Northern pakistanis linkage to europeans?

[INDIC]

well many of these rohilla pathans moved to karachi and are killing real pashtuns.

Pathan is considered as a caste among Indian Muslims.

 

[Edevelop]

^^ @ Darius
BTW, i am a Kashmiri and a 'Butt'. Yes the same name you have written up there for a guy. Here is the reality, those pundits make like 10-15% of Kashmir population. The rest of the majority like me don't affiliate as 'Indians'. Take your minorities elsewhere

 

[DARIUS]

Dravidians also form the part of gene pool of Pakistani particularly Punjabi, Sindhis.



Indians have large percentage in many countries. In ancient times our cultural values reached far and wide in Asia.

He doesn't even know that the Brahui people of Pakistan still speak Dravidian.
[QUOTEGenetic views on race differ in their classification of Dravidians. Classical anthropologists, such as Carleton S. Coon in his 1939 work The Races of Europe, argued that Ethiopia in Northeast Africa and India in South Asia represented the outermost peripheries of the Caucasoid race. In the 1960s, genetic anthropologist Stanley Marion Garn considered the entirety of the Indian subcontinent to be a "race" genetically distinct from other populations.The geneticist L.L. Cavalli-Sforza of Stanford, based on work done in the 1980s, classified Indians as being genetically Caucasian. Cavalli-Sforza theorized that Indians are about three times closer to West Europeans than to East Asians.More recently, other geneticists, such as Lynn B. Jorde and Stephen P. Wooding, demonstrated that South Indians are genetic intermediaries between Europeans and East Asians.Nevertheless, Indians are classified by modern anthropologists as belonging to one of four different morphological or ethno-racial subtypes, although these generally overlap because of admixture: Caucasoid (concentrated in the north), Mongoloid (concentrated in the north), Australoid (concentrated in the south), and Negrito (located in the Andaman Islands).Dravidians are generally classified as members of the Proto-Australoid or Australoid race.In one study, southern Indian Dravidians clustered genetically with Tamils, a socially endogamous, predominantly Dravidian-speaking Australoid group.
While a number of earlier anthropologists held the view that the Dravidian people together were a distinct race, a small number of genetic studies based on uniparental markers have challenged this view. Some researchers have indicated that both Dravidian and Indo-Aryan speakers are indigenous to the Indian subcontinent; however, this point of view is rejected by most researchers in favor of Indo-Aryan migration, with racial stratification among Indian populations being distributed along caste lines.
Because of admixture between Caucasoid, Mongoloid and Australoid racial groups, one cannot speak of a biologically separate "Dravidian race" distinct from non-Dravidians on the Indian subcontinent. In a 2009 study of 132 individuals, 560,000 single-nucleotide polymorphisms in 25 different Indian groups were analyzed, providing strong evidence in support of the notion that modern Indians (both Indo-Aryan and Dravidian groups) are a hybrid population descending from two post-Neolithic, genetically divergent populations referred to as the 'Ancestral North Indians' and the 'Ancestral South Indians'. According to the study, Andamanese are an ASI-related group without ANI ancestry, showing that the peopling of the islands must have occurred before ANI-ASI gene flow on the mainland.ANI-ASI admixture happened some 1,200-3,500 years ago, which roughly coincides with the Indo-Aryan conquest of the Indian subcontinent.][/QUOTE]

 

[DARIUS]

^^
BTW, i am a Kashmiri and a 'Butt'. Yes the same name you have written up there for a guy. Here is the reality, those pundits make like 10-15% of Kashmir population. The rest of the majority don't affiliate themselves as 'Indians'. Take your rare minorities elsewhere

I can guarantee that an average Kashmiri would not like to use the term Indian to refer to himself but what would they hate even more is to be referred to as a Pakistani.So your claim seems somewhat unconvincing to me.Kashmiris want their own independent state maybe but not to merge with Pakistan!!BTW I was not referring to what Kashmiris want or not.I was trying to make it clear that what that other poster claimed that Kashmir has nothing to do with India was based on an absolute false notion given the fact that Pakistan itself was carved out of India in 1947.BTW which part of Kashmir are u from I mean Zila!!?Now pls dont say from ***!!

