Re: [tied] Re: From words to dates: Water into wine, mathemagic or

At 11:24:29 PM on Tuesday, February 6, 2007, mkelkar2003
wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen"
> <tgpedersen@...> wrote:

>>> Fig 3 is just a comparison of timelines; not geography.
>>> The rapid divergence can came from Anatolia or for that
>>> matter South Asia. The 2003 Nature article by the same
>>> authors I have posted earlier, supports the Anatolian
>>> hypothesis.

>> It does?
>> "
>> The pattern and timing of expansion suggested by the four
>> analyses in Fig. 1 is consistent with the Anatolian
>> farming theory of Indo-European origin. Radiocarbon
>> analysis of the earliest Neolithic sites across Europe
>> suggests that agriculture arrived in Greece at some time
>> during the ninth millennium BP and had reached as far as
>> Scotland by 5,500 years BP25. Figure 1 shows the Hittite
>> lineage diverging from Proto-Indo-European around 8,700
>> years BP, perhaps reflecting the initial migration out of
>> Anatolia. Tocharian, and the Greco-Armenian lineages are
>> shown as distinct by 7,000 years BP, with all other major
>> groups formed by 5,000 years BP. This scenario is
>> consistent with recent genetic studies supporting a
>> Neolithic, Near Eastern contribution to the European gene
>> pool4,6. The consensus tree also shows evidence of a
>> period of rapid divergence giving rise to the Italic,
>> Celtic, Balto-Slavic and perhaps Indo-Iranian families
>> that is intriguingly close to the time suggested for a
>> possible Kurgan expansion. Thus, as observed by Cavalli-
>> Sforza et al.26, these hypotheses need not be mutually
>> exclusive.
>> "

>> Cf the conclusion with that of the 2005 article:
>> "

>> ...the two theories of Indo-European origin may not, in
>> fact, be mutually exclusive ? a possibility identified by
>> Cavalli-Sforza et al. (1994).
>> "

[...]

> There is *no doubt* that they do not support the kurgan
> horsemen theory.

On the contrary, as Torsten pointed out at length, they
explicitly acknowledge that their results are consistent
with the possibility that it is part of the full story.

> Here is the portion of the para you quoted earlier:

>> "The consensus tree also shows evidence of a period of
>> rapid divergence giving rise to the Italic, Celtic,
>> Balto-Slavic and perhaps Indo-Iranian families that is
>> intriguingly close to the time suggested for a possible
>> Kurgan expansion. "

> I think you are reading what you want to read in this
> sentence.

No, you are. Or rather, you are ignoring the parts that you
don't like.

[...]

Brian