"Will the ‘real’ linguist please stand up?"

Indo-Iranian > Finno-Ugric

"Will the `real' linguist please stand up? It should be obvious that
linguists have as much difficulty in establishing the chronological
relationships between loanwords as any other `historical science'"
(Mallory, J.P., 1997, The homelands of the Indo-Europeans, in:
Arhaeology and Language, R. Blench and M. Spriggs, ed., London,
Routledge, p. 98).

This exasperation arose from the problem of explaining Finno-Ugric
loans from Indo-Aryan (not Proto-Indo-European; Shevoroskin), Indo-
Iranian (Dolgopolsky and D'iakonov), early Iranian (not Old Indic;
Gamkrelidze and Ivanov), Sanskrit (Lubotsky). S.S. Misra cites
Harmatta who had analyzed eleven consecutive chronological periods,
from the first half of the fifth millennium BCE to the invasion of
Europe by Hun in 4th century CE. (Harmatta, J., 1981, Proto-Iranians
and Proto-Indians in Central Asia in the 2nd millennium BC
(Linguistic Evidence), in: M.S. Asimov, ed., Ethnic Problems of the
History of Central Asia in the Early Period, Moscow, Nauka pp. 75-
82.; cf. Harmatta, J., 1992, The emergence of the Indo-Iranians: The
Indo-Iranian Languages, in: A.H.Dani and V.M. Masson, ed., History
of Civilizations of Central Asia, UNESCO, pp. 1: 357-378.)
Considering that the Finno-Ugric loans ar from Indo-Iranian, Misra
notes that Indo-Iranians came from South Asia or Afghanistan to the
Caspian Sea region. (S.S. Misra, 1992, The Aryan Problem: A
Linguistic Approach, New Delhi, Munshiram Manoharlal).
This issue is discussed in Edwin Bryant, 2001, The quest for the
origins of vedic culture: The Indo-Aryan migration debate, OUP, pp.
126-129) who opines that "there is unlikely to be agreement among
linguists regarding the exact linguistic (and therefore
chronological) identification of such loans…"

What are the chances that linguists will agree with Misra? What are
the chances that there was one wave from east to west impacting
Finno-Ugric, and one later wave from east to southerly Caucasian?

Kalyan