 

[INDIC]

He doesn't even know that the Brahui people of Pakistan still speak Dravidian.
[QUOTEGenetic views on race differ in their classification of Dravidians. Classical anthropologists, such as Carleton S. Coon in his 1939 work The Races of Europe, argued that Ethiopia in Northeast Africa and India in South Asia represented the outermost peripheries of the Caucasoid race. In the 1960s, genetic anthropologist Stanley Marion Garn considered the entirety of the Indian subcontinent to be a "race" genetically distinct from other populations.The geneticist L.L. Cavalli-Sforza of Stanford, based on work done in the 1980s, classified Indians as being genetically Caucasian. Cavalli-Sforza theorized that Indians are about three times closer to West Europeans than to East Asians.More recently, other geneticists, such as Lynn B. Jorde and Stephen P. Wooding, demonstrated that South Indians are genetic intermediaries between Europeans and East Asians.Nevertheless, Indians are classified by modern anthropologists as belonging to one of four different morphological or ethno-racial subtypes, although these generally overlap because of admixture: Caucasoid (concentrated in the north), Mongoloid (concentrated in the north), Australoid (concentrated in the south), and Negrito (located in the Andaman Islands).Dravidians are generally classified as members of the Proto-Australoid or Australoid race.In one study, southern Indian Dravidians clustered genetically with Tamils, a socially endogamous, predominantly Dravidian-speaking Australoid group.
While a number of earlier anthropologists held the view that the Dravidian people together were a distinct race, a small number of genetic studies based on uniparental markers have challenged this view. Some researchers have indicated that both Dravidian and Indo-Aryan speakers are indigenous to the Indian subcontinent; however, this point of view is rejected by most researchers in favor of Indo-Aryan migration, with racial stratification among Indian populations being distributed along caste lines.
Because of admixture between Caucasoid, Mongoloid and Australoid racial groups, one cannot speak of a biologically separate "Dravidian race" distinct from non-Dravidians on the Indian subcontinent. In a 2009 study of 132 individuals, 560,000 single-nucleotide polymorphisms in 25 different Indian groups were analyzed, providing strong evidence in support of the notion that modern Indians (both Indo-Aryan and Dravidian groups) are a hybrid population descending from two post-Neolithic, genetically divergent populations referred to as the 'Ancestral North Indians' and the 'Ancestral South Indians'. According to the study, Andamanese are an ASI-related group without ANI ancestry, showing that the peopling of the islands must have occurred before ANI-ASI gene flow on the mainland.ANI-ASI admixture happened some 1,200-3,500 years ago, which roughly coincides with the Indo-Aryan conquest of the Indian subcontinent.]

Dravidian genes is present in most of the North Indians and Pakistanis. Dravidian exist today only as a language family but not as a race.

I can guarantee that an average Kashmiri would not like to use the term Indian to refer to himself but what would they hate even more is to be referred to as a Pakistani.So your claim seems somewhat unconvincing to me.Kashmiris want their own independent state maybe but not to merge with Pakistan!!BTW I was not referring to what Kashmiris want or not.I was trying to make it clear that what that other poster claimed that Kashmir has nothing to do with India was based on an absolute false notion given the fact that Pakistan itself was carved out of India in 1947.BTW which part of Kashmir are u from I mean Zila!!?Now pls dont say from ***!!

When Pakistanis claim themselves as Kashmiri it really doubt me because they declare anyone Kashmiri. Infact the Kashmiri from valley never consider Mirpuri, Dogra, and even Bakarwal of Kashmir valley as Kashmiris.

 

[abvgroup]

And this proves the IQ of Pakistanis.Is this what u inferred from this video.It says the first Human beings and I repeat First Human beings migrated out of India and into India so whatever Human migration took place was from India in the later ages.Now its a different thing altogether if Pakistanis do not consider themselves Humans but Angels!!

The video is bulltshit, if indians migrated out of india, how come no body outside india looks like dark brown indians?

 

[LaBong]

Buttts are more punjabi than kashmiri.

