Is India a country or a continent?

[Mamluk]

I seriously doubt IVC people were Caucasian. For that they have to originate from the Caucasus or from some nearby Eastern European steppes. No such pre-Aryan migration to present day Pakistan has been recorded.

You are mixing up Indo-Europeans/Aryans with Caucasians.

The Indo-Europeans were the ancestors of white people. But Caucasians evolved much earlier and were more widespread in Eurasia, stretching from the Mediterranean to Indus and Transoxania.

When the Aryans spread out and invaded all these Caucasian inhabited regions, their smaller invading population got assimilated into these peoples but being the invaders their culture was imposed on the inhabitants.

Europe was the only place were the existing Caucasians did not significantly outnumber the Aryans -- which is why they still retain most white genes.

Like I said, I would be happy to learn something new. But you dont have anything to offer except concocted BS.

First figure our your ancestry then we will talk.

Here this IVC saint looks like your Tamil/Maratha Grandfather:

So I've been wrong all along! Now go home and throw a party!

 

[Pakistani E]

A year or two ago the Indians claimed that they found a few bodies from the time of the Indus Valley and were going to carry out tests on them to determine their genetic make up. What happen to these remains?

 

[Hold up]

You are mixing up Indo-Europeans/Aryans with Caucasians.

The Indo-Europeans were the ancestors of white people. But Caucasians evolved much earlier and were more widespread in Eurasia, stretching from the Mediterranean to Indus and Transoxania.

When the Aryans spread out and invaded all these Caucasian inhabited regions, their smaller invading population got assimilated into these peoples but being the invaders their culture was imposed on the inhabitants.

Europe was the only place were the existing Caucasians did not significantly outnumber the Aryans -- which is why they still retain most white genes.

By Caucasians you mean the Caucasoid peoples I suppose? The Caucasoid peoples include Aryan, Germanic, Nordic, Semite, Meditteranean peoples. All of them developed simultaneously. Aryans originating from Central Asian steppes.

Present day Europeans are mix between Germanic, Celtic, Meditteranean and other races and Aryans who spread out into Europe from Central Asia. They were fellow Caucasoids so exogamy was much prevalent I suppose.

As for the Aryans who entered Indian subcontinent, they mainly practised endogamy and didn't mix much with native Dravidian peoples- caste system(??). But Dravidian peoples were overwhelmingly larger in number, so I guess some mixing did happen. Dalits are former Dravidians of North India who adopted Aryan language, religion but were relegated to low caste due to racism by Aryans who had fierce features and very fair skin. Aryans mixing with Dravidian peoples ended at around Punjab and Sindh. Iranic and Dardic Aryans the Pashtuns and Kashmiris never mixed with Dravidic peoples so they look mostly like modern day Iranians.

 

[Mamluk]

By Caucasians you mean the Caucasoid peoples I suppose? The Caucasoid peoples include Aryan, Germanic, Nordic, Semite, Meditteranean peoples. All of them developed simultaneously. Aryans originating from Central Asian steppes.

Present day Europeans are mix between Germanic, Celtic, Meditteranean and other races and Aryans who spread out into Europe from Central Asia. They were fellow Caucasoids so exogamy was much prevalent I suppose.

As for the Aryans who entered Indian subcontinent, they mainly practised endogamy and didn't mix much with native Dravidian peoples- caste system(??). But Dravidian peoples were overwhelmingly larger in number, so I guess some mixing did happen. Dalits are former Dravidians of North India who adopted Aryan language, religion but were relegated to low caste due to racism by Aryans who had fierce features and very fair skin. Aryans mixing with Dravidian peoples ended at around Punjab and Sindh. Iranic and Dardic Aryans the Pashtuns and Kashmiris never mixed with Dravidic peoples so they look mostly like modern day Iranians.

Agree with some of it. Let's leave it at that for now.

 

[Peshwa]

LMAO. Now all Pakistanis came from Mars? You guys are hilarious.

Well apparently Pakistanis are descendents of the people of IVC when no such evidence exists. So it is not that far fetched if some of you claim to be martians.
Besides, you're quoting the words of your fellow countrymen, not me.
So please take it up with them.

 

[Pakistani E]

Well apparently Pakistanis are descendents of the people of IVC when no such evidence exists. So it is not that far fetched if some of you claim to be martians.
Besides, you're quoting the words of your fellow countrymen, not me.
So please take it up with them.

What? This is what you said:

You mean Pakistans claim over the IVC is the same as the modern day americans, claiming the history of North America before the white man colonized it.

Now please, the burden that you seek to put on other Pakistanis, kindly put the same burden of proof on yourself and prove the above comment.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Well apparently Pakistanis are descendents of the people of IVC when no such evidence exists.

Well, at least they walk, live, die, get buried over the land that saw IVC flourish. At least that is something. We know Pakistani's did not come from Mars. They are much evolved products of IVC people, with layer after layer - over 8,000 years everything evolves, even granite weathers change.

On the the other hand what exactly has Ganga or Dravid Indian's have as proof? That they are mostly naked? That they are mostly starving? That they are mostly untouchables? The Iranians, Afghans and Central Asians have as much claim if not more then Dravid Indians.


And as to the question OP asked my answer is simple "India is a humongous pile of Adivasis, Untouchables, Shudras with tiny polish of Brahmins".

 

[Hold up]

Now please, the burden that you seek to put on other Pakistanis, kindly put the same burden of proof on yourself and prove the above comment.

He meant that modern day Pakistan consists mainly of Aryans who came here around 2000-1500 BC. Before that it was inhabitated by some other peoples. Some say the Brahuis are remnants of those peoples.

