Iran Producing 15 rare Nano Medicines by using nuclear energy

[al-Hasani]

Just LOL.

You are the greatest Kazakh nomads in the world indeed. I can give you that.

 

[Baradar]

Just LOL.

You are the greatest Kazakh nomads in the world indeed. I can give you that.

Actually, according to most scientific accepted theory about Indo-Europeans, we actually come from a region north of the Black Sea.

Kurgan hypothesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So actually we had nothing to do with Kazakhstan. Although Kazakhstan is probably a nice country too.

 

[halupridol]

n i thought this thread wud b related to medical science

 

[al-Hasani]

Russian Steppe. Big difference. We are talking about Indo-Iranians. Your people. Who were from the Kazakh Steppe. Andronovo. The Europeans had nothing to do with them by large. Europe, especially the European civilizations in the South were already populated by humans way before that immigration.
The only haplogroups related to the Kurgan hypothesis is the one below:

Haplogroup R-M420 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why don't you look at the genetic tests of Iranians? Give me the numbers of the different haplogroups and I can quickly tell you about the ancestry of those haplogroups.

Yes, and all of them originate from the Arabian Peninsula which they roamed for thousands of years like all other people outside of Africa. Big deal.

 

[ResurgentIran]

n i thought this thread wud b related to medical science

Nuclear medicine...Arabian horses. Whats the diff?
Potato potAto

 

[halupridol]

Nuclear medicine...Arabian horses. Whats the diff?
Potato potAto

well atleast now they moved on from horses to civilization.....

 

[Baradar]

Even Andronovo was not our ancient homeland. Kurgan probably was. Anyway. Haplogroups are insignificant. We are classified as Indo-Europeans due to our language, which originated at that place, not because of racial homogeneity.

 

[al-Hasani]

Even Andronovo was not our ancient homeland. Kurgan probably was. Anyway. Haplogroups are insignificant. We are classified as Indo-Europeans due to our language, which originated at that place, not because of racial homogeneity.

LOL. So what is your point? Most South Asians speak an Indo-European language but racially less than 10% of them have anything to do with those people that once roamed the Russian and Kazakh Steppe. Just look at them.

Close to all Latin Americans speak an Indo-European language (Spanish) but racially over half of them are native Indians and even a lesser number of them are of "pure" Spanish ancestry.

Can you give me some genetic studies from Iran? Let us see how big percentage of Iranians have any ties to the haplogroup R-M420 that is the only haplogroup associated with those people.

 

[Baradar]

LOL. So what is your point? Most South Asians speak an Indo-European language but racially less than 10% of them have anything to do with those people that once roamed the Russian and Kazakh Steppe. Just look at them.

Close to all Latin Americans speak an Indo-European language (Spanish) but racially over half of them are native Indians and even a lesser number of them are of "pure" Spanish ancestry.

Can you give me some genetic studies from Iran?

Difference is that South Asia already had a massive population and many civilizations before the Indo-Iranians came to inhabit some places. In Iran, only the Elamites were really populating Iran. And they only inhabited a small place in Iran. The rest of the country was largely uninhabited. That is why the Assyrians suddenly spoke about the 'Parsu' (Persians) and 'Madu' (Medians).

In contrast to Latin Americans, our language is natural. We were never colonized in order to speak Indo-European, in contrast to people in South America. So your argument is incorrect here.

I do not have genetic studies from Iran, but Dienekes have them. There is quite some variety in Iran, but we are distinct from other ethnicities in the region. Although we are classified as West Asians. But if you look at older statues of Persians, we pretty much look like our ancient ancestors.

 

[haman10]

.

LOL. So what is your point? Most South Asians speak an Indo-European language but racially less than 10% of them have anything to do with those people that once roamed the Russian and Kazakh Steppe. Just look at them.

Close to all Latin Americans speak an Indo-European language (Spanish) but racially over half of them are native Indians and even a lesser number of them are of "pure" Spanish ancestry.

Can you give me some genetic studies from Iran? Let us see how big percentage of Iranians have any ties to the haplogroup R-M420 that is the only haplogroup associated with those people.

lol had exams, been studying , am back (he ya right ! we iranians are educated unlike the nomad otoomans like u )

i think you have mal-used my absence here very well A-rab wannabe ottoman

anyhow this kind of shitty comments about race are just normal in A-rabs . normal people dont talk about race in 100% of their troll-ish pathetic posts .

anyhow this is the first time i'm seeing iranians being racially profiled by an A-rab wannabe ottoman how are things goin on in your tribe ?

go sell your oil nomad !

and btw no matter from which race are we , silly , we are a light year ahead of you (whole a-rabs , not just saudi) in terms of anything related to thinking and brain .

cause we are producing 2 times more science than the whole a-rab world

now get lost

 

[al-Hasani]

Difference is that South Asia already had a massive population and many civilizations before the Indo-Iranians came to inhabit some places. In Iran, only the Elamites were really populating Iran. And they only inhabited a small place in Iran. The rest of the country was largely uninhabited. That is why the Assyrians suddenly spoke about the 'Parsu' (Persians) and 'Madu' (Medians).

