--- kishore patnaik <
kishorepatnaik09@...>
wrote:
> Very absurd and crazy reply (Re A.F.). Come out
with
> arguments and facts, quotations
> etc.
>
> kishore patnaik
****GK: Some alternative thoughts:
(1)Why do you suppose, Kishore, that European scholars
(well 99.9% of them) are not disturbed by the European
version of the AIT, which would be what we would call
the "PIE-I-T"? Because the PIEIT has not been
interpreted in a way that unjustly unfairly and
untruthfully damages their national prides. The Nazis
tried to turn PIEIT into a European version of the AIT
notion Indians object to. So we well understand your
intense and totally justified rejection of this
pseudo-science. But this does not mean that an
adequate version of AIT is not correct, just as a
rejection of Nazism does not entail a required
accompanying rejection of PIEIT by the Europeans. Just
think it through. A properly understood AIT does not
negate the decisive cultural input of pre-Aryan
Indians into the development of Indian history and
culture.
(2) The current OIT is incapable of adequately
explaining the "Indo-Europeanization" of Europe by the
necessary combination of linguistic,
archaeological,and historical/documentary factologies.
But the application of PIEIT to India can explain part
of the emergence of the India we know. That is why it
is a preferable hypothesis. *****
>