India vs Pakistan thread

[Moonred]

Great post.

As @anant said that Oh my god did a much better job of getting the message across. Having said that, we're going off topic here. This is not an entertainment forum.

Even they botched up the ending by playing it safe and not really rubbishing the existence of God. And it was too preachy for my liking. Sorry about adding to the off topic discussion but that's that.

 

[RedTiger]

Jats are a middle caste, involved in farming, and unlike lower castes they hold land.* In parts of Western UP and Haryana, they are the politically dominant group. However, many young Jats do not see a future in farming, especially after seeing their neighbours get rich when the expansion of Delhi (Gurgaon) meant their farmland was bought at high prices for building new apartments. Many of them were born rich enough to go to college, but the job market for most degree-holders sucks (and so does the quality of most degrees).
So, they are agitating for reservations. Reservations in college admission and govt jobs were started for SCs (Dalits) and STs (Tribes) after independence. In ~1990 they were expanded to OBCs (Other Backward Class) after a report (Mandal Commission) showing the lack of representation of these groups in govt jobs. Of course this has led to mass unrest among the castes above them.
With slowing job growth, protests started by these intermediate but politically strong castes - Marathas in Maharashtra (measuring it politically, every CM of Maharashtra has been a Maratha from the 60s till 2014), Patels in Gujarat, and Jats in Haryana, demanding reservation as part of OBC category.
In the Jat agitation in Haryana, Jats rioted, and did extensive damage to railways and other property for several days. To measure how strong these groups are, consider that they attacked the police and sitting MPs, which for weaker groups usually means police firing and death. The govt formed a committee to look at including them as OBCs, which ended that violence more or less. 12 people died. Same happened (I think with less violence) with Marathas, it ended after an assurance from the CM that he will implement the changes. Patels had a long violent agitation, their leader is now in jail, I am not sure how it was ended (probably they have a committee too).



*This is my impression, I could be wrong.

Thanks for the heads up bro, much appreciated.

 

[berbatrick]

 

[Neutral]

10 years for the rapist 'guru'.

Looks like the judge gave him the maximum (under the circumstances)

 

[Sultan]

My problem with PK is that it is not criticising the belief in god, but rather is selectively demonising the methods followed by the masses to worship said god.

For example, if the film had said "God is a myth, so stop following superstitions", it would have been an acceptable satire. However, it criticises idol worship while insinuating that a god beyond all description and form, common to all religions, can likely exist. If idol worship is false, on what grounds is the latter argument true when one of the religions considers idols to be gods?

How can you say that regarding the Pope, a human being, as a mediatrix to god is more rational than worshipping an idol? Why is the Pope better than any other godman revered (apart from the fact that the Pope is not of course, a criminal like these godmen)? You can condemn both of course, but saying idols are more false representations than Pope seems selective.

Instead of a whole sale condemnation of religion and god, it merely criticises specific religious practices. In that respect, I enjoyed the recent "Toilet Ek Prem Katha" as a more rational and level-headed form of social satire.

You're right the film was not about God or condemnation of religion. If you don't believe in God the film then becomes irrelevant as you wouldn't get involved in any of the scams shown in the film.

The film centred around con merchants acting as so called agents of God. You're right, these could be in many forms such as Gurus, Idols, Priests, Imams, Shrines, Temples, Churches etc...The director of the film basically is trying to make a point to people to be cautious and informing them if you believe in a God so powerful, all hearing and seeing then you can liaise and deal directly with God and these so called intermediaries become meaningless. If they possessed super powers they would not be in need of your favours and money. This does not mean people cannot gain religious training, teaching and wisdom from Godly people.

Disclaimer: These are my personal thoughts. I hope I have not hurt anyone's feelings or sensibilities.

Edit: @KM just read your point about going off topic. Apologies.

 

[Sultan]

I don't get the fascination and fun why these powerful and influential people need to force themselves on women. They would hardly be deprived of sex and could have a constant choice of almost any woman of choice from amongst their followers.

 

[Neutral]

I don't get the fascination and fun why these powerful and influential people need to force themselves on women. They would hardly be deprived of sex and could have a constant choice of almost any woman of choice from amongst their followers.

Power and control - it's never really about the 'sex'

 

[Sultan]

Power and control - it's never really about the 'sex'

He already had that in abundance without resorting to forced sex, bro.

 

[Neutral]

He already had that in abundance without resorting to forced sex, bro.

This isn't unique to him.
Why is it so many powerful men - historically, be it politicians, clergy or otherwise, do this? They could get anyone they want...or pay for it at the very least. But, no - they always get followers, fanatics, women besotted by their power, wealth, divinity and then...shag them. With or without consent.

 

[VidaRed]

I don't get the fascination and fun why these powerful and influential people need to force themselves on women. They would hardly be deprived of sex and could have a constant choice of almost any woman of choice from amongst their followers.

The victim was a follower.

 

[Sandyman]

I don't get the fascination and fun why these powerful and influential people need to force themselves on women. They would hardly be deprived of sex and could have a constant choice of almost any woman of choice from amongst their followers.

They need instant gratification though. Probably never take no for an answer. They want, they get - consent or no consent!

 

[KM]

It's actually 20 years for both the cases.

 

[Neutral]

It's actually 20 years for both the cases.

Right you are.

There were initial reports of a 10-year sentence but his lawyers confirmed the sentencing was of consecutive, not concurrent, terms.

 

[berbatrick]

http://www.thehindu.com/news/nation...in-the-dera/article19582371.ece?homepage=true
Why migrant labourers loved to work in the Dera

Wages paid on time, free meals, prompt medical attention, and equal treatment of everyone

 

[wr8_utd]

Crazy crazy day in Bombay today with the rains. Absolutely batshit crazy rains all day!

 

[van der star]

How do you even combat a problem like the one in Bombay? The drainage system is non functioning, from what I've heard, the city is located next to a sea, and there is heavy rainfall every year. This isn't even the first time this has happened so the city officials really should have been prepared for this to happen again.

 

[Krits]

So I actually took off in that rain, while it was probably at its worst. I was really impressed with Bombay Airport at least. I remember that in 2005 (I wasn't a pilot then) that the airport had to be shut down due flooding. There wasn't much of that today. Now I don't know if that was cause the rains were worse then or that they have improved drainage this time.