In contrast to Latin Americans, our language is natural. We were never colonized in order to speak Indo-European, in contrast to people in South America. So your argument is incorrect here.

I do not have genetic studies from Iran, but Dienekes have them. There is quite some variety in Iran, but we are distinct from other ethnicities in the region. Although we are classified as West Asians. But if you look at older statues of Persians, we pretty much look like our ancient ancestors.

How do you know that most of Iran was not populated less than 3000 years ago?Lastly I have looked at plenty of genetic studies from all the populations of the Middle East and why is it that we cluster with each other despite not always belonging to the same ethnic group or linguistic family? We, including Iranians, don't cluster with South Asians, South East Asians or Northern Europeans. In fact outside of the Middle East the Middle Eastern populations (overall) seem to cluster most with nearby Southern Europe (Mediterranean areas) and that is only normal seeing that population movements have arrived from the Middle East to those regions for thousands of years. That is how most knowledge was spread including a fundamental thing such as agriculture.

The Elamites which were not Persians or spoke an Indo-Iranian language were very much native to Iran and they are the oldest known civilization in Iran. So of course people who once lived in Iran were linguistically conquered by probably a small elite that originated on those Steppe lands. This is why only a small part of Iranians actually have any genetic affinity to those people.

A-zeri let the adults have their discussions. I did not ask to get assaulted by smileys.

I forgot the Caucasus region which seems to cluster more or less completely with the Middle East. Look at their haplogroups.

 

[Baradar]

How do you know that most of Iran was not populated less than 3000 years ago?

From ancient texts. The Assyrians named some of the people who were inhabiting Iran, but most lands probably weren't. Only the border region between Iran and Iraq was greatly populated. The rest had some population, but not very large communities. If they were was any, we would probably had heard about them.

Lastly I have looked at plenty of genetic studies from all the populations of the Middle East and why is it that we cluster with each other despite not always belonging to the same ethnic group or linguistic family? We, including Iranians, don't cluster with South Asians, South East Asians or Northern Europeans. In fact outside of the Middle East the Middle Eastern populations (overall) seem to cluster most with nearby Southern Europe (Mediterranean areas) and that is only normal seeing that population movements have arrived from the Middle East to those regions for thousands of years. That is how most knowledge was spread including a fundamental thing such as agriculture.

Yes, most people in the Middle East (as well as Iranians) have Middle Eastern (or West Asian) origins. But the difference is that we have a large Indo-European input, while Arabs have a large Semitic input. And South Europe is indeed more closer to us than to others. Although you should't forget that according to many racialists, the meditterean race originated in the Middle East according to them. And they believe that Nordic Europeans are depigmented Mediterreans.

The Elamites which were not Persians or spoke an Indo-Iranian language were very much native to Iran and they are the oldest known civilization in Iran.

Not exactly true. Their language was indeed unique, but they weren't the oldest civilization in Iran. The Jiroft civilization is older:

Jiroft culture - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So of course people who once lived in Iran were linguistically conquered by probably a small elite that originated on those Steppe lands. This is why only a small part of Iranians actually have any genetic affinity to those people.

I don't think they were a small elite. In fact, Assyrians suddenly spoke about huge communities of Iranians. And we don't know the genetic affinity of the older Iranians to compare. They were probably mixed too.

 

[twilight]

Iran just had to crawl to the west for a measly $7b

Yet these Iranis talk like they're some big power in the world making breakthroughs and progressing with inventions.

are you mean , Reformists !? ....

they are well know for being west's fangirls ...

n i thought this thread wud b related to medical science

our arabs friend won't stop trolling till all of Iranian members put them in their ignore lists ....

 

[Baradar]

are you mean , Reformists !? ....

they are well know for being west's fangirls ...

Nothing wrong with the West. Historically, Iranians were always looking to the West. Either to conquer them, or to learn from them. Even Muslims studied mostly Greco scientific works. The Middle East has always been looking more to the West than to the East. And vica-versa too. Europeans were always looking to the Middle East. Either to conquer it, or to learn from it.

 

[halupridol]

i have a suggestion......why dont you iranian guys start a thread on your cinema,which really is world class....with your personal review... i think it would be great.