AIT, NEW genetic evidence

[Paul Kekai Manansala]

"David Salmon (Kettenpom)" wrote:


> > The earliest modern "Australoid" phenotypes occur in Sumatra not in the > "Mediterranean." And the authors fail to note that the mtDNA strains of > the vast majority of Indians tested are significantly closer to East> Asians than to Europeans or "Middle Easterners" that were tested.
> >
>
> I think the point of the authors probably had more to do with -disproving-> any large maternal DNA contribution to the South Asian populations than with> trying to -prove- anything about modern and more recent (a few thousand> years or so) changes.
>

Well, they do disclaim any recent major maternal contribution from
outside India. By "major" I mean on a widespead demographic basis.

> Even so, one wonders what the ratio of women to men were in those "Aryan" > tribal excursions into India.  Were they like the Greek onslaught on Troy,> composed almost solely of men?  Or if not, how many men originally does the> DNA imply in total, if one assumes that most of them arrived in the> centuries in which the "Aryans" came, however they did it?  I don't believe > that data can say a thing about that.
>

Well, the paternal Y chromosome data is not much different from maternal
mtDNA. Hammer grouped modern Indians in a South/Southeast Asia cluster.

The major European Y chromosome haplotype is very rare or absent in
India, but a North African/Middle Eastern variety is found in small
numbers.

Regards,
Paul Kekai Manansala

--
Check out http://AsiaPacificUniverse.com/