AFRIKANS (the "Untouchables" "Dalits") IN INDIA

[Cryptocurrency Scarface]

That's what he and 88 did to get @the cac mamba bushed

Cac mamba is a Cac though

 

[GetInTheTruck]

That's what he and 88 did to get @the cac mamba bushed

I didn't report anything about the cac mamba, I actually think he's an entertaining poster.

And I reported another poster to the feds for supporting isis, but not to the mods.

 

[JahFocus CS]

I didn't report anything about the cac mamba, I actually think he's an entertaining poster.

And I reported another poster to the feds for supporting isis, but not to the mods.

I was referring to Nap, not you

 

[Grano-Grano]

India isn't worth a thread on HL

 

[Grano-Grano]

I didn't report anything about the cac mamba, I actually think he's an entertaining poster.

And I reported another poster to the feds for supporting isis, but not to the mods.

nikka ISIS is the opps. Wtf type of herb you smoking?

 

[GetInTheTruck]

nikka ISIS is the opps. Wtf type of herb you smoking?

Don't quote or address me, I don't associate with terrorists.

 

[Grano-Grano]

Waste the resources of @Feds with false reports of terrorism, brehs

 

[Grano-Grano]

Don't quote or address me, I don't associate with terrorists.

Your mother is a terrorist for having you with a unshaved yeast infected vagina in the Ganges River fukkin Hindu scum

 

[thekyuke]

Devanagari comes from the Brahmi script, not Ge'ez. There is a difference between a language and the script used to write that language.

Sanskrit as a language belongs to the Indo-European language family, Ge'ez is Afro-Asiatic. Also, Sanskrit is the language of the Aryans and the Vedas, whom Winters believes are foreign invaders who usurped the Dravidians, who speak an entirely different set of languages. This is a logical contradiction on his part.

I think you've misunderstood what Jones said. Also those linguistic categorisations,as we'll soon see aren't set in stone;its not like Afro Asiatic is from Mars! The 2 languages use an identical script-devanagari developed from the Ethiopian findal. This was his reasoning: "He explained that this was supported by the fact that both writing systems went from left to right, Sanskrit and Ge'ez share udentical vowels in the same order, and the vowels were annexed to the consonants."

 

[GetInTheTruck]

I think you've misunderstood what Jones said. Also those linguistic categorisations,as we'll soon see aren't set in stone;its not like Afro Asiatic is from Mars! The 2 languages use an identical script-devanagari developed from the Ethiopian findal. This was his reasoning: "He explained that this was supported by the fact that both writing systems went from left to right, Sanskrit and Ge'ez share udentical vowels in the same order, and the vowels were annexed to the consonants."

Devanagari isn't Sanskrit, it's the script used to write Sanskrit. We can forgive Jones because he was around a long time ago, so his work isn't necessarily misleading, just outdated. Winters however doesn't have that excuse.

Pseudoscientific language comparison - Wikipedia

Pseudoscientific language comparison is a form of pseudo-scholarship that has the objective of establishing historical associations between languages by naive postulations of similarities between them.

While comparative linguistics also studies the historical relationships of languages, linguistic comparisons are considered pseudoscientific by linguists when they are not based on the established practices of comparative linguistics, or on the more general principles of the scientific method. Pseudoscientific language comparison is usually performed by people with little or no specialization in the field of comparative linguistics. It is a widespread type of linguistic pseudoscience (another example being false etymology, as in the example of the so-called "Salmon problem").

The most common method applied in pseudoscientific language comparisons is to search two or more languages for words that seem similar in their sound and meaning. While similarities of this kind often seem convincing to laypeople, linguistic scientists consider this kind of comparison to be unreliable for two primary reasons. First, the method applied is not well-defined: the criterion of similarity is subjective and thus not subject to verification or falsification, which is contrary to the principles of the scientific method. Second, the large size of all languages' vocabulary makes it easy to find coincidentally similar words between languages.

Because of its unreliability, the method of searching for isolated similarities is rejected by nearly all comparative linguists (however, see mass comparison for a controversial method that operates by similarity). Instead of noting isolated similarities, comparative linguists use a technique called the comparative method to search for regular (i.e. recurring) correspondences between the languages’ phonology, grammar and core vocabulary in order to test hypotheses of relatedness.

