Attempts at dividing India: Study claims Malayali DNA similar to caucasian

[Chinese-Dragon]

Their looks are like that because they are the closest to the original Turk-Mongol (other being the Uighur) who originated in the Altais..they dont look Chinese to me..they look Mongol.

According to the Out of Africa theory (which is currently accepted by mainstream science), the ancestors of Chinese people left Africa, and went across Central Asia... and arrived at the North China Plain.

So in fact, these Central Asians are our ancestors, not the other way around.

 

[jbond197]

There is another theory, When all the lands were connected people moved around and gradually the lands parted ways and took along the settled people.. That's the time when there were no civilizations, no languages, no culture, no religion. That makes more sense to me because none of these similar looking people share culture, religion etc..

 

[Water Car Engineer]

There is another theory, When all the lands were connected people moved around and gradually the lands parted ways and took along the settled people.. That's the time when there were no civilizations, no languages, no culture, no religion. That makes more sense to me because none of these similar looking people share culture, religion etc..

Bro....... Humans didn't even exist...

When Pangaea even started to move a part was 200 million years ago.....

 

[jbond197]

According to the Out of Africa theory (which is currently accepted by mainstream science), the ancestors of Chinese people left Africa, and went across Central Asia... and arrived at the North China Plain.

So in fact, these Central Asians are our ancestors, not the other way around.

And what could be the reason that you did not took either African looks or the real middle eastern?? a big chunk of todays middle easterns looks like you because of Mongols.. come on how can you deny that? Genghis khan's genes are wide spread..

Bro....... Humans didn't even exist...

Not the humans, but what about what ever that evolved in human beings..

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

That makes more sense to me because none of these similar looking people share culture, religion etc..

I don't know about that.

English for example, is a "Germanic" language that borrows a significant portion of its vocabulary from French (and Latin).

Basic words like "yes" (ya) and "good" (gud) are more similar to German, while more complex words are borrowed from French. An estimated 30% of English words are of French origin.

List of English words of French origin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Is it a coincidence that England/Germany/France are all neighbours of each other?

 

[jbond197]

I don't know about that.

English for example, is a "Germanic" language that borrows a significant portion of its vocabulary from French (and Latin).

Basic words like "yes" (ya) and "good" (gud) are more similar to German, while more complex words are borrowed from French:

List of English words of French origin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Is it a coincidence that England/Germany/France are all neighbours of each other?

There are more words borrowed from Sanskrit is most of the languages.. What does that tell you?

And I am talking about words like Mother, Father, Brother, me etc etc.. That's an example in English but distorted forms of the same words exists in most of the languages..

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

According to the currently accepted Out of Africa theory, East Asians and Native Americans are the furthest away from white Europeans, in both genetic distance and geographical distance.

It seems that geographical distance was actually a very big deal in the past, where there were very few reliable methods of mass transportation.

Today, you can look at a city like London and see people of every different ethnicity. But in the past, this process was much slower and mostly had its effects in a much more limited geographic scope (England/Germany/France for instance).

Some groups did make it quite far in the past, such as the Jewish people and the Roma people. But these only made up a very small percentage of the host nation's population. Mass migrations due to significant events (such as civil war) did move a lot of people, but generally not that far. And such migration events usually happened in a few large waves.

This of course changed significantly during the period of Western colonization. Jamaica for example.

 

[anonymus]

According to the currently accepted Out of Africa theory, East Asians and Native Americans are the furthest away from white Europeans, in both genetic distance and geographical distance.

It seems that geographical distance was actually a very big deal in the past, where there were very few reliable methods of mass transportation.

Today, you can look at a city like London and see people of every different ethnicity. But in the past, this process was much slower and mostly had its effects in a much more limited geographic scope (England/Germany/France for instance).

Some groups did make it quite far in the past, such as the Jewish people and the Roma people. But these only made up a very small percentage of the host nation's population. Mass migrations due to significant events (such as civil war) did move a lot of people, but generally not that far. And such migration events usually happened in a few large waves.

This of course changed significantly during the period of Western colonization.

Well,

Who is contesting that claim.

anyway it would be polynesians who are farthest away from europeans followed by native south americans.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Well,

Who is contesting that claim.

anyway it would be polynesians who are farthest away from europeans followed by native south americans.

I just find it interesting that many Indian studies (like in the OP) are geared towards proving that Indians and white Europeans are connected.

Whereas Chinese will sometimes go to even absurd lengths to show that we are NOT connected to white Europeans in any way.

(One idiot Chinese professor even claimed that Chinese people had a separate ancestor from all other humans).

 

[anonymus]

I just find it interesting that many Indian studies (like in the OP) are geared towards proving that Indians and white Europeans are connected.

Whereas Chinese will sometimes go to even absurd lengths to show that we are NOT connected to white Europeans in any way.

(One idiot Chinese professor even claimed that Chinese people had a separate ancestor from all other humans).

There are enough spatial genetic variation within a population that one can prove anything he/she wants.He/She needs to take sample intelligently.

The thread posted by OP is result of tension between Tamils and Malyais going on because of a Dam.He probably wanted to imply that they both are different.

Even Indians go to absurd distances to refute Aryan Invasion theory and some even stating that all humans originated from India.It is not unique to your country.Even though there is enough linguistic,archeological and genetic evidence to prove that it is not a bogus theory.

And regarding your claim of central asian being mongoloids because it lay on the route which chinese ancestor took is a half true one.

While central asia lay on the route ansector of chinese took Into china,the mongoloid race as it is called developed after your ansector have moved out of that area.

The current mongoloid stock in central asia is due to one murderous barbarian rapist.

 

[Bhairava]

According to the Out of Africa theory (which is currently accepted by mainstream science), the ancestors of Chinese people left Africa, and went across Central Asia... and arrived at the North China Plain.

So in fact, these Central Asians are our ancestors, not the other way around.

You are only supporting my theory...btw I repeat the Central Asians look Mongol...not like Chinese..

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

You are only supporting my theory...btw I repeat the Central Asians look Mongol...not like Chinese..

What point are you trying to make? I am talking about East Asian not Chinese.

And even I have trouble telling apart East Asians. Btw Mongolia is classfied as an East Asian country in the United Nations.

If I claimed everyone in the world who looked slightly East Asian as Chinese, then we would have a population of 2+ billion.

 

[Bhairava]

What point are you trying to make? I am talking about East Asian not Chinese.

And even I have trouble telling apart East Asians. Btw Mongolia is classfied as an East Asian country in the United Nations.

If I claimed everyone in the world who looked slightly East Asian as Chinese, then we would have a population of 2+ billion.

I am saying the central asians dont have the Han look..I used Chinese for Han..

And even the Koreans are Tungusic people, a sub-branch of the Altaic people....Hans are from South...

So there is no single East Asian grouping except as a political/economic group..ethnically the Mongols, Koreans are different from you people and that reflects in their looks as well.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

I am saying the central asians dont have the Han look..I used Chinese for Han..

And even the Koreans are Tungusic people, a sub-branch of the Altaic people....Hans are from South...

If you can really tell apart East Asians simply by looks, then I am very impressed.

Since even as an East Asian myself, I cannot do it. Nor can anyone I know.

Take the test and see.

http://alllooksame.com/register.php?tid=1

(Don't put in your real name or email address, just make up something random for the fields).

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Koreans are different from you people and that reflects in their looks as well.

I can agree with that partially.

Though Northeast Chinese do share a lot of similarities.

But personally I am always mistaking Koreans for Chinese (they don't like it at all). And it's not just because HK is almost entirely made up of East Asians, but because I really can't tell.