There were delays, obviously (I was delayed 1.5 hours) and it was a bit nervy deciding to take off, but I was quite confident that I had assessed the situation well. The winds were almost a constant headwind and the visibility was poor, but good enough that I could see enough of the runway to maintain centreline and take off. In the end it was surprising by how little turbulence was there after I took off. It was a smooth climb out with just a lot of rain. There wasn't a typical TCU (towering cumulous) cloud, just a large rain cloud up to about 15000 feet and about 40-50 NM's across. TCU's go up to about 35-40000 feet. Never seen anything like it in my career thus far.

 

[VidaRed]

Gauri Lankesh’s Murder Is a Chilling Message to All Dissenters

The dharma of a journalist is to ask difficult questions, hold the establishment to account and stand up for the dispossessed and the voiceless. Gauri Lankesh was acutely conscious of that. Throughout her journalistic career, she stoodup for those values, fighting not just corruption but also bigotry and the purveyors of communal hatred. She was threatened, sued and finally, when she refused to be silenced, killed in cold blood.

The identity of her killers is not known, but her brutal murder by gunmen who shot her outside her home must be seen in the backdrop of the rising violence against dissenters and rationalists and those who have consistently spoken out against the forces of sectarianism and hatred. A climate of intolerance has built up, fuelled by politicians and sundry extremist organisations who operate in the name of religion; sadly sections of the big media have played a dangerously complicit role in fostering this climate.

Over the past four years, leading thinkers Narendra Dhabolkar, Govind Pansare and M.M. Kalburgi were gunned down for raising their voices against communalism and superstition. The role of militant Hindutva organisations is suspected but the police in Maharastra and Karnataka do not appear to be treating these cases with any sense of urgency. The modus operandi of the killers in Lankesh’s murder appear similar. A proper investigation will be required to pinpoint who killed her – and more importantly who got her killed – but it is impossible to ignore the context.

Just about a year ago, she was sentenced to six months in jail after being convicted of defamation in cases filed by two BJP leaders in Karnataka. Though she was released on bail, the sentence was hanging over her head. The conviction prompted no less a person that the BJP’s IT cell to publicly issue a veiled warning to journalists at large.

Journalists in India have long valued their independence, but of late, that one-time feistiness has morphed into a coziness with the powers that be. Some journalists are blatant about their support for the government, others, while pretending neutrality and equidistance, are more subtle. Either way, the space for independent journalism – which does its job without fear or favour and seeks to serve only the reader/viewer – is rapidly shrinking. How dangerous the profession is can be gauged from the fact that five journalists were killed in India in 2016; the same year, India dropped three places to 136 in the global Freedom of the Press index.

A brazen killing such as this one seeks to send out a chilling message to not just journalists but to all independent thinkers and dissenters – that this could be their fate too. The only proper response should be to do the exact opposite of what the killers want – to continue standing up to those who are out to spread terror and silence all opposition. Intolerance of this kind has to be resisted and exposed. Gauri Lankesh would have done that and we owe it to her to continue the fine tradition.

https://thewire.in/174544/editorial-gauri-lankesh-murder-wire/

 

[Varun]

So I actually took off in that rain, while it was probably at its worst. I was really impressed with Bombay Airport at least. I remember that in 2005 (I wasn't a pilot then) that the airport had to be shut down due flooding. There wasn't much of that today. Now I don't know if that was cause the rains were worse then or that they have improved drainage this time.

There were delays, obviously (I was delayed 1.5 hours) and it was a bit nervy deciding to take off, but I was quite confident that I had assessed the situation well. The winds were almost a constant headwind and the visibility was poor, but good enough that I could see enough of the runway to maintain centreline and take off. In the end it was surprising by how little turbulence was there after I took off. It was a smooth climb out with just a lot of rain. There wasn't a typical TCU (towering cumulous) cloud, just a large rain cloud up to about 15000 feet and about 40-50 NM's across. TCU's go up to about 35-40000 feet. Never seen anything like it in my career thus far.

The rains were just one-third of the 2005 levels. What time did you leave? I think the airport had to be closed for a while this time as well but could be mistaken.

How do you even combat a problem like the one in Bombay? The drainage system is non functioning, from what I've heard, the city is located next to a sea, and there is heavy rainfall every year. This isn't even the first time this has happened so the city officials really should have been prepared for this to happen again.

From what I gather, there's too much unplanned construction to totally solve the drainage system issue. That said, increasing the capacity of the existing channels and changing the setup so that water outflow to the sea is just one way is definitely doable. Atm, there are no valves and thus the drainage is already flooded with sea water at high tide.

 

[Krits]

The rains were just one-third of the 2005 levels. What time did you leave? I think the airport had to be closed for a while this time as well but could be mistaken.

I took off at around 14:30 I think. Airport wasn't really shut while I was there. Visibility only dropped below take off and approach minima for about 5 mins.

 

[Varun]

I took off at around 14:30 I think. Airport wasn't really shut while I was there. Visibility only dropped below take off and approach minima for about 5 mins.

I see, I think it was only briefly shut with delays being the norm.

 

[Edgar Allan Pillow]

Don't get the ruckus around NEET.

 

[berbatrick]

Excellent article summarising recent genetic research about early migration to India - it makes the experiments understandable IMO.

http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/sc...he-aryan-migration-debate/article19090301.ece

Edit: the article mentions research by David Reich. I read that paper as part of coursework. One of the disgusting insights from that paper is that caste has been so fixed that evidence of intra-caste marriages can be seen in our DNA, and can be dated back ~1000 years.