 

[abvgroup]

Dravidian genes is present in most of the North Indians and Pakistanis. Dravidian exist today only as a language family but not as a race.



When Pakistanis claim themselves as Kashmiri it really doubt me because they declare anyone Kashmiri. Infact the Kashmiri from valley never consider Mirpuri, Dogra, and even Bakarwal of Kashmir valley as Kashmiris.

Dravdian genes may exist in some eastern pakistanis, however the topic is about northern pakistanis, none of them have Dravidian genes, they look nothing like indians

Pathan is considered as a caste among Indian Muslims.

the ones in karachi are not real rohilla, I am talking about the ones that existed there before 1947 and they migrated to KP not Karachi

 

[INDIC]

The video is bulltshit, if indians migrated out of india, how come no body outside india looks like dark brown indians?

One question, do you study about Xuanzang journey in your textbook.

 

[Marwat Khan Lodhi]

Dravdian genes may exist in some eastern pakistanis, however the topic is about northern pakistanis, none of them have Dravidian genes, they look nothing like indians



the ones in karachi are not real rohilla, I am talking about the ones that existed there before 1947 and they migrated to KP not Karachi

By the way are you "karachi" of PF by any chance?

 

[INDIC]

the ones in karachi are not real rohilla, I am talking about the ones that existed there before 1947 and they migrated to KP not Karachi

what was the native place of Rohilla Pashtuns in Pakistan/Afghanistan.

 

[abvgroup]

By the way are you "karachi" of PF by any chance?

^ no what is PF? I am from Lahore

what was the native place of Rohilla Pashtuns in Pakistan/Afghanistan.

Probably Swat

 

[Edevelop]

Both the statements are wrong.

trying to be a smarty a55 ? punjabis and sindhis make up 80 % of pak populace and we know how they look

Not surprised. Indians like you are showing lack of knowledge.

Here is what you don't see:

Balochistan (Half of the population is Pashtun)

KPK: (Pashtuns) + heavy population of Afghanis

Punjab: Check people from these districts: (Attock, Mianwali, Bhakkar, Chakwal, Rajanpur, Dera Ghazi Khan) + heavy population of Kashmiris: (Lahore, Rawalpindi, Sialkot, Gujranwala, Multan)

Gilgit Baltistan (That you already know)

Azad Kashmir (That you already know)

 

[DARIUS]

The video is bulltshit, if indians migrated out of india, how come no body outside india looks like dark brown indians?

This is another brainfart and low IQ question.Do u really think that all the modern races on earth just dropped from the sky??What do they teach u guy's in school??All the modern races on Earth other than the Black Africans have actually evolved over a large period of time in their course of migration from one place to another (And these are journeys covering gigantic distances that I am referring to inter-Continental) in an attempt to acclimatize themselves with their surrounding's and environment and climate.Mongolians have got slanted and small eyes merely owing to the fact that they had to get used to the regular sandstorms occurring in the Gobi which was their first major habitat perhaps for thousands of years and slanted small eyes protected their eyes from the dust.Caucasoids who migrated towards Europe did not have enough sunlight for Vitamin D synthesis and hence no melanin!!Get it kiddo??

 

[abvgroup]

This is another brainfart and low IQ question.Do u really think that all the modern races on earth just dropped from the sky??What do they teach u guy's in school??All the modern races on Earth other than the Black Africans have actually evolved over a large period of time in their course of migration from one place to another (And these are journeys covering gigantic distances that I am referring to inter-Continental) in an attempt to acclimatize themselves with their surrounding's and environment and climate.Mongolians have got slanted and small eyes merely owing to the fact that they had to get used to the regular sandstorms occurring in the Gobi which was their first major habitat perhaps for thousands of years and slanted small eyes protected their eyes from the dust.Caucasoids who migrated towards Europe did not have enough sunlight for Vitamin D synthesis and hence no melanin!!Get it kiddo??

you are talking about some thing about 50000 years ago, who cares about that. My point is, no dark brown indian has migrated out of india in the 5000 years. Indians are not aryans, they are dravdians, you can clearly see that in their faces