08-29-2005 04:18 AM
what is this ???	indianguy4u	South Asian Defense Topics	15	05-21-2005 05:38 AM
Interesting report on Females in combat	Anon	The Western Alliance	183	04-13-2005 07:55 AM

05-11-2004, 09:32 AM	#19 (permalink)
Aryan Banished Join Date: 05-02-04 Posts: 1,532	Just found a map on the internet. It doesn't look entirely accurate, I don't think the B antigen phenotype extends that far south or east into the subcontinent, contradicting my text, but still the differences in the subcontinent are obvious. BTW, Aryan race are known to have one of the highest occurances of the B antigen.

05-11-2004, 10:30 AM	#20 (permalink)
Jay Tamizhanban *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 08-06-03 Location: Edison, NJ Posts: 6,345 Country:	Exacltly. Your earlier post, this map all just proves what I said!! This is the whole reason I asked you to prove your point! Atleast 50% are so called Aryan tribes, 30% of Indians are dravidians (Central , South), the rest (North East and pockets throughout India) are all mogoloid, australoid ethnic groups, tribes. That still beats the population of combined Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan.

05-11-2004, 10:34 AM	#21 (permalink)
Jay Tamizhanban *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 08-06-03 Location: Edison, NJ Posts: 6,345 Country:	And whats the lil concentration in Eurasia...isnt that Russia? Didnt you say that Russia didnt have Aryan population??

05-11-2004, 17:49 PM	#29 (permalink)
Jay Tamizhanban *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 08-06-03 Location: Edison, NJ Posts: 6,345 Country:	duh? whats your point? I didnt say that the whole of India is Aryan race anywhere in my arguement. You said Pakistan is Aryan and I said we have more Aryans than you, whih I and you have proved it over and over and again. All my question is then why are you harping your aryan supremacy theory in this case??

05-11-2004, 17:53 PM	#30 (permalink)
Jay Tamizhanban *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 08-06-03 Location: Edison, NJ Posts: 6,345 Country:	And yeah I've been through this a number of times! I've read the differences between the aryans, dravidians and the others, especially a lot about the dravidian and their genetics. Go read/see Spencer Wells documentary - Journey of Man. He found out a marker in Madurai (South Indian city) which happened some 40,000 years ago. So, still I dont see a point in your last post!!

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 guests)