From that paper:

the average inbreeding-corrected FST was 0.0069; much higher than the analogous 0.0018 in Europe when comparing within regions

We propose that the high FST among Indian groups could be explained if many groups were founded by a few individuals, followed by limited gene flow8, 24. This hypothesis predicts that within groups, pairs of individuals will tend to have substantial stretches of the genome in which they share at least one allele at each SNP. We find signals of excess allele sharing in many groups (Supplementary Fig. 2), which as expected tend to occur in the groups that have the highest FST values from all others (P = 0.002 for a correlation). To estimate the age of founder events, we measured the genetic distance scale over which allele-sharing decays, and verified the robustness of our procedure by simulation (Supplementary Fig. 3). Six Indo-European- and Dravidian-speaking groups have evidence of founder events dating to more than 30 generations ago (Supplementary Fig. 2), including the Vysya at more than 100 generations ago (Fig. 2). Strong endogamy must have applied since then (average gene flow less than 1 in 30 per generation) to prevent the genetic signatures of founder events from being erased by gene flow. Some historians have argued that 'caste' in modern India is an 'invention' of colonialism25 in the sense that it became more rigid under colonial rule26. However, our results indicate that many current distinctions among groups are ancient and that strong endogamy must have shaped marriage patterns in India for thousands of years24, 27.

 

[Kapardin]

Excellent article summarising recent genetic research about early migration to India - it makes the experiments understandable IMO.

http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/sc...he-aryan-migration-debate/article19090301.ece

Edit: the article mentions research by David Reich. I read that paper as part of coursework. One of the disgusting insights from that paper is that caste has been so fixed that evidence of intra-caste marriages can be seen in our DNA, and can be dated back ~1000 years.

From that paper:

Quite the twitter storm over this article.

Dunno about migrations, genetics and other stuff, but linking the Veda or the caste system to them (as that article insinuates) is absolute bollocks. The veda is neither a geographical nor a historical text, it is completely religious in nature. It has been misinterpreted by historians, philologists and modern day fraud "gurus" without access to ancient tradition. There are specific rules to interpret the Veda. I should know, philosophy is my forte.

Of course, I know nothing about genetics, so I can't comment on that. This despite majoring in Biotechnology. Kinda veered away from it, I hated the subject

As an example, to prove that light skinned "Aryans" wrote the Veda and subjugated the native dark skinned "Dasyus", these historians quote mantras like these from the Rg Veda:

akarmā dasyurabhi no amanturanyavrato amānuṣaḥ | tvantasyāmitrahan vadhardāsasya dambhaya ||

The meaning for this given by the historians is:

"Around us is the Dasyu, riteless, void of sense, inhuman, keeping alien laws. Baffle, thou Slayer of the foe, the weapon which this Dāsa (barbarian) wields."

So, these historians contend "Aryans" subjugated the native "Dasyus/Dasas" with force apparently based on mantras like these. Sort of like Genghis Khan and Alexander, but more benevolent.

However, such nonsensical interpretations throw grammar and context to the winds. The correct interpretation would be as follows:

"Around us (enveloping us) is that (matter/prakrti) which is different from “karma” or actions, ie, the non-doer of actions (akarmA), the “dAsyu” or the hostile as it is antagonistic to the self (by obstructing knowledge), the insentient (amantur), that which is different from that which spreads or extends, ie attributive intellect (anya-vrata; vratati iti vrata), that which is different from the self which is capable of meditation (mAnuSha – manana shIla; amAnusha is the opposite of it). You (the Supreme Being), who are the slayer of the enemy (the mind which is the enemy of the self), destroy the impelling inclinations (karmas/vAsanas that impel us to attachments) of the self known as "dAsa" as he is the slave to these attachments."

So this mantra simply declares the difference between the body and soul as per vedanta and how the body and mind are enemies as they cause attachments, and is a prayer to overcome them. I gave this as an example because the historians use such mantras as bread and butter for their invasion theories.

Its' quite strange how historians have come up with wholesale theories of invaders writing the Vedas based on misinterpretations. The caste system is whole another kettle of fish. Don't get me wrong, if you find empirical proof, fine, but if they try to pass off the Vedas as a documentation of the history or geography of those times, I am inclined to take it with a pinch of salt.

Apologies if I hurt anyone's sentiments, ofc. Don't mean to turn it into a religious/philosophical discussion, but actually both are linked to this topic. Won't say more on this.

 

[berbatrick]

Quite the twitter storm over this article.

Dunno about migrations, genetics and other stuff, but linking the Veda or the caste system to them (as that article insinuates) is absolute bollocks. The veda is neither a geographical nor a historical text, it is completely religious in nature. It has been misinterpreted by historians, philologists and modern day fraud "gurus" without access to ancient tradition. There are specific rules to interpret the Veda. I should know, philosophy is my forte.

Of course, I know nothing about genetics, so I can't comment on that. This despite majoring in Biotechnology. Kinda veered away from it, I hated the subject

As an example, to prove that light skinned "Aryans" wrote the Veda and subjugated the native dark skinned "Dasyus", these historians quote mantras like these from the Rg Veda:

akarmā dasyurabhi no amanturanyavrato amānuṣaḥ | tvantasyāmitrahan vadhardāsasya dambhaya ||

The meaning for this given by the historians is:

"Around us is the Dasyu, riteless, void of sense, inhuman, keeping alien laws. Baffle, thou Slayer of the foe, the weapon which this Dāsa (barbarian) wields."

So, these historians contend "Aryans" subjugated the native "Dasyus/Dasas" with force apparently based on mantras like these. Sort of like Genghis Khan and Alexander, but more benevolent.

However, such nonsensical interpretations throw grammar and context to the winds. The correct interpretation would be as follows:

"Around us (enveloping us) is that (matter/prakrti) which is different from “karma” or actions, ie, the non-doer of actions (akarmA), the “dAsyu” or the hostile as it is antagonistic to the self (by obstructing knowledge), the insentient (amantur), that which is different from that which spreads or extends, ie attributive intellect (anya-vrata; vratati iti vrata), that which is different from the self which is capable of meditation (mAnuSha – manana shIla; amAnusha is the opposite of it). You (the Supreme Being), who are the slayer of the enemy (the mind which is the enemy of the self), destroy the impelling inclinations (karmas/vAsanas that impel us to attachments) of the self known as "dAsa" as he is the slave to these attachments."

So this mantra simply declares the difference between the body and soul as per vedanta and how the body and mind are enemies as they cause attachments, and is a prayer to overcome them. I gave this as an example because the historians use such mantras as bread and butter for their invasion theories.

Its' quite strange how historians have come up with wholesale theories of invaders writing the Vedas based on misinterpretations. The caste system is whole another kettle of fish. Don't get me wrong, if you find empirical proof, fine, but if they try to pass off the Vedas as a documentation of the history or geography of those times, I am inclined to take it with a pinch of salt.

