---

Can you prove they're not?

---

The thing is that you don't really have many sources for this claim :D

---

Yep the non- aryan  Europeans who were there originally were not Aryans. True.

---

You never named them.

Do so now.

*Hint: Cro-Magnons aren't the answer. Cro-Magnons were Proto-Nordics.

Also, the Black Sea flood (The first Great Aryan Migration - yet not the first) is estimagted to be only as old as 7.5 thousand years ago - Humans weren't referred to as "Cro-Magnon" after 10,000 years ago.

Wiki:

---

mtDNA retrieved from two Cro-Magnon specimens was identified as Haplogroup N.

---

Look at this:

Sources:

Therefore, anything coming from the N mtDNA haplogroup can trace itself back to Cro-Magnons.

This, as you can see in the chart, includes:
I,W,A,X,Y,R,B,F,HV,H,V,O,J,T,U, and K

Now according to this chart (same sources):

That looks to be about ALL, if not the vast majority, of Europe.

-------
"One of the Germans... would frequently snatch a child from the
woman's arms and... tear the child in half... Such incidents...
occurred all the time." - A Year in Treblinka, Yankel Wiernik,
Treblinka's "most authoritative eyewitness"

---

You made the claim - you back it up.

---

---

The thing is that you don't really have many sources for this claim :D

---

---

I remember the last time you said that.

You never named them.

---

I never talked of Cro-magnon.

---

Cro-Magnons were Proto-Nordics.

---

About the indo-aryan migration here is what people have found out

1. The evidence is mainly LINGUISIC
No proof that there is an association with a particular race

---

Biological anthropologists remain unable to lend support to any of the theories concerning an Aryan biological or demographic entity."

---

2. When people do trace the ancestry of the arraivas from the caspain sea they find that

---

A 2006 genetic study by the National Institute of Biologicals in India, testing a sample of men from 32 tribal and 45 caste groups, concluded that the Indians have acquired very few genes from Indo-European speaking migrants.

---

---

Kennedy (in Erdosy 1995:49) remarks that: "Our multivariate approach does not define the biological identity of an ancient Aryan population, but it does indicate that the Indus Valley and Gandhara peoples shared a number of craniometric, odontometric and discrete traits that point to a high degree of biological affinity." Cephalic measures though might not be a good indicator as they do not necessarily indicate ethnicity and their might be a tendency of plasiticity due to environment

---

---

Witzel (in Erdosy 1995:113) states that 'their genetic impact would have been negligible and, as was the case with the Normans in England, would have been "lost" in a few generations in the much larger gene pool of the Indus people.' Vijendra Kashyap, one of the authors of Sahoo et al. (2006), states that the people of the Indian subcontinent are indigenous to South Asia, but that Indo-European languages aren't, and that language change resulted from the migration of numerically small superstrate groups that are difficult to trace genetically.

---

3. When they can trace indo-european languages and geneic orgin to any Europeans they find that

---

The spread of the Indo-European languages is associated with Y-chromosome haplogroup R1a1, which is identified with genetic marker M17. The Genographic Project conducted by the National Geographic Society states that M17 arose "in the region of present-day Ukraine or southern Russia.".

---

That haplogroup is East European. So Aryns as you think them are East Europeans. (which are NOT the same as Haplogroup I which are the scandinavians)

4. But even #3 is not proven since

---

However (Kivisild 2003a; Kivisild 2003b) have revealed that a high frequency of haplogroup 3 (R1a1) occurs in about half of the male population of Northwestern India and is also frequent in Western Bengal. These results, together with the fact that haplogroup 3 is much less frequent in Iran and Anatolia than it is in India, indicates that haplogroup 3 found among high caste Telugus did not necessarily originate from Eastern Europeans. Kivisild et al. (2003) "suggests that southern and western Asia might be the source of this haplogroup".

---

5 Finally

---

Kennedy (in Erdosy 1995:54) concluded, "there is no evidence of demographic disruptions in the north-western sector of the subcontinent during and immediately after the decline of the Harappan culture. If Vedic Aryans were a biological entity represented by the skeletons from Timargarha, then their biological features of cranial and dental anatomy were not distinct to a marked degree from what ]we encountered in the ancient Harappans."

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Aryan_migration

So basically the "migration" was a movement of culture and language . But the movement of peoples may or may not be related.

