The false link between an extrinsic origin of IA and the foreignness of the vedic texts is something I have stressed several times. Glad to see the author clarify this.
https://twitter.com/vagheesh/status/981638462888607744 …
-
-
At risk of being anal, I still object to using Aryan for any migration event from outside India, for reasons we discussed last time.
-
Yeah I'd prefer 'Indo European'. Hard to control others' language.
-
We should try tickling others until they see error of their ways.
-
Lol. You first
-
Anyway seriously speaking though, even though I am far from an expert, I find this excessive focus on genetics to absolute exclusion of extensive literary evidence present in our Vedas and related scriptures. A consequence of this, I suspect is the timeline.
-
Far serious problem though is the assumption under-girding this exclusively genetic centric approach to history, it is not an accurate model of how ancient cultures evolved including ours.
-
it's not an exclusive approach but it's the only undeniable one. It's upto us to fill in the rest of the puzzle using texts and our own knowledge. What we cannot do is take head in sand approach and contradict genetic findings.
-
When I was a staunch OIT proponent, there were a few questions that people like Elst had posed - 'how can people forget where they came from' being among them. This has been amply answered in the Greek case. And the timelines do show that RigVeda is Indian.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.