Apologies if I hurt anyone's sentiments, ofc. Don't mean to turn it into a religious/philosophical discussion, but actually both are linked to this topic. Won't say more on this.

I've been wanting to get back to this. So...
The articles I quoted from are purely about genetics. There is no other historical analysis in them, apart from one single line.

About the origin of Indian populations:
What was found was that there was an influx (influx =/= invasion) of people into India, and this happened at around the same time when these was a similar influx (by the same people) into Europe. And this influx (and subsequent expansion within India) is dated long after the start and quite near the end of the Indus Valley Civilisation. It is perfectly possible the influx and the Harrapans never met, or they did, this paper doesn't mention anything about that.

This is the crucial paragraph from the Hindu summary:

Dr. Underhill’s research found that R1a had two sub-haplogroups, one found primarily in Europe and the other confined to Central and South Asia. Ninety-six per cent of the R1a samples in Europe belonged to sub-haplogroup Z282, while 98.4% of the Central and South Asian R1a lineages belonged to sub-haplogroup Z93. The two groups diverged from each other only about 5,800 years ago. Dr. Underhill’s research showed that within the Z93 that is predominant in India, there is a further splintering into multiple branches. The paper found this “star-like branching” indicative of rapid growth and dispersal. So if you want to know the approximate period when Indo-European language speakers came and rapidly spread across India, you need to discover the date when Z93 splintered into its own various subgroups or lineages.
...
Now that we know that there was indeed a significant inflow of genes from Central Asia into India in the Bronze Age, can we get a better fix on the timing, especially the splintering of Z93 into its own sub-lineages? Yes, we can; the research paper that answers this question was published just last year, in April 2016, titled: “Punctuated bursts in human male demography inferred from 1,244 worldwide Y-chromosome sequences.” This paper, which looked at major expansions of Y-DNA haplogroups within five continental populations, was lead-authored by David Poznik of the Stanford University, with Dr. Underhill as one of the 42 co-authors. The study found “the most striking expansions within Z93 occurring approximately 4,000 to 4,500 years ago”. This is remarkable, because roughly 4,000 years ago is when the Indus Valley civilization began falling apart. (There is no evidence so far, archaeologically or otherwise, to suggest that one caused the other; it is quite possible that the two events happened to coincide.)

The Hindu article is beautifully written, and infact I found that the original papers it combines are hard to read, even though I have read a few population genetics papers before. I cannot explain it any better if I tried.

Anyway, quoting from the originals:

Spoiler

In South Asia, we detected eight lineage expansions dating to ~4.0–7.3 kya and involving haplogroups H1-M52, L-M11, and R1a-Z93 (Supplementary Fig. 14b,d,e). The most striking were expansions within R1a-Z93, occurring ~4.0–4.5 kya. This time predates by a few centuries the collapse of the Indus Valley Civilization, associated by some with the historical migration of Indo-European speakers from the Western Steppe into the Indian subcontinent27
...
There are now sufficient high-quality Y-chromosome data available (especially Poznik et al. [58]) to be able to draw clear conclusions about the timing and direction of dispersal of R1a (Fig. 5). The indigenous South Asian subclades are too young to signal Early Neolithic dispersals from Iran, and strongly support Bronze Age incursions from Central Asia. The derived R1a-Z93 and the further derived R1a-Z94 subclades harbour the bulk of Central and South Asian R1a lineages [55, 58], as well as including some Russian and European lineages, and have been variously dated to 5.6 [4.0;7.3] ka [55], 4.5–5.3 ka with expansions ~4.0–4.5 ka [58], or 4.7 [4.0;5.5] ka (Yfull tree v4.10 [54]).

Altogether, therefore, the recently refined Y-chromosome tree strongly suggests that R1a is indeed a highly plausible marker for the long-contested Bronze Age spread of Indo-Aryan speakers into South Asia, although dated aDNA evidence will be needed for a precise estimate of its arrival in various parts of the Subcontinent.

About caste:
For background - This is the statistic they are looking at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixation_index
It looks at the various random mutations that arise all over the human genome (and are harmless). It looks at these mutations throughout the population. Then it looks at subpopulations (groups) within the main population. Does the frequency of these mutations within each subpopulation differ from the other groups? Then that is an indication that the entire population is not mating randomly, and that the subpopulations are more likely to mate within themselves rather than with other subpopulations. That is because outbreeding by members of the subpopulation would introduce mutations from the other group, and tend to move the mutation signature of the subpopulation towards the overall population . Repeated interbreeding between different groups would make it impossible to distinguish between the groups genetically. The length of time there have been distinct groups can be estimated from how diverged the groups are from each other, in terms of their characteristic mutations.
These subpoulations complicate population genomic analysis so the survey recorded caste for each sample. After sequencing and finding the the Fst value, the paper estimated that the non-interacting subpopulations, corresponding to castes, existed within India for 30-100 generations. This indicates that caste separation has been strictly enforced for at least 30-100 generations (note that even a very small number of outcrossings, in the form of intermarriage, rape or an adopted baby, would drastically reduce this number). The paper then says that some people blame the British for making the caste system more rigid, but clearly that is not the case if this inbreeding can be traced back far far beyond their arrival.

 

[Kapardin]

I've been wanting to get back to this. So...
The articles I quoted from are purely about genetics. There is no other historical analysis in them, apart from one single line.

About the origin of Indian populations:
What was found was that there was an influx (influx =/= invasion) of people into India, and this happened at around the same time when these was a similar influx (by the same people) into Europe. And this influx (and subsequent expansion within India) is dated long after the start and quite near the end of the Indus Valley Civilisation. It is perfectly possible the influx and the Harrapans never met, or they did, this paper doesn't mention anything about that.

This is the crucial paragraph from the Hindu summary:



The Hindu article is beautifully written, and infact I found that the original papers it combines are hard to read, even though I have read a few population genetics papers before. I cannot explain it any better if I tried.

