8 Tweets 2 reads Jul 15, 2023
@ShantihMuse @SheetalPronamo lol. The bbc article keeps saying new research but doesnt link the research paper by reich. Anyways i did read the paper and all i would say is you don't read anything. You just read the non-sense bbc writes and keep running around shouting that AMT is true
@ShantihMuse @SheetalPronamo Secondary sources are not conclusive evidence. Now giving the paper a read it explicitly states that,
We do not have access to any DNA directly sampled from the Indus Valley Civilization (IVC)
and that,
(1/n)
@ShantihMuse @SheetalPronamo "Without ancient DNA from individuals buried in IVC cultural contexts, we cannot rule out the possibility that the group represented by these outlier individuals, which we call Indus_Periphery, "
(2/n)
@ShantihMuse @SheetalPronamo continued-> "was limited to the northern fringe and not representative of the ancestry of the entire Indus Valley Civilization population."
But i doubt my first point even tho copy pasted from the research paper you allegedly argue with would change your mind
(3/n)
@ShantihMuse @SheetalPronamo The research is therefore unable to find any evidence that the people of the Indus valley were "Dravidians" or Ancient Ancestral South Indians.
2. it is also beyond the study's scope to determine the language and the culture of the Indus valley civilisation.
(4/n)
@ShantihMuse @SheetalPronamo 3. The study does not in any way invalidate the results of previous studies which have shown that the genetic lineage (haplogroup F) associated with the Indo-European languages originated in India 15,450 to 18,000 years ago.
Let me bill this down for you in simple words:
(5/n)
@ShantihMuse @SheetalPronamo Multiple studies prove that the patrilineal lineage specially haplogroup F originated in India. That is after Africa, the biggest population migration happened from India to the outside world like Europe and Central Asia.
But i doubt you will still question me.
(6/n)

Loading suggestions...