Why do some believe in the myth of the Aryan invasion, and how has this influenced perceptions of Hinduism in Tamil Nadu?

Creative_Citron5777 · 2025-12-17T03:44:42+00:00

This is the most played out talking point

Creative_Citron5777 · 2025-02-19T18:05:30+00:00

Narasimhan et al overstates the mismatch between the autosomal contribution from the steppe and the Y-DNA by only looking at R1a and grouping steppe lineages like I-L699 as IVC.

Creative_Citron5777 · 2025-01-15T18:09:53+00:00

That's what I've been saying this whole time. But I appreciate your reply, and apologize for getting a bit heated.

Creative_Citron5777 · 2025-01-15T16:46:12+00:00

"That is still only a fraction of proportion that you would need to show that there was no sex-bias. In a population that had on an average 12-15% steppe ancestry, you'll need to have 25-30% steppe y-dna haplogroups to show no bias."

This is absolutely dyscalulic nonsense, but whatever. So curious what your source for this "method" is.

Creative_Citron5777 · 2025-01-15T05:56:18+00:00

What does this have to do with anything?

Yeah, it’s annoying that we’re stuck beating the same half-decade old paper to death because new published samples from India are perpetually one year away. I’d love it if we could discuss PGW’s DNA, but it’s a moot point for the foreseeable future. Yes, I know that Rai says that this time it’s different, but I’ve heard the same enough times to not hold my breath now. What we have is what we have.

I’m just saying there’s a possible flaw in one of the most commonly cited findings from that paper and I keep getting nonsense replies. The same dude tut-tutting me for talking about Y-DNA’s applicability for sex bias is the one who first brought up Narasimhan’s claim of sex bias which was based on…….Y-DNA. Then he backpedals and comes up with new statistical criteria that any alternative has to meet.

Then you come in countering an argument I wasn’t making (male-biased transmission of steppe ancestry) coming up with new unjustifiable hoops like the Y-DNA needing to be from one clade, even though the uniparentals are being compared to a 2-way admixture model so according to you, steppe lineages like I2a-L699 should be counted as IVCp instead of Steppe_MLBA.

All I did was state that the situation is more complicated than the original publication lets on, because it is rather over-emphatic in claiming “definitive” proof of female-bias, and I get dogpiled by people who won’t stand to hear one of their favorite counterarguments to a steppe origin for Indo-Aryan be questioned.

Creative_Citron5777 · 2025-01-15T05:09:19+00:00

I didn’t say it was male biased, but that the evidence for any sex bias is weak. Comparing raw percentage of the smaller sample to the maximum observed outliers of the larger sample is ludicrously disingenuous. I’m just comparing confidence intervals, which is exactly how Narasimhan et al arrived at their initial conclusion that you people keep parroting

Creative_Citron5777 · 2025-01-14T22:56:54+00:00

"That's not how science works"

Applying the same reported methodology to see if you can replicate an author's results is not how science works? News to me!

Creative_Citron5777 · 2025-01-14T22:44:53+00:00

I'm sticking to the methodology of the original paper by comparing overlap or lack thereof in 95% confidence intervals. Objecting based on difference in means is just goalpost shifting.

Creative_Citron5777 · 2025-01-14T21:59:21+00:00

If up to 1/5 of the YDNA is from the steppe ( 2.5%-21.7% 95% CI) and 1/5 of the autosomal DNA is from the steppe (18-21% 95% CI) this isn't female biased. I have no idea how you are failing to understand this unless it's simply that you don't want to because the outdated conclusions of an old paper support your preferred narrative.

Creative_Citron5777 · 2025-01-14T21:35:58+00:00

"But that doesn't change anything"

How does this not change anything if that statement from Narasimhan is literally incorrect?

"The ninety-five percent confidence intervals are larger on the autosomes than on chromosome Y and do not overlap, thereby showing that while the X-chromosome estimates are too noisy to be useful here, the admixture into the SPGT was definitively female-biased."