Anyway, quoting from the originals:

Spoiler

In South Asia, we detected eight lineage expansions dating to ~4.0–7.3 kya and involving haplogroups H1-M52, L-M11, and R1a-Z93 (Supplementary Fig. 14b,d,e). The most striking were expansions within R1a-Z93, occurring ~4.0–4.5 kya. This time predates by a few centuries the collapse of the Indus Valley Civilization, associated by some with the historical migration of Indo-European speakers from the Western Steppe into the Indian subcontinent27
...
There are now sufficient high-quality Y-chromosome data available (especially Poznik et al. [58]) to be able to draw clear conclusions about the timing and direction of dispersal of R1a (Fig. 5). The indigenous South Asian subclades are too young to signal Early Neolithic dispersals from Iran, and strongly support Bronze Age incursions from Central Asia. The derived R1a-Z93 and the further derived R1a-Z94 subclades harbour the bulk of Central and South Asian R1a lineages [55, 58], as well as including some Russian and European lineages, and have been variously dated to 5.6 [4.0;7.3] ka [55], 4.5–5.3 ka with expansions ~4.0–4.5 ka [58], or 4.7 [4.0;5.5] ka (Yfull tree v4.10 [54]).

Altogether, therefore, the recently refined Y-chromosome tree strongly suggests that R1a is indeed a highly plausible marker for the long-contested Bronze Age spread of Indo-Aryan speakers into South Asia, although dated aDNA evidence will be needed for a precise estimate of its arrival in various parts of the Subcontinent.

About caste:
For background - This is the statistic they are looking at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixation_index
It looks at the various random mutations that arise all over the human genome (and are harmless). It looks at these mutations throughout the population. Then it looks at subpopulations (groups) within the main population. Does the frequency of these mutations within each subpopulation differ from the other groups? Then that is an indication that the entire population is not mating randomly, and that the subpopulations are more likely to mate within themselves rather than with other subpopulations. That is because outbreeding by members of the subpopulation would introduce mutations from the other group, and tend to move the mutation signature of the subpopulation towards the overall population . Repeated interbreeding between different groups would make it impossible to distinguish between the groups genetically. The length of time there have been distinct groups can be estimated from how diverged the groups are from each other, in terms of their characteristic mutations.
These subpoulations complicate population genomic analysis so the survey recorded caste for each sample. After sequencing and finding the the Fst value, the paper estimated that the non-interacting subpopulations, corresponding to castes, existed within India for 30-100 generations. This indicates that caste separation has been strictly enforced for at least 30-100 generations (note that even a very small number of outcrossings, in the form of intermarriage, rape or an adopted baby, would drastically reduce this number). The paper then says that some people blame the British for making the caste system more rigid, but clearly that is not the case if this inbreeding can be traced back far far beyond their arrival.

Like I said, I don't know anything about genetics and this is not something I particularly care about. There have been assertions and counter assertions, rebuttals and counter rebuttals on this subject all of which is Greek to me.

The point I am making is that the next step that these historians take is to claim that these "migrants" introduced caste system, rg veda etc. And then they quote mantras from the Veda with their misinterpretations to justify this.

So, there is no proof of the fact that there was even a race called "Aryan". The term "Aryan" is derived from their misinterpretation of the Veda, where it is used to denote puNya karmas. For example,

sāhyāma dāsamāryaṃ (- Manyu Sukta, Rg Veda)

This means, "We will overcome the Aryas and Dasyus". Again, historians take it as referring to some "Aryan" and "Dasyu" tribes.

Here, "Arya" means that which is noble, ie, the puNya karmas arising from actions related to adherence of the Veda. "Dasyu" refers to that which is hostile, the pApa karmas. The implication being, get rid of both to attain liberation.

The only point I have been making is that there is no way you can link migrations (whether they happened or not) to the Vedic culture and claim that the names of said migrant tribes are "Aryan" or "Indo-Aryan" and that they introduced caste system. Zero proof for that as it comes from wrong understanding of the Rg Veda. The premise itself is wrong.

If they want to stick to their theory of migrations, they should give it some other name. They have no proof that a migrating tribe named "Arya" brought the Vedas and caste system as the proof they give for that come from their distortions of the Vedas.

 

[berbatrick]

Like I said, I don't know anything about genetics and this is not something I particularly care about. There have been assertions and counter assertions, rebuttals and counter rebuttals on this subject all of which is Greek to me.

The point I am making is that the next step that these historians take is to claim that these "migrants" introduced caste system, rg veda etc. And then they quote mantras from the Veda with their misinterpretations to justify this.

So, there is no proof of the fact that there was even a race called "Aryan".

The only point I have been making is that there is no way you can link migrations (whether they happened or not) to the Vedic culture and claim that the names of said migrant tribes are "Aryan" or "Indo-Aryan" and that they introduced caste system. Zero proof for that as it comes from wrong understanding of the Rg Veda. The premise itself is wrong.

If they want to stick to their theory of migrations, they should give it some other name. They have no proof that a migrating tribe named "Arya" brought the Vedas and caste system as the proof they give for that come from their distortions of the Vedas.

These are not historians. These are all geneticists.

If they see evidence of a migration, I think that's what they will call it. And the genetic evidence, currently, suggests that there was a migration from central Asia into India about 4000-4500 years ago.

The word Aryan is not used in those papers, for geneticists it is quite meaningless. They use the term Indo-European.*

Evidence for segregation by caste was found by looking at Indian populations today. Our DNA suggests that this segregation was strictly followed/enforced for 30-100 generations. That is after the arrival of Indo-Europeans. The Rig Ved has been dated (obviously not by geneticists) to 1-2000 BC, which is also after the arrival of the Indo-Europeans. I cannot comment on what the Rig Veda says about caste, Aryans, etc. I do know that the Manusmriti, which came around 500 BC (again, obviously, not genetic dating), does have verses specifying caste boundaries and punishments for breaking them. The genetic evidence suggests that caste separation largely happened around the time Manusmriti was written, which would make sense.

*Edit: I should also add that Sanskrit is a member of the Indo-European language family. Since the Vedas, etc were written in Sanskrit, it makes sense that they were written in India by the Indo-Europeans who arrived.

 

[fishfingers15]

Are you suggesting that the caste system was rigidly enforced in India by colonial invaders?

 

[berbatrick]

Are you suggesting that the caste system was rigidly enforced in India by colonial invaders?

No!
1. Caste has been strictly followed/enforced for 30-100 gens.

