AIT, NEW genetic evidence

Paul Kekai Manansala kekai at JPS.NET
Tue Jan 11 01:01:40 UTC 2000

"David Salmon (Kettenpom)" wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Paul Kekai Manansala <kekai at JPS.NET>
> Sent: Monday, January 10, 2000 1:11 PM
> Subject: Re: AIT, NEW genetic evidence
> > To classify the human populations of Asia 50,000 years ago as
> > "pre-caucasoid" is poor analysis and linked with earlier Eurocentric
> > racial mythology.
> >
> > In fact, given recent evidence that the out of Africa migration of
> > modern humans began during this period, the people could be more
> > accurately described as proto-Africoid. In phenotype, their remains were
> > closest to modern Papuans, Fijians or Australian Aborigines only
> > shorter.
> >
> > Since, it is likely that all the non-African "racial" groups originated
> > from this exodus, one cannot classify this deme simply as
> > "proto-caucasoid" or "proto-mongoloid" or whatever.
> >
> "Likely"?  What do the DNA or mitochondrial surveys say?


> > Also, the linguistic and archaeological evidence does *not* support a
> > West Asian origin for Dravidian.  SUsing the standard techniques of
> > greatest diversity and least moves, the point of origin of this language
> > family would be squarely in South Asia.
> >
> The languages of 50,000 years ago are so far removed from the languages of
> the last 10,000 years or so as to be almost beyond study.  The relevance of
> population and language movements of 50,000 years ago to the question of the
> origin of Dravidian would seem to be nil, as you might agree?

No, not necessarily. Although the methods I described are specified at
any time period. The greatest diverity of Dravidian languages and the
central point of their distribution is in South Asia.

Paul Kekai Manansala

Check out

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list