Genes link Australia with India: Indians broke Australian isolation, study

[ALOK31]

SYDNEY: People from the Indian sub-continent migrated to Australia and mixed with Aborigines 4,000 years ago, bringing the dingo dog with them, according to a study published on Tuesday.

The continent was thought to have been isolated from other populations until Europeans landed at the end of the 1700s.

But researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, reported "evidence of substantial gene flow between Indian populations and Australia about 4,000 years ago".

They analysed genetic variation from across the genome from Australian Aborigines, New Guineans, Southeast Asians, and Indians.

"Long before Europeans settled in Australia humans had migrated from the Indian subcontinent to Australia and mixed with Australian Aborigines," the study said.

It found "substantial gene flow from India to Australia 4,230 years ago ie... well before European contact," it said.

"Interestingly," said researcher Irina Pugach, "this date also coincides with many changes in the archaeological record of Australia, which include a sudden change in plant processing and stone tool technologies... and the first appearance of the dingo in the fossil record.

"Since we detect inflow of genes from India into Australia at around the same time, it is likely that these changes were related to this migration," she said.

A common origin was also discovered for the Australian, New Guinean and Philippine Mamanwa populations who had followed a southern migration route out of Africa begun more than 40,000 years ago.

The researchers estimate the groups split about 36,000 years ago.

Australia offers some of the earliest archaeological evidence for the presence of humans outside Africa, with sites dated to at least 45,000 years ago.


Genes link Australia with India: Indians broke Australian isolation, study says - The Times of India

 

[Cherokee]

aahh .. reposting it .

 

[FaujHistorian]

SYDNEY: People from the Indian sub-continent migrated to Australia and mixed with Aborigines 4,000 years ago, bringing the dingo dog with them, according to a study published on Tuesday.

The continent was thought to have been isolated from other populations until Europeans landed at the end of the 1700s.

But researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, reported "evidence of substantial gene flow between Indian populations and Australia about 4,000 years ago".

They analysed genetic variation from across the genome from Australian Aborigines, New Guineans, Southeast Asians, and Indians.

"Long before Europeans settled in Australia humans had migrated from the Indian subcontinent to Australia and mixed with Australian Aborigines," the study said.

It found "substantial gene flow from India to Australia 4,230 years ago ie... well before European contact," it said.

"Interestingly," said researcher Irina Pugach, "this date also coincides with many changes in the archaeological record of Australia, which include a sudden change in plant processing and stone tool technologies... and the first appearance of the dingo in the fossil record.

"Since we detect inflow of genes from India into Australia at around the same time, it is likely that these changes were related to this migration," she said.

A common origin was also discovered for the Australian, New Guinean and Philippine Mamanwa populations who had followed a southern migration route out of Africa begun more than 40,000 years ago.

The researchers estimate the groups split about 36,000 years ago.

Australia offers some of the earliest archaeological evidence for the presence of humans outside Africa, with sites dated to at least 45,000 years ago.


Genes link Australia with India: Indians broke Australian isolation, study says - The Times of India

Those "Indians" were the aborigines that spread mainly along Indian south and later in the Ganga valley as first major wave out of Africa. Genetic study is good but just look for big flat noses and Indian faces similar to Australian aborigines.


Modern day Indians (with Asian or European noses/faces) on the other hand migrated from north West as second (and subsequent) wave(s) out of central Asia.

Later successive waves from NW brought Brahmanism that turned the local aborigines of Ganga valley and Indian south to "the lowest cast", the shudras, the untouchable.

By the way the Brahmanism could not stay in Indus valley for too long either, and got replaced by more egalitarian faiths.

However Brahmins' iron clad hold remains strong in the Ganga valley.

By the way we are all just 2,000 generations from the original African tribe(s) that started it all. Amazing! Isn't it?


peace

p.s. just a technical point. No way to start another Pak-India net-war.

 

[xdrive]

People migrated to Australia from multiple places in the world over thousands of years ago and eventually became their own ethnic group, Australian aboriginals.

This discovery isn't really something surprising.

 

[curioususer]

Those "Indians" were the aborigines that spread mainly along Indian south and later in the Ganga valley as first major wave out of Africa. Genetic study is good but just look for big flat noses and Indian faces similar to Australian aborigines.

Modern day Indians (with Asian or European noses/faces) on the other hand migrated from north West as second (and subsequent) wave(s) out of central Asia.

Later successive waves from NW brought Brahmanism that turned the local aborigines of Ganga valley and Indian south to "the lowest cast", the shudras, the untouchable.