2. Indo-Europeans arrived and settled in India ~4000 years ago. Their arrival into the region coincided with the collapse of the Indus Valley civilisation, but this could well be unrelated since there is no evidence to the contrary.
Almost all Indians today have some percentage of Indo-European ancestry. It is IMO wrong to call them colonial invaders, they settled here and there is clear mixing of Indo-Europeans with other Indian populations. The percentage of Indo-European ancestry was found to be higher among North Indians and upper castes. The only Indians who have no Indo-Eu ancestry are some groups in the Andamans.
The Manusmriti was written by descendants of Indo-Europeans (since it is in Sanskrit), and it has very direct references to caste separation. It can also be dated back to 2-2500 years, where the genetic evidence of caste suggests (30-100 gens).

 

[Maradona10]

Economic slowdown not just technical, it’s real: SBI report

The Research note has come ten days after BJP president Amit Shah attributed the slowdown — GDP growth slid for the sixth quarter in a row to hit a three-year low at 5.7 per cent in the June quarter — to “technical reasons”
India is currently undergoing a slowdown in the GDP growth rate and the continued fall since the second quarter of FY17 is “technically not short-term in nature or even transient,” SBI Research has said in a report.

“While it is true that the economy has undergone too many structural breaks since November 2016, and that may have precipitated a transient slowdown, it will be unfair if we only call it transient. A slowdown in demand has only aggravated the situation,” it said hinting that the slowdown is for real. Private sector capital formation is also languishing as resolution of stressed assets is yet to happen. “This situation demands that the government steps in and uses the fiscal policy as a tool to rev up the economy,” SBI report said.

The Research note has come ten days after BJP president Amit Shah attributed the slowdown — GDP growth slid for the sixth quarter in a row to hit a three-year low at 5.7 per cent in the June quarter — to “technical reasons”.

“GDP growth, jo Atalji ke samay 8 per cent thi, 2013-14 me wo 4.7 (per cent) par aayi, aur ab usko – last quarter chod dijiye, ek technical karano se hua hai – magar last quarter chod dijiye to 7.2 per cent par usko pahuchane me safalta mili hai. (GDP growth, which was at 8 per cent during former Prime Minister Atalji’s regime, came down to 4.7 per cent in UPA regime. Now, if you leave the last quarter — when growth fell due to technical reasons — we have been successful in increasing it to 7.2 per cent),” Shah had said while addressing industrialists at a FICCI session in New Delhi on September 9.
Stating that the economy is in urgent need of a fiscal push now to shore up growth, the SBI report said: “We believe the government should consciously expand the spending and fiscal deficit, without disturbing the borrowing maths. This can be done in the following manner. First, the government being aware of the crowding out argument, has kept the net market borrowing on a declining trend over the years with Rs 3.4 lakh crore budgeted for FY18. This reduction in net borrowings has been plausible owing to buybacks and switches. The government can consider more of these buybacks and switches in next fiscal as a first option to keep net borrowings under control.”

“Second, if we look at the total borrowings which is the sum total of net market borrowings through dated securities and short term sources, it may be noted that short-term borrowings of only Rs 2002 crore were budgeted for FY18. However, we believe that short term borrowings could be increased from the current levels, as movements in short term rates depend crucially on liquidity,” it said.

Core liquidity which rose sharply post demonetisation and reached a peak of Rs 4.48 lakh crore in March 2017 is still excess, amounting to Rs 2.7 lakh crore in August 2017. “Thus increase in short-term borrowings and hence a concomitant decline in long term borrowings will definitely not lead to higher interest rates under the current circumstances. This will also keep the total borrowings in check,” SBI report said.

The government can always use the clause in Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management (FRBM) Act that says “far-reaching structural reforms in the economy with unanticipated fiscal implications” which can provide an escape clause (or slip) for a 0.5 per cent deviation from the recommended target.

The report said the government has pegged the fiscal deficit for FY18 at 3.2 per cent of GDP and remains committed to achieving 3 per cent in the following year, but it should not get straitjacketed in the fiscal consolidation agenda so that the development goals are compromised.

Another option available for reviving growth as being made in several circles is by depreciating the currency so as to make the exports more competitive. “However, even though we believe a depreciation in exchange rate will be a welcome move as far as shoring up export competitiveness, it will militate against inflation targeting,” SBI report said.

The economy is well and trully fecked by Gst and the Demonitization, jaitley has been a disaster for the economy, govt has no response as to why petrol/diesel prices keep rising andstill involved in showing how big narendra modi's dick is. Its been a shit year, and a shit governement but Modi's orator skill will win him another election when he is able to emotionally connect and almost blackmail people to vote for him. Its a sad state of affairs of what is happening in this country. We are regressing, Modi in footballing terms is jurgen klopp all talk no show. Shows passion and speaks the right things and blames everyone but himself and his country. We are deluded by jurgen klopp of politics. Basically we are all fecked.

 

[Kapardin]

These are not historians. These are all geneticists.

If they see evidence of a migration, I think that's what they will call it. And the genetic evidence, currently, suggests that there was a migration from central Asia into India about 4000-4500 years ago.

Like I said, papers go back and forth on it, so this theory is strictly related what side one chooses. A rebuttal to that article you quoted was published in the Hindu the next day and Tony Joseph has been arguing over it on twitter.

Not being a geneticist, I don't understand it and so don't make an opinion.

The Rig Ved has been dated (obviously not by geneticists) to 1-2000 BC, which is also after the arrival of the Indo-Europeans. I cannot comment on what the Rig Veda says about caste, Aryans, etc. I do know that the Manusmriti, which came around 500 BC (again, obviously, not genetic dating), does have verses specifying caste boundaries and punishments for breaking them. The genetic evidence suggests that caste separation largely happened around the time Manusmriti was written, which would make sense.

Maybe you are not aware, but the dating of the Rg Veda is again, based on the assumption that these "migrants" were "Aryans", based on their interpretations of the mantras, and therefore assumed that these "migrants" brought the Veda.

Again, this is a circular logic. Vedas were brought by the migrants because the Vedas mention these migrants by differentiating between "Aryas" and "Dasyus". That too based on a dubious interpretation of "Arya" and "Dasyu".

