What's new

Ghaggar-Hakra believed to be mythical Rig Veda Sarasvati river proven false

Please stop using arabic words especially when you cant write them properly. :omghaha: Why don't you stick with Tamil language which is "pure".

Punjabis of Pakistan are slowly becoming Bhaiyyas by copying the culture and language of Uttar Pradesh. What a cultural invasion by India. :lol:
 
Please stop using arabic words especially when you cant write them properly. :omghaha: Why don't you stick with Tamil language which is "pure".

Hey, how many TV Channels and newspapers do you have in Punjabi language in Pakistan. :woot:
 
And you verified every bs claim you guys make? You guys cant even accept scientific studies unless they are done by hindutvas themselves.

What scientific studies? You are the one spewing bs. The only thing that science can talk about is whether a river ever flowed from the mountain or at what time it so flowed. It is you who mixes up that with whether that river is the same Sarasvati of the Rg veda. That is not a claim made by science nor can it made. That is determined only by scholars of the Rg veda. After mixing up science with stuff not related - your ridiculous headline being a clear example, you have the audacity to mouth off. As I see it, you made an accusation of Tamils being regarded as monkeys. Now running for cover, eh? Standard behavior.
 
Aunty you claim something which doesn't belong to your kind, remember how they portrayed Tamils as mere monkeys who can just throw rocks in to the sea? :omghaha:



As i said before just one 1 major site and Lothal isnt comparable to Mohenjo-Daro, otherwise it would have been known as Lothal Civilization and not Indus Valley or Harappa Civlization.

Civilt%C3%A0ValleIndoMappa.png

showing some old map which doesn't even reflect half of the territory or sites where IVC is spread cross ?I can understand your desperation but sorry, fact is the sites I mentioned are very much in league of mohanjadaro and hapappa.
 
What scientific studies? You are the one spewing bs. The only thing that science can talk about is whether a river ever flowed from the mountain or at what time it so flowed. It is you who mixes up that with whether that river is the same Sarasvati of the Rg veda. That is not a claim made by science nor can it made. That is determined only by scholars of the Rg veda. After mixing up science with stuff not related - your ridiculous headline being a clear example, you have the audacity to mouth off. As I see it, you made an accusation of Tamils being regarded as monkeys. Now running for cover, eh? Standard behavior.

In the book of Rig Veda chapter number 10.92.2 it is clearly mentioned (say it with voice of Zakir Naik) that Sarasvati rose from the mountains and fell into the ocean. And the study in the OP which i am sure you didn't bother to read anyway clearly say that Ghaggar-Hakra is monsoon-fed river. Now run away and hide, and its not me but respect full Tamils (unlike our wannabe aunty on PDF) saying it that they are portrayed as monkeys.
 
showing some old map which doesn't even reflect half of the territory or sites where IVC is spread cross ?I can understand your desperation but sorry, fact is the sites I mentioned are very much in league of mohanjadaro and hapappa.

Haha old map :omghaha:. Yes Pakistan also have many sand bags sites and not just these 3 major ones. Im talking about major sites, Mehrgarh is 9000 years old site.
 
In the book of Rig Veda chapter number 10.92.2 it is clearly mentioned (say it with voice of Zakir Naik) that Sarasvati rose from the mountains and fell into the ocean. And the study in the OP which i am sure you didn't bother to read anyway clearly say that Ghaggar-Hakra is monsoon-fed river. Now run away and hide, and its not me but respect full Tamils (unlike our wannabe aunty on PDF) saying it that they are portrayed as monkeys.


You were talking talking about this research. The report is not claiming that Ghaggar-Hakra was not Saraswati.

Monsoon link to end of Harappan cities

Monsoon link to end of Harappan cities
G.S. MUDUR

New Delhi, May 28: The ancient Harappan civilisation emerged, flourished, and collapsed under a steadily weakening monsoon, according to new research findings that scientists say provide the strongest evidence yet to link its rise and fall to changing climate.

An international team of scientists has combined multiple sets of data to show that weakening monsoon and reduced river water initially stimulated intensive agriculture and urbanisation, but later precipitated the decline and collapse of the subcontinent’s earliest cities.

The scientists said their research also suggests that a large river, assumed to be the mythical Saraswati, which once watered the Harappan civilisation’s heartland between the Indus and the Ganges basins was a monsoon-fed river — contrary to interpretations of text from the Rig Veda that suggests it was a glacier-fed river with origins in the Himalayas.

