dray
BANNED
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2013
- Messages
- 10,853
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
Firstly, genetic tests did not indicate they were low caste converts. The few Bangladeshis had around 5% Northeast Euro and a bit of Med, bit of Caucasian, something low castes do not have. The samples were only 5 or at most 6 people from Bangladesh, so no way can you decipher an entire population from such a tiny sample. If there were more samples then we could have had individuals showing even higher Northeast Euro, Med, Caucasian. Muslims are mixed of all castes since we don't follow a caste structure. There were converts from various Hindu castes. Secondly, there would be some foreign 'Muslim' blood mixed in from Afghans. Afghans and Turks first started coming into Bangladesh in the 12th century, at which time the population of East Bengal would have been much much smaller than what it is today. They were all men, so would have had to have taken local wives. And this trend continued for several centuries. So to say some Muslims in Bangladesh don't have Afghan blood, is absolute fallacy. If Bangladeshis were all low caste converts then why don't we have an IQ of 75, a widely measured low caste IQ in india. Why is it 82, the same as India and Pakistan?
Bangladeshis are a mix of ANI, ASI, some Mongoloid admixture, and also bit of 'Muslim' (this latter component is mainly Afghan but also maybe a bit of Turk, and Arab, particularly Yemeni and Iraqi).
That 82 iq was a BS, don't go by any stupid article in the internet.