[tied] Re: Proving India is the Indian Homeland

> [Piotr:] Sorry, but Misra was _fundamentally_ wrong in failing to

respect some very basic assumptions of general historical linguistics.

>

I don't disagree with that.

> [Piotr:] I see. So they all agree that it's the linguists who must

be wrong ;).

>

Hehe. Well actually, no one really wants to think about it much so
the blame hasn't been placed on anyone yet. Frankly, most of the
archaeologists and historians I know are a bit intimidated by the
linguist gangs. :-)

> [Piotr:] I haven't seen any Harappan chariots as yet;

It depends on the definition of ratha.

> the presence or absence of horses is really irrelevant inasmuch as

horses don't speak Indo-Aryan or PIE<

LOL!

>"Vedic" fire altars...Tripartite aspects..."the IE pantheon", and

where do you see it in the Indus Valley Civilisation?

These depend on how you look at the evidence. I'll have to bring this
up in a few days when I have more time.