Let us leave the argument for migrations. There is no proof that anyone brought the Vedas in based on the erroneous dating methods used by historians. The Vedas do not speak of any tribes and are not historical in nature.

Not only do the historians date the Vedas based on their assumption of the arrival of migrants and their double assumption of the migrants bringing the Vedas with them, but they ignore simple things. For instance, the ithihasa and purana are termed by these historians to be non-vedic texts and of a later period. But they have no idea how the chandogya upanishad, supposedly "written" during a time when the puranas and ithihasas do not exist, mentions "Ithihasa purana" as among the texts of study by Narada Muni!

Their dating methods are thus, not sacrosanct.

Furthermore, the caste system is mentioned in the Vedas themselves, long before Man Utd smriti. But not in the way it is understood now, for sure.

Edit: I should also add that Sanskrit is a member of the Indo-European language family. Since the Vedas, etc were written in Sanskrit, it makes sense that they were written in India by the Indo-Europeans who arrived.

Since the assumption that "Indo-Europeans" wrote the Vedas is based on the assumption that they are the "Aryans" who subjugated the "Dasyus" which in turn is based on a flawed interpretation of the Vedas, it is quite erroneous to assume Sanskrit was brought in by them. It could well be the reverse - Sanskrit influenced other languages due to transmission of ideas. This is independent of whether migrations actually occured or not.

The Vedas were actually never written, btw. Such a claim is not made by the Vedas themselves. They were orally transmitted. It was only in the early BC roundabouts, as the power of oral transmission waned, that they were written down in palm leaf manuscripts. This is admitted by these historians themselves, yet they assume dates arbitrarily based on the dating of the manuscripts for the sake of convenience.

The Manusmriti was written by descendants of Indo-Europeans (since it is in Sanskrit), and it has very direct references to caste separation. It can also be dated back to 2-2500 years, where the genetic evidence of caste suggests (30-100 gens).

Zero proof of this as well since it is not even proven that "Indo-Europeans", even assuming such a race existed, brought in sanskrit anyway. As mentioned above, none of the texts (not just the Vedas) were written down until early BC, and that definitely is not the date of their origin because an oral tradition existed beyond that. Until they can provide empirical proof of "Indo-Europeans", them writing these texts and popularizing sanskrit in the early ages without misinterpreting the texts themselves in an attempt to prove their point, it remains unproven.

Let me give you one more example of the dating methodology. They date one of the Puranas (Bhagavata Purana) as belonging to 10th-11 century AD because they feel the "sanskrit is different from earlier works" (never mind that there is not much basis to this). However, Gaudapada, a 6th Century AD scholar of advaita, in his karikas, references a shloka from the Bhagavata Purana by saying - atha sa bhagavata uktah 'katham'iti. This shows that not only was the Bhagavatam text prevalent in 6th Century AD, but it was actually so popular that it was quoted by a scholar, implying it was far older!

Similar examples can be given for almost every text they dated.


Their line of thinking is very simple. The believers of the "Aryan Migration Theory" saw that the early ages showed an unbroken adherence to the vedic culture, without an intermixing of other cultures. The uniformity of one culture is at odds with their theory of migrations of different races. So, they had no choice but to try to show that the Vedas and everything were brought in by these races and were not indigenous. But unfortunately for them, neither the Vedas nor the other ancillory texts have an inkling of information about multiple tribes, or colonization, or invasion or migration or whatsover. There is zero empirical proof other than inaccurate interpretations of mantras.

Which therefore leads us to genetics. Tony Joseph's article is also challenged by several others, so the topic is by no means settled, except for believers on either sides who go by convictions.

 

[VidaRed]

No!
1. Caste has been strictly followed/enforced for 30-100 gens.

2. Indo-Europeans arrived and settled in India ~4000 years ago. Their arrival into the region coincided with the collapse of the Indus Valley civilisation, but this could well be unrelated since there is no evidence to the contrary.
Almost all Indians today have some percentage of Indo-European ancestry. It is IMO wrong to call them colonial invaders, they settled here and there is clear mixing of Indo-Europeans with other Indian populations. The percentage of Indo-European ancestry was found to be higher among North Indians and upper castes. The only Indians who have no Indo-Eu ancestry are some groups in the Andamans.
The Manusmriti was written by descendants of Indo-Europeans (since it is in Sanskrit), and it has very direct references to caste separation. It can also be dated back to 2-2500 years, where the genetic evidence of caste suggests (30-100 gens).

You are right but people wont accept it.

 

[Kapardin]

You are right but people wont accept it.

They will, if you show a link between Sanskrit and "Indo-Europeans" in the form of archaeological, literary or other forms of proof. Not even the "Proto-Indo-European" language which is surmised to be the parent of sanskrit and other languages is proven empirically, but is more of a conjecture based on the link between sanskrit and other languages, and by linking them to the texts and migration by dubious historical research. The author of the Man Utd smriti is no more known to the historians or geneticists than he is to you or me. Until then, theories remain precisely that, theories and people have full rights to take sides without being judged.

Of course, important thing is to look at them objectively, rather than from the prism of nationalism/religion, or vice-versa (compulsive faith in academia).

EDIT: I see you follow a religion. Ah, that explains it. Never mind.

 

[VidaRed]

Of course, important thing is to look at them objectively, rather than from the prism of nationalism/religion, or vice-versa (compulsive faith in academia).

EDIT: I see you follow a religion. Ah, that explains it. Never mind.

Please elaborate.

 

[Kapardin]

Please elaborate.

Its' very simple. I will be very direct here.

I don't think religious people can provide a very unbiased view on the topic of AIT, AMT and others. It is because hindu nationalists are likely to skew all arguments to their biased narrative, whereas muslims and christians would be only too happy to believe the left liberals because it would validate their views.

Furthermore, I think anyone who believes in something on faith cannot be an authority on things that are to be proven on empirical evidence, considering that they themselves believe in things that cannot be proven empirically otherwise and even contradict perception. So, any debates on this is better conducted between those who believe that perception (empirical data) is authority on ALL matters and whenever something is against perception, it should be reinterpreted in view of the empirical data.

Of course, likes of Darwin and Newton who were theists and yet scientists are rare exceptions.