By the way the Brahmanism could not stay in Indus valley for too long either, and got replaced by more egalitarian faiths.

However Brahmins' iron clad hold remains strong in the Ganga valley.

By the way we are all just 2,000 generations from the original African tribe(s) that started it all. Amazing! Isn't it?

peace

p.s. just a technical point. No way to start another Pak-India net-war.

Don't believe Nazi propaganda. Do you have any proof to believe this?

 

[FaujHistorian]

People migrated to Australia from multiple places in the world over thousands of years ago and eventually became their own ethnic group, Australian aboriginals.

This discovery isn't really something surprising.

This is not true. At lease not on the bases of genetic studies. Aborigines (flat noses, big foreheads) were the first major wave out of Africa. This wave traveled along coastal areas of East Africa, along the coast of modern day Pakistan, then onwards along the coastlines of modern day India, BDesh, Burma, then down along far east to Indonesia, then possibly a short log ride across the much lower level sea (ice age sucked water out of oceans) and then to Australia.

Then they remained pretty much isolated until modern day European colonization.


peace.

 

[Manas]

@FaujHistorian

Bharmins never had any political power in indian history.

They were bascially the priest class who lived on alms received from the ruling class and spend life in pursuit of knowledge.

Whether its Lord Rama or Lord Krisha , they were born as khatriyas(the hindu warrior castes) in their human avatars not brahmins.


Yes,They were few bharmins kingdom called hindushahis around the 800Ads in areas todays Sindh ,NWFP, punjab, kashmir that lasted for few hundred years till Mahmood Ghaznavi conquered theese regions and brought an end to the hindu shah brahmin Pala dynasty.

 

[FaujHistorian]

Don't believe Nazi propaganda. Do you have any proof to believe this?

CU and Manas Bhai logo,

There are several studies done on this topic. One by an American professor in TX, and one by an Indian research group. They all studied Y-Chromosome in the Indian subcontinent and discovered the upper castes (sharp noses, asian/european faces) have mostly come from central Asia, while the lower castes and especially Shudras are the aborigines (flat noses and Australian aborigine faces).

And no it is not Nazi propaganda. All the researchers that I have seen are pretty mainstream.


peace to you brother, peace to all

 

[Bang Galore]

Those "Indians" were the aborigines that spread mainly along Indian south and later in the Ganga valley as first major wave out of Africa. Genetic study is good but just look for big flat noses and Indian faces similar to Australian aborigines.


Modern day Indians (with Asian or European noses/faces) on the other hand migrated from north West as second (and subsequent) wave(s) out of central Asia.

Later successive waves from NW brought Brahmanism that turned the local aborigines of Ganga valley and Indian south to "the lowest cast", the shudras, the untouchable.

By the way the Brahmanism could not stay in Indus valley for too long either, and got replaced by more egalitarian faiths.

However Brahmins' iron clad hold remains strong in the Ganga valley.

By the way we are all just 2,000 generations from the original African tribe(s) that started it all. Amazing! Isn't it?


peace

p.s. just a technical point. No way to start another Pak-India net-war.

Not much of a technical point. No one believes what you posted anymore, that theory went out of date a long time ago. Genetic studies show a stable population for the last 40000 years in India and all Indians being a mix of two ancestral populations, ASI (- Ancestral South Indian-60000 years ago- probably among the first to leave Africa - closest population to the original live in the Andamans) and ANI (ancestral North Indians - 40000 + years ago). The population has remained stable since the mixing of these two populations at around 40000 years ago. There is also no genetic difference among castes or tribes; all belong to the same mix.

 

[Koovie]

race discussion.....

this thread will derail in

10

9

8

7

6

5

......

 

[Spring Onion]

. There is also no genetic difference among castes or tribes; all belong to the same mix.

wish if their brains and mentality was also the same.

 

[A1Kaid]

You guys are all wrong, I don't feel like giving a history lesson in early Human migration. However, FaujHistorian's account is the most accurate. Though it is incorrect of him to call the early Human groups from Africa as "Aboriginese". Also FaujHistorian you forgot to mention the groups out of Africa first traveled to modern day Arabian peninsula. There were not one African group but more likely several.

Not much of a technical point. No one believes what you posted anymore, that theory went out of date a long time ago. Genetic studies show a stable population for the last 40000 years in India and all Indians being a mix of two ancestral populations, ASI (- Ancestral South Indian-60000 years ago- probably among the first to leave Africa - closest population to the original live in the Andamans) and ANI (ancestral North Indians - 40000 + years ago). The population has remained stable since the mixing of these two populations. There is also no genetic difference among castes or tribes; all belong to the same mix.

