I'd like to see studies done on Indian scriptures that claim humans are a lot older than the X number of thousands of years currently thought to be true.
Many people across Asia reject the Aryan invasion theory as its been revised many times.
Many people across Asia reject the Aryan invasion theory as its been revised many times.
A problem with investigations of physical evidence of bible stories is they are often paid for by christian organisations in the US, with the explicit goal of ‘proving the bible true’. As a result we get a lot of extremely low grade, deliberately misinterpreted amateur archaeology that’s really only designed to please the sponsors, but is obvious junk.
Any attempt to verify something from any form of scripture with modern adherents risks suffering from this problem of motivated reasoning.
Really? Does anyone outside India reject it?
It's true that there are many people inside India who reject it, but they are doing that for the most transparent, and stupid, ideological reasons. No one is proud of the Catholic rejection of heliocentrism today.
There are a few European or American scholars (or "scholars") who reject the idea that the Indo-Aryan languages ultimately arrived from outside the continent. They usually tend to be converts to Indian spirituality and so their objections have a partly religious basis. Koenraad Elst is perhaps the most famous. The OP's claim that the notion is rejected across Asia is something he pulled out of his arse; India aside, linguists across the region very much uphold the scholarly consensus.
Which is based on currently available archeological and genetic evidence. What do you wish to study? How ancient writings are contradicted by modern evidence?
He would say to me and I'm paraphrasing obviously, "Look at my nose it is flat but your nose isn't you look like the people from the north. Look at my skin it is dark but the ones up north it is light like your skin" meaning Indians.
At the time I didn't realize he was most likely referring to the "Aryan Invasion" theory which is now seen as false. Even his own comment about his own nose I don't know if he knew nose shape was used to divide people into Aryan and Dravidian. Probably inspired by Eugenics ideas of the time.
Another person in our group was Mi'kmaq First Nations aka "Indian" he was also there when we were discussing this. So it was a bit bizarre or funny since the Indian was not an Indian and the Indian was Tamil and didn't consider themselves ethnically Indian.
https://scroll.in/article/936872/two-new-genetic-studies-uph...
It is a political issue in India, obviously, but the North has more Aryan steppe ancestry than the south:
https://araingang.medium.com/south-asia-ancestry-map-637092c...
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1101873469/
Here's a review of the part that applies to India: https://www.brownpundits.com/2018/03/30/the-indian-chapter-o...
There has never been a back-and-forth on the issue, only ideological insistence on ignoring the facts.
New evidence = hypothesis falsified. New hypothesis needed.
That’s science working right.
Not relevant for this discussion.
From the article:
> The age of the lowest fossil, a fragment of a leg bone found 7 meters deep, suggests modern humans arrived in this region between 86,000 and 68,000 years ago.
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Aryan_migrations
> From the BMAC, the Indo-Aryans migrated into northern Syria and, possibly in multiple waves, into the Punjab (northern Pakistan and India), while the Iranians could have reached western Iran before 1300 BCE, both bringing with them the Indo-Iranian languages.