...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Vedic Origins of the Europeans: the Children of Danu (Questions)
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Djehuti: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by coolnight: [qb] I never claimed you said ''Kalash or other peoples of Central Asia/northernmost South Asia are "Europeans. Earlier in the posts I clearly was arguing on the point Kalash have no european admixture/ancestry. You are the one who lolled at the idea of Kalash having no european admixture/ancestry. You pointed out the ''Alexander the Great-Greek'' supposed connection. To which I responded so far genetics has not supported this claim. You then bought my simple point about kalash having no europeand admixture to this supposed shared ancestry which again I do not deny they may share but this has not relation to my original argument/point which was very clearly kalash have no european admixture/ancestry. If anything this supposed shared ancestry shows europeans to be connected to the kalash not kalash to be connected to europeans because this shared ancestry is not ethnically european and kalash have so far shown to have no european admixture.[/qb][/QUOTE]If you recall my point about 'Alexander's army' is that the claim was totally fictional. Yes there is a connection to the Greeks but it is NOT due to any Greek or Macedonian ancestry but to a shared ancestry between the Greek/Macedonians and Kalash that pre-dates both groups and that actually this ancestry is quite low among Balkans like the Greeks/Macedonians and is much greater among northeast Europeans. As far as your claim of Europeans being connected to Kalash and not the other way around, this preposition makes no sense whatsoever as 'shared ancestry' implies kinship through a shared ancestor NOT on group deriving from another. The shared ancestry between the Kalash and Europeans is due to Ancient North Eurasian ancestry. [QUOTE][qb]Their ANE ancestry probably is the connection to their Indo-European links. But again what does indo european links mean? You mean ANE represents an Ethnic link/connection? This may be right but people can be linked in many ways directly/indirectly or simply be linked/connected as a result of mixing between two groups. Is this ANE ancestry ethnically european? If not then it only represents a language and genetic connection for europeans (one way) not for Kalash because if kalash have no european admixture they can not be directly genetically connected to europeans. They would not even be connected to europeans via there ANE ancestors. It would be europeans who are connected to Kalash via the ANE or both groups are connected to ANE but the ANE population was ethnically distinct from both europeans and kalash so in this case neither kalash or eurppeans are connected to each other. They simply share ancestors. It is very complicated. For two people/groups to be connected to each other they both have to share the same ancestors but those ancestors have to also represent the genes/ethnic racial identity of at least one group. The example I gave you of blacks with european ancestry. Blacks in this case not only share ancestry with europeans but are also genetically connected with europeans because these shared genes are ethnically european. Now if this shared ancestry between europeans and blacks represented a completely difference/distinct group from both blacks and europeans then one can say both blacks and europeans are not directly connected or even just connected to each other. They simple share the same ancestors. This is the same point I mean about ANE. If this group/population was neither ethnically european or kalash then both europeans and kalash would share ancestry but neither would be directly connected to each other because neither has the genes of the other they only shared genes of a group that is distinct from both. If the ANE was ethnically european (vice versa-kalash) then kalash (vice versa- europeans) would be directly connected to the europeans.[/qb][/QUOTE]Again you seem to be implying the unproven hypothesis of the Indian/South Asian origins of Indo-European when no evidence-- linguistic, archaeological, or otherwise supports this. ANE which means Ancient [i]Northern[/i] Eurasian is an ancestral component that differs from those of South Asia which is comprised of Ancient South Indian (ASI) and Ancient North Indian (ANI) as well as the Southwest Asian component associated with the introduction of neolithic culture which you cited [URL=http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=009782]here[/URL]. Is this ANE ancestry associated with any one ethnic or cultural group? The answer is no because it predates many cultural groups including Indo-European and even today not only does it include Indo-European speakers but also Uralic speakers like Hungarians and others in the Ural Mountains but NOT South Asians. [QUOTE][qb]I guess what am trying to say then is to understand the genetic relation between different groups be it europeans and kalash or any other group when it comes to shared ethnic components. We need to know more about the ethnic/genetic identity of the ancestral components both groups share. For example which group/people this shared ancestral component derives from or is closet to? Or if this shared ancestral component is completely distinct from the groups that share these genes. So if the ANE were ethnically closest to south asian groups then it simply means europeans have south asian ancestry or ancestry that is genetically closest/related to south asians. This shared component would not mean south asians have european ancestry or ancestry that is genetically close/related to europeans. If the component was ethnically european or genetically close to europeans more than south asians it would mean south asians have european ancestry or ancestry that is closely related to europeans. Not that europeans have south asian ancestry. **If the component was etnically distinct from both south asians and europeans it would mean they simple share ancestors/share ancestry.**[/qb][/QUOTE]Again, not only what I typed just above but your very last sentence in your quote above was my point precisely. [QUOTE][qb]So when we talk about groups being related/connected etc... we need to know/define the racial identity of the group we are talking about in relation to the groups that have that ancestry. There are also different ways in which people can be related/connected. For example mixed race black/europeans or mixed race europeans/chinese groups/individuals are related/connected to both ethnic sides but is this connection/relation only a result of there being mixed race or are chinese/europeans or blacks/europeans related/connected independently, before they mixed with each other?[/qb][/QUOTE]The genetic sources I cited were very clear about that. The Kalash are a mixture of different ancestries with one ancesty--ANE-- being shared with Europeans. [QUOTE][qb]Again I do not deny the indo european link between south asians/europeans. Am just trying to get a more specific understanding regards the genetics/language. Trying to get a clearer understanding on exactly what point and the exact nature of this connection. [/qb][/QUOTE]Again, everything was already presented to you. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3