Khilji, the first Afghan dyansty of Hindostan

[jatt+gutts]

conclusion - Pakistani are churas who meekly surrender to any tom dick and harry. short and ugly they live in delusional world of 10000000000000 years ago. cut out from real world . and I m out

 

[INDIC]

Yes you're right! One little mistake: "India" and "Indian" never were an ethnic group. It's a term denoting a geographical region after which a political entity is named after.

Country, province, town, city, village, streets etc. every thing is geographical region, which geographical region are you talking about.

 

[he-man]

Sikhs have reduced to jokes in Hindu india. After 84 sikh genocide by hindus now days the only thing they do is tell the world how tall they are compared to tamil hindu. Jatt+gutts have similar complex, developed after being slaves yet again. One operation was needed to kill rightfull and valid claims of sikhs.

All sikhs demanded was protection of their faith ad culture, the result now is poorbias from bihar and up have invaded punjab.

Go and see the stats.

Sikhs have highest per capita income in india

Greater than even brahmins and baniyas.


Now don't be butthurt yaar
Shit happens.deal with it

 

[RazPaK]

And ur forefather had no balls to stand up to invader and got converted.

Ja ro baith ke kone ch hun

Ok chamar singh....

 

[Jackdaws]

Out of curiosity - the Pakistani penchant for choosing heroes is rather amusing. Is there still a cricket stadium named after Gadaffi in Lahore?

 

[he-man]

Ok chamar singh....

Theek aa bai
Khush reh

 

[DRaisinHerald]

Country, province, town, city, village, streets etc. every thing is geographical region, which geographical region are you talking about.

First of all: Punjabis and Sindhis of the country of Pakistan are indeed genetically closer to their immediate eastern neighbors living in the country of India, than their western ones. You can't deny that, nor is there a need to.

But, India is just a country. It's not an ethnic/racial group; just like Pakistan is just a country and not a racial/ethnic group! So you can't really say they're 'Indian' as if 'Indian' was some sort of ethnic or racial group!

It's just like how Europe is geographical region and not a country or ethnic group.

 

[dawn_news]

Any references on how and where the theory has been proven wrong?

Even the most remote tribes in South India have ANI genes, which obviously hasn't taken place in the last 2000 years. The ANI genepool has had a number of additions over the centuries. But it's virtually impossible for the so-called Aryan tribes to have arrived in India and propagated their genes into every Indian population in just 3-4 thousand years. The interbreeding has a 40000 year timeline, not 2000-4000, even in regions that comprise modern-day Pakistan.

40.000 was just a theory. Thats why they recently did extensive study to find out real admixture date.

Genetic Evidence for Recent Population Mixture in India

And ANI doesnt mean Aryan only. There were 2-3 big waves of ANI people in South Asia.

 

[dawn_news]

Out of curiosity - the Pakistani penchant for choosing heroes is rather amusing. Is there still a cricket stadium named after Gadaffi in Lahore?

Well he gave us $1 billion for nuke development 40 years ago, that used to be a lot of money back then. In return we named stadium after him which can be changed anytime. I would say good deal.

 

[he-man]

Well he gave us $1 billion for nuke development 40 years ago, that used to be a lot of money back then. In return we named stadium after him which can be changed anytime. I would say good deal.

If true,smart decision

 

[Indischer]

40.000 was just a theory. Thats why they recently did extensive study to find out real admixture date.

Genetic Evidence for Recent Population Mixture in India

And ANI doesnt mean Aryan only. There were 2-3 big waves of ANI people in South Asia.

Precisely my point! There isn't one haplogroup that signifies ANI, but rather a cluster. And it could be possible only if disparate groups from Eurasia had entered India in different times. And remember, the paper you quoted states explicitly that such a timeline was observed in a subset of the tested groups, not all.

 

[dawn_news]

First of all: Punjabis and Sindhis of the country of Pakistan are indeed genetically closer to their immediate eastern neighbors living in the country of India, than their western ones. You can't deny that, nor is there a need to.

But, India is just a country. It's not an ethnic/racial group; just like Pakistan is just a country and not a racial/ethnic group! So you can't really say they're 'Indian' as if 'Indian' was some sort of ethnic or racial group!

It's just like how Europe is geographical region and not a country or ethnic group.

Here is the thing pakistani sindhi and punjabis are similar to Indian punjabi and sindhi genetically? Yes and these make 2% of Indian population. But to say punjabis are similar to poorbias, bengalis, tamil etc is just hogwash.

 

[DRaisinHerald]

First of all: Punjabis and Sindhis of the country of Pakistan are indeed genetically closer to their immediate eastern neighbors living in the country of India, than their western ones. You can't deny that, nor is there a need to.

Adding to this, the farther away east or towards south India you go the less they are related to us. The Baloch and Pashtun are indeed genetically closer to the Punjabis and Sindhis than say Marathi or Bengalis are, even if they happen to speak an 'Indo-Aryan language.
BTW, the word 'Indic' has roots to the concept of Indo-Aryan languages'. It's purely a linguistic word, not an ethnic one. Going by that, many Indians i.e. North-Easterners and Dravidians are not 'Indic'.

Giving a European example on the case, the French are mostly descendants from Frankish tribes, which were of Germanic origin like the English or Danes were, but they speak a Romance/Latin-derived language, like the Italians and Spanish do.

Here is the thing pakistani sindhi and punjabis are similar to Indian punjabi and sindhi genetically? Yes and these make 2% of Indian population. But to say punjabis are similar to poorbias, bengalis, tamil etc is just hogwash.

And that's exactly what I'm trying to say here.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Destroying the intellectuals and altering or destroying/replacing the existing education system is key to a successful invasion. The British practised the same when they took over India. The US is doing the same in Iraq, Afg.. etc

Not always.Not unless they are random looters like hulegu the mongol or bhaktiyar khliji the barbarian.Timur, a maniac that he was always spared the scholars when he took a city.As for replacing the education system,the madrasah education system brought on by the inavding armie s was restricted solely to muslims,it can't replace education imparted to hindu or buddhist students because its not available to them.This act of destruction was one of pure savagery for sake of savagery.It destroyed some of the greatest learning centres of the ancient world,where students came to study from all over asia.

 

[dawn_news]

Precisely my point! There isn't one haplogroup that signifies ANI, but rather a cluster. And it could be possible only if disparate groups from Eurasia had entered India in different times. And remember, the paper you quoted states explicitly that such a timeline was observed in a subset of the tested groups, not all.

The paper tested 74 groups from all over India and from Pakistan Sindhis and Pashtuns. The only explanation after that study is Pakistan region was almost 100% ANI about 2000-2500 years ago, mixing started happening after that.

The reason 4200 years old ani-asi is found in South India can be early wave of ANI who got to South India and mixed with natives. But 40.000 years old admixture has been proven wrong. It seem hardly any native ASI was living in Pakistan/North west India punjab 2000-2500 years ago.

Not always.Not unless they are random looters like hulegu the mongol or bhaktiyar khliji the barbarian.Timur, a maniac that he was always spared the scholars when he took a city.As for replacing the education system,the madrasah education system brought on by the inavding armie s was restricted solely to muslims,it can't replace education imparted to hindu or buddhist students because its not available to them.This act of destruction was one of pure savagery for sake of savagery.It destroyed some of the greatest learning centres of the ancient world,where students came to study from all over asia.

Well one can say hindu education system was restricted to brahmins only. At least any muslims could learn in madrassah.