I believe you are a muslim, I have seen your posts. The AMT or AIT is something that muslims and christians will naturally agree with, so it certainly isn't a shock you are on that side of the fence. A person who follows something on faith can never be unbiased, as he will always look through the prism of his faith.

I don't of course, mean to offend or criticize your faith. Just pointing out the tendencies of religious people in general. If it were a hindu, naturally he would disagree with AIT and AMT, but that is wrong as well if it isn't backed by unbiased facts.

 

[berbatrick]

There is only one person denying hard evidence (a combination of genetic and language similarity) in this thread.

Besides, as an atheist and a scientist I can safely tell you that religious scientists are not rare exceptions. Science which has been created by atheists alone will be horrendously hollow; many of the biggest advances in human knowledge haven't come from those who "believe that perception (empirical data) is authority on ALL matters." This includes Darwin, who is the de-facto founder of modern biology, Einstein (same for modern physics), Maxwell and Newton (classical physics) and Lavoisier (chemistry).

 

[Kapardin]

There is only one person denying hard evidence (a combination of genetic and language similarity) in this thread.

Hard evidence according to you. I frequent other forums where opinions differ on this very topic, it just so happens this forum doesn't have those people.

Besides, I haven't said anything about genetics as that is not my forte. However, philosophy and indology is something I know very well. And I am quite fluent in sanskrit to know a smattering of its' linguistic relations with other languages.

Besides, as an atheist and a scientist I can safely tell you that religious scientists are not rare exceptions. Science which has been created by atheists alone will be horrendously hollow; many of the biggest advances in human knowledge haven't come from those who "believe that perception (empirical data) is authority on ALL matters." This includes Darwin, who is the de-facto founder of modern biology, Einstein (same for modern physics), Maxwell and Newton (classical physics) and Lavoisier (chemistry).

True. I named two as well. But then, they were extraordinary men with gifted intellect. Prodigies actually. Does that hold for every average muslim, hindu or christian for whom blind faith dominates their lives?

The very fact that Darwin, Einstein, Maxwell, Newton, Lavoisier were theists and scientists is testament to them being exceptions to the horde.

Besides, these men were probably intelligent to reinterpret their faith in accordance with their findings. That is true of Indian scientists like Aryabhata, Brahmagupta, etc who were theists as well. The common everyday believer is not capable of that thinking.

EDIT: Regarding the "all perception is authority" jibe, I am a strong believer of the old Vedic nyaya (logic) of "yathArtha khyAti vAda" or theory of reals. Do allow me to share it, it is quite relevant.

Basically, this theory says all perception is of the real and sublates everything else. An example - a person suffering Jaundice sees everything as yellow. If he sees a yellow table, is it an unreal object as it is not really yellow?

One person believing in "asat khyAti vAda" or theory of unreals, says that the table is unreal as the person no longer sees a yellow table when the jaundice is removed. He thus realizes his error. Similarly, perception can be wrong sometimes and one must depend on faith (religious belief without basis).

However, the "yathArtha khyAti vAda" person says - the yellowness is a real color of the bile, superimposed on the real table by the rays of the eyes, and when Jaundice no longer exists, the real yellow color of the bile is no longer seen, so the table is seen in its proper color. That is to say, nothing unreal is ever seen, it was only the non-apprehension of the difference between real yellowness and real table that led to seeing the real table as "yellow table" in error.

So, all perception is of the real and it can never be inferior to other sources of authority.

The moral of this in short is - a person who believes perception to be the superceding authority in all matters has the higher authority. Faith is akin to the other person who made a mistake in assuming unreality of perception.

 

[berbatrick]

49% of scientists in the US believe in god or a higher power. The names I mentioned are not exceptions in the sense that they have religious beliefs, they are exceptions because of their contribution to science.

You can link me to the articles shared in the other forum about genetic evidence for/against migration, I can read them in a few days. From everything I've read, very solid genetic evidence and mainstream linguistics both point to an Indo-European migration, from Central Asia into India.

 

[Kapardin]

49% of scientists in the US believe in god or a higher power. The names I mentioned are not exceptions in the sense that they have religious beliefs, they are exceptions because of their contribution to science.

Ha Ha, 'Course they do. Scientists by trade, are unique people. Out of those unique people, there are some very unique people who can reinterpret their faith in terms of what they discover. Again I ask, is the common hindu, muslim, or christian capable of that? What is the proportion of these 49% of scientists to the total religious population in America? Negligible.

If you can boldly claim God did not create something from nothing (as the religious texts say), for instance, and did not create us, but yet believe there could be a higher power controlling us, then you are eligible for debate. For that is not entirely irrational, as it allows you to adapt your beliefs.

You can link me to the articles shared in the other forum about genetic evidence for/against migration, I can read them in a few days. From everything I've read, very solid genetic evidence and mainstream linguistics both point to an Indo-European migration, from Central Asia into India.

Again, I am not even discounting there was a migration. There could have been, if genetics says so. But it has nothing to do with sanskrit, or the Vedas, or the Man Utd Smriti. Because the dating methodologies of the indologists are flawed, the interpretations they use to link it to migrants are flawed and there is not much empirical evidence in the field of linguistics, thus a lot is left to conjecture.

If you say a migration happened and intermixed with our people, and perhaps adopted the indigenous Vedic culture of the land, then I probably won't have anything to say to that, although I cannot say whether or not there was a migration in the first place. There is however, *Zero* proof that they brought the Vedas in or that they were called "Aryans" (Which is based on the misinterpretations I previously pointed out).

By forums, I meant twitter which I was browsing at work. I typed "Tony Joseph Aryan, etc" keywords and came across a couple of rebuttals. Some of the rebuttals were on twitter in a series of posts by people with a knowledge of genetics, while other rebuttals were a couple of articles that linked to the Hindu itself. One article was by Konraad Elst whom I discounted as Elst is a known person with some bias, but the other was by another guy, a foreigner.

You could probably get them by simply typing rebuttal to Tony Joseph, the man has become rather famous after that article.

 

[berbatrick]

I am reading the replies right now, including on twitter. Will reply once I finish reading everything.
This one was funny:

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

The out of India migration shown there is of...Mus musculus. Mice. (Taken from Fig 1: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1929145/)