 

[Peshwa]

Well, at least they walk, live, die, get buried over the land that saw IVC flourish. At least that is something.

That's a HUGE achievement I must say, for Pakistanis at least. To merely exist!
Einstein must be ashamed of his minor accomplishments after looking at the gargantuan achievements made by the Pakistanis.

We know Pakistani's did not come from Mars. They are much evolved products of IVC people - over 8,000 years everything evolves, even granite weathers change.

Oh no. That's the claim you will have to prove that Pakistanis are descendants of IVC and have evolved from IVC.

That's the point of the discussion and you're just regurgitating stale claims made by others from your country.

No proof of your claims exist. If they do, please put them forth for all to see.

The Iranoans, Afghans and Central Asians have as much claim if not more then Dravid Indians.

I have no problem with anyone in South Asia making the claim that IVC is shared history of the sub continent.
Ive made that abundantly clear that I believe in that myself. But for Pakistanis to stake claim of ancestry from IVC is only laughable.

And as to the question OP asked my answer is simple "India is a humongous pile of Adivasis, Untouchables, Shudras with tiny polish of Brahmins".

I suppose you have comprehension issues. The question revolves around a geographical entity, ie. Country or continent. So that doesn't really answer the OPs question.
LOL!
Try again.

What similarities exist between a modern European and a Neolithic European guy?
I'm all ears!!



hint: only race!

FAIL!
Ok, what was the race of the people from IVC?
Do you have a definite answer?
NO! Only theories.
So please bring something solid to the argument.

 

[Hold up]

Anyone have any idea about the race of IVC peoples?

 

[Peshwa]

What? This is what you said:

Yeah they were your tropical ancestors who vacated Pakistan once my ancestors arrived form Mars. Idiot

And this was the claim made by your comrade. Don't know how to spell his name. the one that is obsessed with phalluses based on his user handle.
I just responded saying anything is believable when there is no burden of proof for claims.
But TBH I suppose I overeacted thinking you were quoting him. Maybe you made the Mars comment independently.
So maybe that's where the confusion stems from.

Now please, the burden that you seek to put on other Pakistanis, kindly put the same burden of proof on yourself and prove the above comment.

Sure.
Since we don't know what happened to the people of IVC. Whether they migrated, or perished is a big question mark.

The people of the nation of Pakistan living on those lands today are an amalgamation of various empires, population exchanges, conquests and even migrations that existed through recorded history.
At this point in time, there is no DNA evidence to prove a direct lineage of Pakistanis with those of the IVC. I'm simply asking for this evidence.

The analogy I made with Americans was that they ended up in North America as a result of various factors, mostly migration. Pakistanis cannot draw a direct lineage to the IVC folks and Americans (whites and black) have no ancestral connection to the civilizations that existed before their arrival.
Yet today, America is predominantly white and the history of America as a land belongs to them all but it doesn't become their ancestral history. Americans are NOT descendents of those that lived in North America before their arrival and cannot make such claims without proof.
So I ask you again. Do you have proof of ancestral connections with IVC?
If so, I will concede. I have no shame in admitting if I were wrong. I just need to see this evidence.

So I've been wrong all along!

The only believable thing you've said all day.

 

[Hold up]

I read many articles on IVC peoples which cite a link between pre-Aryan populations in West Asia and Indus Valley. IVC peoples are supposedly linked to the Elamite peoples of West Asia who later assimilated with the Aryans who settled in Iran.

 

[supun1]

It is a subhuman subcontinent of the absolute human misery of disease, famine, and degradation of life.

 

[Hold up]

Read some more articles about the IVC peoples. Apparently the "Dravidian origin of IVC" Theory has been debunked by most scholars. The commonly held view now is that the IVC peoples were a pre-Aryan population in present day Pakistan and NW India linked to the Elamites who either perished completely after the fall of IVC or migrated east or assimilated completely with the Aryans during the Aryan invasion of Indian subcontinent through the Hindukush.

 

[kvpak]

2. The Myth of India and Indian Unity

The British conquered the various kingdoms in the Indian subcontinent one by one. Then, for ease of administering (ruling) the conquered territories, the British set up an administrative unit called India. A country or administrative unit called India (or by any other name), comprising of the current territories of India, never existed in all known history, before the British conquest and consolidation.

During the British colonial rule, people of the Indian subcontinent (including those areas now in Pakistan and Bangladesh) had a common purpose and agenda, namely, freedom from British colonial rule. Such a one-ness of purpose never before existed amongst the various peoples of the Indian subcontinent. It brought them together. Finally, in the middle of the 20th century (in the middle 1940s), the British decided to end their rule over the subcontinent. The one-ness of purpose that evolved during the freedom struggle against the British held, with the one exception that most of the Muslim-majority regions in the north became a separate nation called Pakistan at the insistence of the Muslims. Much of the rest of the subcontinent became a country called "India".

India, as a country, by any name, never existed before the British colonial rule in all history, in spite of the oft-repeated false propaganda of the long history, one-ness and unity of India.

3. Hindian rule Over India

Once the British left in 1947, politicians from the Hindi heartland (Hindian politicians) dominated the Indian Parliament and thus control the Indian Government [Reference 1]. This resulted in not only the imposition of Hindi as the official language on the non-Hindi speaking peoples of the Indian Union but also in the steady draining of economic resources from much of the rest of India into the Hindi heartland by allocating un-proportionately large amounts of central government funds

Real the full article at:

Why Independence for Tamil Nadu?