NO ONE KNOWS.

In Plain English: the whole Aryan race thing is unproven at this point.

Or

You Fail. (and I proved it)  

-------
"Everyone helpin' each other whenever they can we makin' it happen, from nothin' to somethin'
That's how we be survivin'" - BEP

---

What claim?

---

---

Not any more than you.

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurgan_hypothesis" target="_top">http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurgan_hypothesis

---

Prehistoric Europeans probably Neanderthal.

I never talked of Cro-magnon.

---

Neanderthal?

There is absolutely no evidence to support mixing with Neanderthals.
Wiki:

---

A 2003 study on Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal mitochondrial DNA, published by an Italo-Spanish research team led by David Caramelli, concluded that Neanderthals were far outside the modern human range, while Cro-Magnons were well in the average of modern Europeans.

---

---

Which still does not say anything about race.

---

Ther wasn't so much mixing back then Jakey.

---

About the indo-aryan migration here is what people have found out

1. The evidence is mainly LINGUISIC
No proof that there is an association with a particular race

---

But, the fact remains: They went to Europe - and until you can prove those European Aryans mixed with non-Aryans - they didn't really change much from the original Aryans.

---

2. When people do trace the ancestry of the arraivas from the caspain sea they find that

---

That doesn't mean that they'll never find out.

Blue eyes, remember, can be traced back to the Black Sea region. Shocker...

---

3. When they can trace indo-european languages and geneic orgin to any Europeans they find that

That haplogroup is East European. So Aryns as you think them are East Europeans. (which are NOT the same as Haplogroup I which are the scandinavians)

---

But, you have to look at how they came about, what mutations they arose from.

They can trace the history of each mutation you know. R1b and R1a came from the same mutation (R1).
R came from P which came from K which came from F - the same thing I came from.

---

4. But even #3 is not proven since

---

---

5 Finally

---

It proves that THEY ARE NOT SURE YET - not that they are 100% certain at anything.

---

So basically the "migration" was a movement of culture and language . But the movement of peoples may or may not be related.

NO ONE KNOWS.

In Plain English: the whole Aryan race thing is unproven at this point.

---

There had to be people that brought it (Most accepted theory stating the Black Sea region) and that they may have given that to other populations with DIFFERENT GENETICS and they passed it on themselves.

Therefore, it originated among Aryans and passed it on.

---

You Fail. (and I proved it)

---

---

You were kidding, but you were just putting it in all of your posts...

---

---

That doesn't mean the theories are WRONG though.

---

---

You make a theory. I say its unproven and probably unprovable. Your theory failed to pass the test. End of story.

---

Unproven and unprovable?

Well, it has a lot of supporting evidence, but it's trying to be proven (and disproven) at this moment.

Also, Wiki:

---

A specific haplogroup R1a1 defined by the M17 (SNP marker) of the Y chromosome (see:[5] for nomenclature) is associated by some with the Kurgan culture.

---

Those are small mutations not complex enough to get thier own letter. You can make an educated guess that they were of the same race as that happened.

Again, is it MY theory?
No, it's just one that I tend to lean towards.

And if it failed to pass "The test" - then why is it the most common Aryan invasion theory? Why is it the most accepted?

-------
"One of the Germans... would frequently snatch a child from the
woman's arms and... tear the child in half... Such incidents...
occurred all the time." - A Year in Treblinka, Yankel Wiernik,
Treblinka's "most authoritative eyewitness"

The theory of Aryan POPULATION migration is in dispute because we don't really know who migrated where and if the orginators of the aryan LANGUAGE were one or more ethnic groups and what race they were.

Get it now?

-------
"Everyone helpin' each other whenever they can we makin' it happen, from nothin' to somethin'
That's how we be survivin'" - BEP

---

What is accepted is the theory of Aryan LANGUAGE migration.

The theory of Aryan POPULATION migration is in dispute because we don't really know who migrated where and if the orginators of the aryan LANGUAGE were one or more ethnic groups and what race they were.

Get it now?

---

There are quite a few genetic markers that correspond with the Kurgan theory.

-------
"One of the Germans... would frequently snatch a child from the
woman's arms and... tear the child in half... Such incidents...
occurred all the time." - A Year in Treblinka, Yankel Wiernik,
Treblinka's "most authoritative eyewitness"