The population has remained stable since the mixing of these two populations. There is also no genetic difference among castes or tribes; all belong to the same mix.

Just be quiet okay, you have no idea what you're talking about. I am studied in Biology and specialize in Cell Biology and Genetics and can tell you, you have no idea what "genetics", "genetic difference", or "genetic variance" means or looks like judging by the ignorant statements you have made.

 

[Bang Galore]

Just be quiet okay, you have no idea what you're talking about. I am studied in Biology and specialize in Cell Biology and Genetics and can tell you, you have no idea what "genetics", "genetic difference", or "genetic variance" means or looks like judging by the ignorant statements you have made.

You have studied biology? I'm impressed. In any case, I didn't claim to have done any research and if I'm not technically correct in my usage of terms, so be it. Not claiming to be an expert in the field But considering how you jumped in without addressing the point made; probably better read.

The study, which has medical implications for people of Indian descent, was led by scientists at the Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology (CCMB) in Hyderabad, India together with US researchers at Harvard Medical School, the Harvard School of Public Health and the Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT.

The finding that nearly all Indian groups descend from mixtures of two ancestral populations applies to traditional "tribes" as well as "castes." Kumarasamy Thangaraj, a senior research scientist at CCMB in Hyderabad and a co-author said, "It is impossible to distinguish castes from tribes using the data. The genetics proves that they are not systematically different. This supports the view that castes grew directly out of tribal-like organizations during the formation of Indian society."

The finding that nearly all Indian groups descend from mixtures of two ancestral populations applies to traditional "tribes" as well as "castes."

The one exception to the finding that all Indian groups are mixed is the indigenous people of the Andaman Islands, an archipelago in the Indian Ocean with a census of only a few hundred today. The Andamanese appear to be related exclusively to the Ancestral South Indian lineage and therefore lack Ancestral North Indian ancestry

The great Indian divide along north-south lines now stands blurred. A pathbreaking study by Harvard and indigenous researchers on ancestral Indian populations says there is a genetic relationship between all Indians and more importantly, the hitherto believed ``fact'' that Aryans and Dravidians signify the ancestry of north and south Indians might after all, be a myth.

``This paper rewrites history... there is no north-south divide,'' Lalji Singh, former director of the Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology (CCMB) and a co-author of the study, said at a press conference here on Thursday.

The initial settlement took place 65,000 years ago in the Andamans and in ancient south India around the same time, which led to population growth in this part,'' said Thangarajan. He added, ``At a later stage, 40,000 years ago, the ancient north Indians emerged which in turn led to rise in numbers here. But at some point of time, the ancient north and the ancient south mixed, giving birth to a different set of population. And that is the population which exists now and there is a genetic relationship between the population within India.''

Ancestral Populations Of India And Relationships To Modern Groups Revealed
Aryan-Dravidian divide a myth: Study - Times Of India

 

[Yogi]

Those "Indians" were the aborigines that spread mainly along Indian south and later in the Ganga valley as first major wave out of Africa. Genetic study is good but just look for big flat noses and Indian faces similar to Australian aborigines.


Modern day Indians (with Asian or European noses/faces) on the other hand migrated from north West as second (and subsequent) wave(s) out of central Asia.

Later successive waves from NW brought Brahmanism that turned the local aborigines of Ganga valley and Indian south to "the lowest cast", the shudras, the untouchable.

By the way the Brahmanism could not stay in Indus valley for too long either, and got replaced by more egalitarian faiths.

However Brahmins' iron clad hold remains strong in the Ganga valley.

By the way we are all just 2,000 generations from the original African tribe(s) that started it all. Amazing! Isn't it?


peace

p.s. just a technical point. No way to start another Pak-India net-war.

Congratulations for successfully derailing this thread by ur thoughtful comments which r btw factually incorrect but don't wanna argue on this bcoz u n ur likes will ruin this thread just like many others...

 

[Yogi]

@FaujHistorian

Bharmins never had any political power in indian history.

They were bascially the priest class who lived on alms received from the ruling class and spend life in pursuit of knowledge.

Whether its Lord Rama or Lord Krisha , they were born as khatriyas(the hindu warrior castes) in their human avatars not brahmins.


Yes,They were few bharmins kingdom called hindushahis around the 800Ads in areas todays Sindh ,NWFP, punjab, kashmir that lasted for few hundred years till Mahmood Ghaznavi conquered theese regions and brought an end to the hindu shah brahmin Pala dynasty.

Shame on u to shatter the Brahminism propaganda which has been the backbone of Pak studies for many decades, u evil yindoo...