Anshuman.Kumar wrote:It only means the Paper is neither here nor there.
It subtly raises the question on association of R1a/R1b to the so called IE languages and also shows that the Yamnaya through the Maykop have probably southern ancestry as MayKop Y Haplogroup profile is very similar to the southern contemporaneous Cultures/Civilization.But it still allows the conclusion that R1a/R1b were native to Steppe/Europe so not much of an effect on the old Order.
If you use genetics to disprove language migration, it means that genetics can also be used to prove it. This is actually rubbish
When I say that we Indians are science obsessed - I believe that we are fighting windmills by fighting over genetics when the actual rubbish was foisted on us by linguists. Let me explain the "science obsession" that I accuse Indians of having. To the lay reader genetics papers are as arcane as any linguistics ref. By fighting genetics we are searching where the light is because we can understand genetics arcane as it is. Why do we understand genetic methods? Because there is science there.
Why do we wear blinkers about linguists lies? Because we cannot understand it and we are unwilling to put in the effort. If someone with a science background puts in modest effort into linguistics methods - you will find that those methods are simply unscientific trash, full of assumptions and rules to explain other rules all made up on the spot.
I urge people to look into historical linguists. Those lies have to be torn down. If we happen to lose a genetic argument it still does not mean that it connects to languages - but we are simply giving the impression that by "defeating" a genetic paper we are going to overturn the language migration theory.
Western universalists have hoodwinked us again and are continuing to make jackasses out of us - fighting over genetics when the lies have been told by people cooking up protolanguages and putting them in convenient places. Genetics is allowed to find anything and reach any conclusion. But ultimately they are depending on linguistics refs. Those are the refs that need to be torn down. Bad news for science obsessed Indians. Note that Talageri, kak, Kazanas, Oak etc all deal with texts, linguistics and history. Khonde and others also deal with the science aspects of old texts. Over here we are going apeshit over genetics which is a diversion from the issue. It is a bogey. It can never be the main target and no one will ever find a gene that links to a specific language because language function in humans is a basic neuromuscular function that can adapt to various languages, not specific ones. We are actually jackasses because no one asks the geneticist which genes code for language. When you ask them they will point to linguists/archaeology papers and say 'Language migration has been demonstrated by linguists who tell us that PIE was in steppe and those people moved to India and Iran, creating Indo-Iranian language first and later Avestan and Vedic Sanskrit"
What argument do genetics obsessed Indian have against this? By fighting in the genetics arena we are simply wasting time and effort without demanding an answer to a simple question "What is the proof that genes link to language?" Fact is they don't. If they don't what the hell are we arguing about?
Please understand that genes are being linked to migration. And migration has been cooked up by linguists to say that language moved this way or that. wtf are we all fighting about?