Printable View
Kurds are somehow related to Sintashta/Andronovo monkeys due to Alan and Scythians. Alan and Scythians brought indirectly Steppes ancestry into Kurdistan. But the Aryan Medes were just native to Kurdistan. And the Medes are actually the major direct ancestors of the Kurds.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoro
You are just projecting history of India around 1500BC into the Iranian Plateau. And that is failure big time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arhat
The migrations was actually in the opposite direction. It were the people from the Iranian Plateau who migrated into the Steppes and India.
https://i.postimg.cc/FFB8XpxD/ivanov.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/B6chLcWP/3-19.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/Vvr4K9YY/ace.jpg
I have noticed that people have absolutely no evidence at all that Sintashta was Indo-Iranian. There is no evidence for it. Nothing from archaeology and nothing from historic written sources.
What we do know is that BMAC was related to the Aryans, we have got archaeological and written evidences for that. And BMAC predates Andronovo!
People can't answer my question why Indo-Iranian had ergativity, while ergativity is NOT native to the Steppes.
With other words their fantasises are based on nothing but loose sand. They have no evidence at all. They show up, make some wishful thinking statements without evidence and leave, lol. They are just bluffing and farting out of their mouth. People who fail for their nonsense are even more stupid than they are.
While I have got a lot of inductive and deductive scientific evidences based on language, archaeology and DNA.
Nice, when you can't scientically counter the evidence simply call all the sites fucking dubious.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arhat
You clearly have lots to learn about our complex Iranic ethnogenesis and the complexities of the connections between Eastern and Western Iranian languages. But hey I don't expect you to know since you don't speak our languages. I bet you didn't know that Pashto and Kurdish share more congnates than Pashto and Ossetian, or that there are Pashto and Kurdish common words not even found in Persian or
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pashto
Nothing is as simple as black and white or Western and Eastern Iranian. It's alot more complicated than that. You would understand what I am saying alot more if you could speak some of our languages.Quote:
Like Kurdish, but unlike most other Indo-Iranian languages, Pashto uses all three types of adpositions – prepositions, postpositions and circumpositions.
Sure Pamiris and Pashtuns will be genetically closer to some Saka than Kurds or Azeris, but there are some Sarmatians Sakas and Alans where Kurds and Azeris are genetically closer to and some Sarmatians and Alans where Caucasians are closer to. These nomads covered a huge area. Believe me I have seen the IBS and other analysis. I have also seen alot of Scythian samples where Tatars and the like are closest. These groups are all over the place.It's not that simple...
Can somebody explain me why do they connect Sintashta with proto-Indo-Iranian at the first place? What is the connection between those 2 very different things? How does this specific deduction works? What kind of steps/arguments are they making and what kind of evidence do they have to substantiate their claims. How do they come to their conclusions?
I love science fiction, so please entertain me!
well he also has no idea about what he is talking about . I always get pissed of when I visit this forum because 90% of posts here are idiotic. Neither were Aryans from Weet Asia nor they looked Nordic. Also Europe is a modern day concept and if course they would not identify as Europeans. Arguing that they had 19th century concepts of race and nation is retarded . They were warlike steppe people who cared mainly about cattle, water and metals. Also they did not genocide the locals and rather absorbed the elites and that is why Yaz is already 50% BMAC. Even Saka in Europe had BMAC ancestry from back migrations so even the ones who stayed in the European steppe became Central Asian shiftedQuote:
Originally Posted by Babak
Not really. Even the "purest" of them weren't fully European, and their genetic structure was Northern European like. They were heavily mixed with the local Iranian neolithic peoples of central Asia before their migration to what is now Iran 3,000 years ago and began mixing with the local population from there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Token
The Sintashta were very similar to the Corded Ware, I don't know why so much fuss about it in 2019.
This thread is so fire made me curry chicken
The Bronze Age nomads in modern Kazakhstan (the samples are from Eastern or Southeastern KZ) who are believed to have been Indo-Iranians were obviously white people genetically, probably more like Eastern Europeans but not identical to any modern group. That shouldn't be controversial. The Persians are a whole different thing, they were never similar to them to begin with. The Persian language originated in Fars, which is Southwestern Iran.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leto
I get like 56% North European, 18% Atlantic Med, 10% Caucasus and 5% Gedrosia.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leto