Their findings appear today in the US journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

“The link between a weakening monsoon and the fate of the Harappan civilisation should now be considered as settled,” said Ronojoy Adhikari, a physicist with the Institute of Mathematical Sciences, Chennai, a research team member.

“We can now almost rule out every other hypothesis that has ever been proposed for the decline of urbanism in the Harappan heartland,” said Adhikari, who used statistical tools to analyse changing urban patterns in the region from 7000 BC to 500 BC.

Adhikari and his colleagues from Pakistan, Romania, the UK, and the US combined evidence from archaeology, geology, and satellite photos to develop a chronology of landscape changes in the region spanning nearly 10,000 years.

Their analysis shows that the emergence of settlements coincided with a steady weakening of the monsoon that began about 5,000 years ago. The Harappans took advantage of a window in time during which a weakening monsoon encouraged settlements.

“It was a kind of a Goldilocks civilisation,” said Liviu Giosan, a geologist and principal of the study at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in the US. “During periods of heavy rains, the floods were too wild for people to settle near rivers, it was too dangerous.”

As the monsoon rains weakened, a gradual decrease in the intensity of floods stimulated the intensive agriculture and encouraged urbanisation about 4,500 years ago. But the continued decline in monsoon rainfall began to drive people to wetter regions upstream and eastward.

“As rivers became increasingly drier, going east became an escape route,” Giosan told The Telegraph. The archaeological record shows that settlements shifted eastward, but the region did not support crop surpluses that the Harappans had enjoyed in their river valleys.

“They forgot their (Harappan) script, and concentrated on survival,” Giosan said.

Archaeologists believe it might have been during these times of decline that the Harappan civilisation developed one of its great legacies — the double-cropping system with kharif and rabi crop rotations that survives in the subcontinent even today.

“It is clear that while winter crops were Harappan staples, the Harappan period also saw diversification of agriculture, including a range of summer millets and grams,” said Dorian Fuller, an archaeologist and team member at the University College, London.

“And these crops could have been grown independent of any river system during the monsoon rains, but only in the eastern part of the Harappan realm. Archaeobotanical evidence points to an increasing balance between these summer and winter crops in the late Harappan period,” Fuller told The Telegraph.

“Small farmers chose sustainability in the eastern Harappan lands rather than continue in cities like Harappa.”

Giosan said the findings show how changing climate may influence the fate of people and cultures. “If the monsoon were to increase in a warmer world, as some predict, catastrophic floods could turn the current irrigation system, designed for a tamer river, obsolete.”

The new geological evidence also suggests that the Ghaggar-Hakra river network, assumed by some as the mythical Saraswati, was not fed by a Himalayan glacier, but was a monsoon-fed river whose flow turned from perennial to seasonal under the weakening monsoon.

The Rig Veda refers to a mighty Saraswati that flowed through the year and joined the sea, said Adhikari, but those who compiled the Vedas may have had insufficient knowledge of the full geography of the river. “It is possible that they thought of it in analogy with the Indus, which does indeed rise in the mountains,” he said.

Three years ago, a team of scientists from the Geological Survey of India and the University of Delhi had used chemical analysis of sediments to show that the Ghaggar-Hakra river was not glacier-fed. “This new study adds geomorphological evidence,” Adhikari said.

The incisions the Ghaggar-Hakra has made in the landscape lacks the signatures of a glacier-fed river.
 
In the book of Rig Veda chapter number 10.92.2 it is clearly mentioned (say it with voice of Zakir Naik) that Sarasvati rose from the mountains and fell into the ocean. And the study in the OP which i am sure you didn't bother to read anyway clearly say that Ghaggar-Hakra is monsoon-fed river. Now run away and hide, and its not me but respect full Tamils (unlike our wannabe aunty on PDF) saying it that they are portrayed as monkeys.

Run away chap, you are quoting supposedly the Rg veda, that is not scientific proof. Don't bother me with quotes if you don't understand the context of a poet extolling the beauty of the river. There are many other references which are far more explicit in geographic definition. That is a decision for the scholars of the Rg veda to decide and most scholars of whatever persuasion stick to the Ghaggar-Hakra.. You cannot pick & choose what you want from the Rg veda. (btw, don't bother with what I have read, stick with what you can manage)

As for running away & hiding, you better do that. Claims mean nothing, there are enough Tamil claims on the IVC. You agree, I presume? I clearly pointed out where the "Vanara" kingdom was in mythology. It was nowhere near Tamil areas. Their claims are far more silly to simply pick & choose. A fool's errand.
 
