Re: [tied] Re: The physical type of proto-Indo-Europeans

---

From: "mkelkar2003" <smykelkar@...>
Reply-To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [tied] Re: The physical type of proto-Indo-Europeans
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 05:56:34 -0000

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- mkelkar2003 <smykelkar@...> wrote:
>
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh
> > <gknysh@> wrote:
> >  The OIT is a total non-starter in this
> > > respect. It's not even headed towards the
> > ballpark. It
> > > is a complete and utter waste of time.*****
> >
> > The OIT may not be a non starter. See below
> > (Kalyanaraman and Kelkar
> > 2005).
>
> *****GK: There's nothing to see.

Even the current family tree as drawn by IEL (which is in need of some
serious revision imho),  can be explained with migrations out of South
Asia as explained on page 80 of proto vedic continuity.doc

Which is my point.
> OIT cannot demonstrate any archaeological continuity
> leading from India to Europe,

There is no archaeological continity the other way round either, as I
have shown by quoting Kenoyer a leading expert in South Asian
archaeology.

and has no equivalent to
> the Klejn approach (no pre-"historical Aryans" culture
> in India has any affinities to European ones of the
> relevant time frame).Hence, a complete
> non-starter.*****

There is no archaeological evidence to confirm any of the massive
migrations hypothesized by IEL. see p. 23 of proto vedic continuity
theory.doc.

--------------------------

Just wondering how reliable archaeology is as an indicator of genetic relations among peoples, compared to language.  It seems to me one's style of pottery can vary very easily from person to person, place to place, and time to time, since it often is an artistic expression.  Even when not an artistic expression, I would imagine that the basic shapes of pottery, ornaments, etc. would be quite uniform among diverse peoples since they are primarily functional, or form-fitting (the human body).  Language, on the other hand, I think is one of the earliest and most basic human arts that is passed on from mother to child, and is also one of the most cherished, and therefore I think a better indication of ancient genetic affiliations -- and of conquests of peoples (where new genetic types are introduced into a population).  I would rely more on IE theory for cultural affinity than I would archaeological evidence, personally.  But I am biased since I am not highly conversant in archaeology.

Andrew



>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>

SPONSORED LINKS

Online social science degree	Social science course	Social science degree
Social science education	Bachelor of social science	Social science major

---

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

•  Visit your group "cybalist" on the web.
   
•  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   cybalist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
   
•  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

---