Comments by "Ikenga Spirit" (@ikengaspirit3063) on "When did SANSKRIT appear in India? | The GENETIC Evidence" video.

  1. 6:00 Dude, stop. You yourself know that most people treat the invasion and migration theory as interchangeable and the main difference being how much emphasis is placed on whatever violence may or may not have happened. 8:48 Some dude had to write a paper sometime ago arguing against a historical theory that got popular that the Indus Valley Civilization was proto-Communist (AKA the ideal by many people today) 8:53 Unknown but when a langauge is proposed, it is almost always proto-dravidian. Several Papers support this. 9:30 Like fine, Indo-Aryans are said to be Central Asian but the current theory that isn't "We don't know" Is Proto-Indo-Europeans from Ukraine(Europe) the culture before Sintasha from Eastern Europe's Corded Ware(Due to not only Proto-Indo-European steppe DNA but also Eastern European Hunter Gatherer DNA in Northern India), so yeah, the theory that these people were basically Proto-European(Not exactly the same as European but close enough) is the main one. But fine, the theory now is that yes, it collapsed not invaded but... soon after its collapse Indo-Aryans took over. 10:09 it being based on profession doesn't completely remove that it correlated with skin colour, after all, if the Indo-Aryans were disproportionately warriors like many later steppe peoples then the warriors would be disproportionately the skin colour of the Indo Aryans not of the Dravidians. 11:12 They only really differ in degrees not in essential qualities. Well, except for how Indus Valley Civilization ended. 21:28 While the Genocide claim might be easy to argued against from that, the invasion/conquest argument cannot really be argued against from that alone. Because "Peaceful with only periodic violence" argument could be made for the Malian, Mongol, Roman and Chinese conquests and more. Also, From what I know the other people that say there was a genocide or something close enough to that more look to Britain, France and Germany for the area it occurred, tho large scale killing in the East isn't entirely ruled out.
    7
  2.  @docvaliant721  I am pretty sure the Wheel was invented in the fertile crescent in something like 4,000. More specifically in the mountainous area between the Caucasus proper and Mesopotamia. There is also some evidence invention in the Carpatians/Balkans but that would be pre-Indo-European conquest of the area if that's true and would be just evidence of independent invention. Also, by the wheel what exactly do you mean, just circular rolly thing or specifically a wagon with a wheel?. -- The red hair argument is a bad one because most red hair is brown hair that's just more reddish. This is shown in practice when DNA testing on the earliest "Red Haired" Tarim Basin mummies in the article "Bronze Age Tarim mummies aren't who scientists thought they were" showed that the Tocharians moved into the area in the later Bronze age and the early bronze age mummies weren't Yamna or European descent. "a fact relevant to their descendants' claim to be "Europeans" who should be let into the EU." Most Turks further to the West are genetically mostly European(or whatever group they absorbed), given this comment is mostly about genetics, on a genetic level they probably should. As for blond hair, that is more secure evidence but from what I can tell, we only have 2 Egyptian Mummies with Blond hair and testing would still have to be done as Chemicals that Celts used to bleach hair are similar to Chemicals used in Mummification. As for Tut, his mother was a princess descended from dynasty marriage with the Mitanni. So he should have had max 25% to 50% Indo-European DNA. Extracting that out he'll be mostly Levantine and Green Sahara SSA migrants to the Sahara.
    1