Re: Meaning of Aryan: now, "white people"?

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh <gknysh@...> wrote:

>
> This will definitely be my last post re Kelkar. The
> man is an out and out liar. Cf.below at **!!!!**
>
> --- mkelkar2003 <swatimkelkar@...> wrote:
>
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh
> > <gknysh@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > --- mkelkar2003 <swatimkelkar@> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Very scientific! Dixon's BULLSHIT! punctuality
> > > > equilibrium model has
> > > > been validated in a recent Science magazine
> > article
> > > > Evolution of language in punctual bursts."
> > > >
> > > > Every one who does not agree with you is "aged"
> > > > (Dhavalikar), "compromised" and colored by
> > > > "indiginist point of view"
> > > > Not everyone who supports the OIT model is of
> > South
> > > > Asian origin.
> > > >
> > > > Lets continue this "scientific" dialgoue.
> > > >
> > > > M. Kelkar
> > >
> > > GK: The OIT has been effectively refuted time
> > and
> > > again in our archives. Kelkar has nothing new to
> > > contribute and just keeps repeating himself,
> > lapsing
> > > into inconsequential comments such as the above
> > > instead of dealing with arguments. A familiar
> > tactic.
> > > I, for one, will henceforth ignore him. But a
> > thought
> > > comes to mind. Why should someone like Kelkar have
> > the
> > > right to continue his crusades when Torsten was
> > asked
> > > to discontinue his Odinist fantasies? Is OIT less
> > > annoying than Odinism? Or do we discriminate
> > against
> > > Danes (:=)))? Perhaps we could leave it to our
> > > moderators to decide when and if Kelkar and his
> > ilk
> > > have something genuine to advance in favour of
> > their
> > > views? Why continue repeating ad nauseam e.g.
> > messages
> > > 43547ss. and many similar contexts?****
> > >
>
>
> KELKAR: **!!!!**
> > I did reply to Klejin(?) article you posted earlier.
> > It never
> > made it through. S/he starts out withe assumption
> > that Rig Veda
> > records the colonization of India by invading
> > "Aryans" and then tries
> > to fit the archaeological data into it. The fact is
> > Rig Veda does
> > not record any such invasion.
> >
> > M. Kelkar
>
> ****GK: Here is what Kleijn stated:
>
> "The R(i)gveda and other texts of the ancient Indian
> religion reveal the gradual colonization of India by
> the Aryans moving in a northwest to south-east
> direction, but they do not give any indications of
> their original homeland."
>
> Nowhere does K. assert that the Rigveda "records" an
> "Aryan" invasion. He says "reveals", and it is crystal
> clear what he means by this (viz.,the presence in the
> RV of elements which are verified in the
> archaeological evidence of the Catacomb culture of
> Eurasia (now dated ca. 2900-2200 BCE)and absent in the
> pre-IE culture of India).****
> >
> ______________________________________________________________________
> > ______________
> > > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
> > > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>

____________________________________________________________________________________

> Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
>