Run away chap, you are quoting supposedly the Rg veda, that is not scientific proof. Don't bother me with quotes if you don't understand the context of a poet extolling the beauty of the river. There are many other references which are far more explicit in geographic definition. That is a decision for the scholars of the Rg veda to decide and most scholars of whatever persuasion stick to the Ghaggar-Hakra.. You cannot pick & choose what you want from the Rg veda. (btw, don't bother with what I have read, stick with what you can manage)

As for running away & hiding, you better do that. Claims mean nothing, there are enough Tamil claims on the IVC. You agree, I presume? I clearly pointed out where the "Vanara" kingdom was in mythology. It was nowhere near Tamil areas. Their claims are far more silly to simply pick & choose. A fool's errand.

I only agree with believable things and Tamils being monkeys is believble as proven by aunty Blox. And only hindutvas nuts still believe in Ghaggar river being Sarasvati.
 
I only agree with believable things and Tamils being monkeys is believble as proven by aunty Blox. And only hindutvas nuts still believe in Ghaggar river being Sarasvati.

Don't continually display your ignorance. You quote the Rg veda without even realising where the Ghaggar originates. Then you display zero understanding of what any scholar says about the Rg veda. Your rubbish about Tamils & monkeys having been exposed, can now only rest on your racist rants. Move on man, go play with someone else.Clearly wasting my time here.
 
Haha old map :omghaha:. Yes Pakistan also have many sand bags sites and not just these 3 major ones. Im talking about major sites, Mehrgarh is 9000 years old site.

:hitwall:
when I said old, it doesn't mean map from IVC Period, but it means a comparatively old map which doesn't reflect all the major sites of IVC, a map which doesn't even Mark the area of IVC settlement correctly(either intentionally or because other sites were discovered later). since you are bring childish arguments by saying site being major or small determines the IVC Heritage(which I already said is not correct ) let me given the descriptions of two sites in India.

1)rakhigarhi The site is 224 hectares, the largest in the country.(This estimation places Rakhigarhi bigger than Mohenjadaro in size. However, some estimates put it a little less in area [1] ). In size, dimensions, strategic location and unique significance of the settlement, Rakhi Garhi matches Harappa and Mohenjodaro at every level. [6] Three layers of Early, Mature and Late phases of Indus Valley civilization have been found at Rakhi Garhi. What has so far been found indicates that Rakhi Garhi settlement witnessed all the three phases. The site’s antiquities, drainage system and signs of small-scale industry are in continuity with other Indus sites. But major the portion of this site has not been excavacated yet. 2)Dholavira ( Gujarati : ધોળાવીરા) is an archaeological site in Bhachau Taluka of Kutch District, in the state of Gujarat in western India, which has taken its name from a modern village 1 km (0.62 mi) south of it. Also known locally as Kotada timba the site contains ruins of an ancient Indus Valley Civilization /Harappan city. It is one of the five largest Harappan sites [1] and most prominent archaeological sites in India belonging to the Indus Valley Civilization . It is also considered as grandest of cities [2] of its time. It is located on the Khadir bet island in the Kutch Desert Wildlife Sanctuary in Great Rann of Kutch and the area of the full site is more than 100 ha (250 acres). [3] The site was occupied from c.2650 BCE, declining slowly after about 2100 BCE. It was briefly abandoned and reoccupied until c.1450 BCE. [4] The site was discovered in 1967-8 by J. P. Joshi and is the fifth largest of eight major Harappan sites. It has been under excavation since 1990 by the Archaeological Survey of India , which opines that "Dholavira has indeed added new dimensions to personality of Indus Valley Civilisation." [5] The other major Harappan sites discovered so far are: Harappa , Mohenjo-daro , Ganeriwala , Rakhigarhi , Kalibangan, Rupnagar and Lothal. source wiki.
 
Every time I look at this threads name, it reminds me of Jaqen hgar! :fie:
 
Again you can believe anything, thats not the point. If it really was one civilization and same people then Tara Singh would have let Ambedkar and his Dalit followers to convert to Sikhsim to increase numbers. But he didn't like the idea of non-Punjabis dominating sikh religion. There were two civilizations, our is based on Indus and yours Ganges.

My understanding is the IVC which was based on the banks of Indus was abandoned for some unknown reasons and they moved east and settled along the Ganges. I don't think they are two separate civilizations.

It is no coincidence the ritual baths during IVC period resemble the baths in our ancient temples.

P.S. : How do you account for the pashupathi figure?
 

Back
Top Bottom