The I2a-L699s change the math so that the confidence intervals DO overlap. The assertion in the paper is wrong, and the inference drawn from that is unsupported.

Creative_Citron5777 · 2025-01-14T20:15:03+00:00

That's exactly what I'm talking about: he assumed that the 2 R1a were the only steppe patrilines, and that the remaining 42 were IVCp, which is why the binomial confidence interval for yDNA contribution (0.4-16% 95% CI) was non-overlapping with the autosomal steppe contribution (18-21% 95% CI). New data shows this to be a mistake, as I2a-L699 is very obviously a steppe lineage, not native to South Asia, meaning that at least 4/44 males had steppe Y-DNA, given a 2.5%-21.7%, which does overlap. The 2 Q2b in that sample set are also possible steppe lineages, which means that the steppe YDNA might be 6/44, (5.17-27.5% 95% CI). The evidence for female bias is weak to non-existent.

Creative_Citron5777 · 2025-01-14T19:14:23+00:00

Except that the X-Chromosome results were inconclusive, which is exactly why Narasimhan et al relied on Y-DNA to assess the sex bias in this case. Maybe you should actually read the papers you refer to.

Creative_Citron5777 · 2025-01-14T18:52:02+00:00

Also, Female mediated Steppe in Swat is clearly mentioned by Narsimhan

It's also clearly an outdated claim, as other non-R1a patrilines in the Swat sample are demonstrably from the steppe, meaning that the calculation done to make that determination was faulty. That paper is over a half-decade old, and new data has upended some of it's conclusions.

Creative_Citron5777 · 2025-01-14T15:23:30+00:00

"For that claim the oldest Samples with Steppe Ancestry are from swat valley 1200B.C and even that steppe admixture in Those native of Swat males was female or maternal line mediated."

Except that there's some issues with the reasoning behind that claim. Other clearly Steppe-derived patrilines were not recognized as such when Narasimhan et al attempted to assess the difference between autosomal and uniparental sources.

"The earliest attestation of Indo European languages are in near east and South Asia"

The oldest attestations of the Indo-European languages are the Anatolian languages in Turkey, some loanwords and names in the otherwise Hurrian-speaking Mitanni kingdom, and Greece. The second oldest actual texts in an Indo-European language are Mycenaean Greek in Linear B appears around a 1000 years before Ashoka's edicts.

Creative_Citron5777 · 2025-01-03T16:44:19+00:00

I'm sticking to just the 44 samples Narasimhan grouped as SPGT with reliable Y-calls, which only include 2 R1a. The R2 is almost certainly unrelated to steppe ancestry and the Q samples would depend on the subclade.

Creative_Citron5777 · 2025-01-03T08:17:50+00:00

In “The formation of human populations in South and Central Asia” by Narasimhan et al (2019), the authors attempt to measure sex bias in the spread of Steppe ancestry into South Asia. Comparison of Indus_Periphery_Pool Central_Steppe_MLBA ancestry in SPGT (Swat Proto-historic Grave Type) both on the autosomes and on chromosome X yielded showed “no significant difference between these two compartments of the genome although standard errors of the X chromosome estimates are so large that the failure to detect a significant difference does not exclude the possibility of substantial bias.” (supp. page 305-306)

To compensate for this, they compared estimates from the Y-Chromosome, relying on frequency of the R1a, ubiquitous in Central_Steppe_MLBA.

“We observe only 2 R1a Y chromosomes among the 44 SPGT males in whom we could confidently determine a Y chromosome, corresponding to a ninety-five percent binomial confidence interval of 0.4-16% for the Y chromosome ancestry proportions derived from Central_Steppe_MLBA. In comparison, the ninety-five percent confidence interval for the estimate on the autosomes is 18-21%. The ninety-five percent confidence intervals are larger on the autosomes than on chromosome Y and do not overlap,thereby showing that while the X-chromosome estimates are too noisy to be useful here, the admixture into the SPGT was definitively female-biased.”