Certain types of languages seem to attract much more attention in pseudoscientific comparisons than others. These include languages of ancient civilizations such as Egyptian, Etruscan or Sumerian; language isolates or near-isolates such as Basque, Japanese and Ainu; and languages that are unrelated to their geographical neighbors such as Hungarian.

In your link, Winters is guilty of this right off the bat by alluding to Ethiopian "Naga," and says well since the script is called Devanagari that must mean it's Ethiopian in origin. That's so stupid it's really not even worth addressing.

 

[thekyuke]

Devanagari isn't Sanskrit, it's the script used to write Sanskrit. We can forgive Jones because he was around a long time ago, so his work isn't necessarily misleading, just outdated. Winters however doesn't have that excuse.

Pseudoscientific language comparison - Wikipedia



In your link, Winters is guilty of this right off the bat by alluding to Ethiopian "Naga," and says well since the script is called Devanagari that must mean it's Ethiopian in origin. That's so stupid it's really not even worth addressing.

That's not the issue-the bolded bit is.

"I think you've misunderstood what Jones said. Also those linguistic categorisations,as we'll soon see aren't set in stone;its not like Afro Asiatic is from Mars! The 2 languages use an identical script-devanagari developed from the Ethiopian findal. This was his reasoning: "He explained that this was supported by the fact that both writing systems went from left to right, Sanskrit and Ge'ez share udentical vowels in the same order, and the vowels were annexed to the consonants.""

Why is that so? Is the similarity coincidental or non existant?

 

[GetInTheTruck]

@thekyuke here is the genetic data that shows that there was no major influx from outside into the subcontinent within the neolithic era, ie; the past 10,000-14,000 years. You can read the entire study, or you can save time and just read the conclusion:

Since the initial peopling of South and West Asia by anatomically modern humans, when this region may well have provided the initial settlers who colonized much of the rest of Eurasia, the gene flow in and out of India of the maternally transmitted mtDNA has been surprisingly limited. Specifically, our analysis of the mtDNA haplogroups, which are shared between Indian and Iranian populations and exhibit coalescence ages corresponding to around the early Upper Paleolithic, indicates that they are present in India largely as Indian-specific sub-lineages. In contrast, other ancient Indian-specific variants of M and R are very rare outside the sub-continent.

And here is something from the same study more relevant to this thread:

India congregates four linguistic domains (Indo-European, Dravidic, Austro-Asiatic and Tibeto-Burman) that occupy non-random spheres of the geographic distribution of its populations. The majority of the recent studies based on mtDNA variation have, in contrast to some [21], provided evidence that linguistic groups of India do not represent genetically homogeneous units and are not, therefore, traceable to different immigration waves from distinct sources [8, 13, 19]. The complexity that arises in defining populations and groups of populations in India based on genetic and cultural criteria has been recently demonstrated in South Indian tribal and caste populations. The combined data from mtDNA, Y-chromosome and autosomal genes indicated that the tribes and castes derive largely from the same genetic heritage of Late Pleistocene southern and southwestern Asians, and have received limited gene flow from external sources since the Holocene [15]. Similar results were obtained by Cordaux et al. [29],

To put it into simple, layman terms what this means is that Dravidians are not Africans.

Most of the extant mtDNA boundaries in South and Southwest Asia were likely shaped during the initial settlement of Eurasia by anatomically modern humans

So if you want to believe Winters that's up to you, but I'd rather trust genetics.

 

[thekyuke]

@thekyuke here is the genetic data that shows that there was no major influx from outside into the subcontinent within the neolithic era, ie; the past 10,000-14,000 years. You can read the entire study, or you can save time and just read the conclusion:



And here is something from the same study more relevant to this thread:



To put it into simple, layman terms what this means is that Dravidians are not Africans.

Most of the extant mtDNA boundaries in South and Southwest Asia were likely shaped during the initial settlement of Eurasia by anatomically modern humans

So if you want to believe Winters that's up to you, but I'd rather trust genetics.

I'd rather we have an orderly exchange of ideas. Let's first finish the script similarities before we move on.
Thanks.

 

[thekyuke]

Don't go all radio silent,my dude. I'm waiting for your response so we can have civil debate.

 

[newworldafro]

I mean, strictly speaking, this isn't fully true. There were several Ethiopian rulers in parts of the Indian subcontinent.

link