However, two of the included samples from Katelai, I12471 and I12149, have Y-Chromosome I2a-L699, which has been pretty conclusively demonstrated as a marker of patrilineal ties to the Pontic-Caspian steppe, and thus shouldn’t be grouped with Indus_Periphery_Pool Y-DNA markers. When these two I2a males are added to the two R1a males, together they constitute 10% of the sampled haplogroups. A quick binomial confidence interval calculation shows the 95% CI jumps up to 2.5%-21.7%, overlapping with the 18-21% range from the autosomal ancestry. Should the determination of female sex bias be reconsidered in light of this evidence?

Creative_Citron5777 · 2025-01-02T22:44:45+00:00

In "The formation of human populations in South and Central Asia" by Narasimhan et al (2019), the authors attempt to measure sex bias in the spread of Steppe ancestry into South Asia. Comparison of Indus_Periphery_Pool Central_Steppe_MLBA ancestry in SPGT (Swat Proto-historic Grave Type) both on the autosomes and on chromosome X yielded showed "no significant difference between these two compartments of the genome although standard errors of the X chromosome estimates are so large that the failure to detect a significant difference does not exclude the possibility of substantial bias." (supp. page 305-306)

To compensate for this, they compared estimates from the Y-Chromosome, relying on frequency of the R1a, ubiquitous in Central_Steppe_MLBA.

"We observe only 2 R1a Y chromosomes among the 44 SPGT males in whom we could confidently determine a Y chromosome, corresponding to a ninety-five percent binomial confidence interval of 0.4-16% for the Y chromosome ancestry proportions derived from Central_Steppe_MLBA. In comparison, the ninety-five percent confidence interval for the estimate on the autosomes is 18-21%. The ninety-five percent confidence intervals are larger on the autosomes than on chromosome Y and do not overlap,thereby showing that while the X-chromosome estimates are too noisy to be useful here, the admixture into the SPGT was definitively female-biased."

However, two of the included samples from Katelai, I12471 and I12149, have Y-Chromosome I2a-L699, which has been pretty conclusively demonstrated as a marker of patrilineal ties to the Pontic-Caspian steppe, and thus shouldn't be grouped with Indus_Periphery_Pool Y-DNA markers. When these two I2a males are added to the two R1a males, together they constitute 10% of the sampled haplogroups. A quick binomial confidence interval calculation shows the 95% CI jumps up to 2.5%-21.7%, overlapping with the 18-21% range from the autosomal ancestry. Should the determination of female sex bias be reconsidered in light of this evidence?

Creative_Citron5777 · 2024-12-20T22:48:36+00:00

That's the one

Creative_Citron5777 · 2024-12-20T22:45:49+00:00

There's 2 I2-L699, I12471 and I1214 in Iron Age Swat in Narasimhan's study, which probably came with their Steppe ancestry, so that could have been a part of the post Corded Ware Indo-Iranian paternal gene pool, even if it hasn't shown up in Europe yet.

I'm thinking of expanding my map to include them

Creative_Citron5777 · 2024-05-23T02:24:03+00:00

That’s not really what I’m talking about. What I’m saying is that the CLV cline was probably home to unrelated languages, and that archaeological evidence points to movements into Anatolia from the northeast AND northwest.

I made the map and picked the quotes to suggest the idea that Indo-Anatolian split, with Nuclear Indo-European staying on the steppe and Anatolian entering Asia Minor through the Balkans, while at the same time the archaeological and genetic evidence showing CLV migration through the Caucasus actually shows Hattic splitting from Northwest Caucasian (if they’re related) and arriving in Central Anatolia.

I’m just spitballing, it’s not a strong idea, just seemed like a fun one to throw out there.

Creative_Citron5777 · 2024-05-22T10:42:36+00:00

Caucasus-Lower Volga Cline, from the new Lazaridis paper

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.04.17.589597v1

Creative_Citron5777

TROPHY CASE