voidisyinyang

Dear K.E. Eduljee: Your "correction" still makes a claim that is not only not proven but has strong evidence against it: File:Afanasevo provisional.png The geographic area the Afanasevo culture covered J. P. Mallory and Victor H. Mair argue that the Tocharian languages were introduced to the Tarim and Turpan basins from the Afanasevo culture to their immediate north. The Afanasevo culture (c. 3500 – 2500 BC) displays cultural and genetic connections with the Indo-European-associated cultures of the Central Asian steppe yet predates the specifically Indo-Iranian-associated Andronovo culture (c. 2000 – 900 BC) enough to isolate the Tocharian languages from Indo-Iranian linguistic innovations like satemization.[8][9] http://infogalactic.com/info/Tocharians Yep - edited but still wrong! haha. The Pan-Aryan fantasy just doesn't listen does it?

embedding large vids as ad hominems by the OP is o.k.? But not using large font as NO AD HOMINEMS is not o.k.? More ad hominems: Nugali: Posted July 10 · Report post No But I have an M A ( McDonald's Apprentice ..... in long distance woman orgasm causing via Qi ) No But I have an M A ( McDonald's Apprentice ..... in long distance woman orgasm causing via Qi )

Dear K. E. Eduljee: Strabo in Geographia 11.8.2 states: "But the best known of the nomads (Saka) are those who took away Bactriana from the Greeks, I mean the Asii, Pasiani, Tochari (Tarim basin, Khotan), http://www.heritageinstitute.com/zoroastrianism/saka/saka4.htm But that is not what Strabo stated - he made no reference to the Tarim Basin as the Tochari he referred to lived in Bactria. Please correct this error, thanks, drew hempel, M.A. Now "corrected"? Aryan Saka, Scythia & Scythians - Zoroastrian Heritage www.heritageinstitute.com/zoroastrianism/saka/saka4.htm Strabo in Geographia 11.8.2 states (translation by Jones, our notes in []): "But the best known of the nomads [Saka] are those who took away Bactriana from the Greeks, I mean the Asii, Pasiani, Tochari [commonly thought as originating in Tarim Basin, Khotan], and Sacarauli [see Sarikoli, the language spoken in Tashkurgan ... Nope - still not corrected. Nope it's still not corrected: File:Afanasevo provisional.png The geographic area the Afanasevo culture covered J. P. Mallory and Victor H. Mair argue that the Tocharian languages were introduced to the Tarim and Turpan basins from the Afanasevo culture to their immediate north. The Afanasevo culture (c. 3500 – 2500 BC) displays cultural and genetic connections with the Indo-European-associated cultures of the Central Asian steppe yet predates the specifically Indo-Iranian-associated Andronovo culture (c. 2000 – 900 BC) enough to isolate the Tocharian languages from Indo-Iranian linguistic innovations like satemization.[8][9] http://infogalactic.com/info/Tocharians Notice how I used 72 font in the original - I am quoting from earlier info in the thread. I emailed the above to the false Pan-Aryan website with the original 72 font.

How do I make ad hominem emoticons and graphics if I can't use the large font? Please explain the formatting options to me. I will not use large font if you explain in detail how to embed ad hominem graphics and emoticons to me. I'll be waiting. Until then I will copy and paste the examples of ad hominem graphics and emoticons replied to me. The ad hominems started on July 3rd by the OP: Ad hominem emoticons are o.k. but using large font without ad hominems is not o.k.?

So are you still sticking to this false claim that "proto Indo Iranians" are the "source of 'European people' and that PIE is "not" the source of European people? . Because you realize that your Pan-Aryan fantasy is just that - a total B.S. fantasy that happens to be what Neo-Nazis also think as well? haha. Do you really think that "Proto-Indo-Iranians" (i.e. Aryans" are the "source" of European people and NOT PIE? Or are you gonna "edit" that error as well? haha. OP Error. OP Error on July 3rd.

Dear K. E. Eduljee: Thank again for editing your previous error and please correct your false claim about an early Aryan trade in blue stone: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:SxXz1ipGI8MJ:languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/%3Fp%3D33410&num=1&hl=en&gl=us&strip=1&vwsrc=0 Quote Archaeological evidence suggests that Middle Bronze Age Andronovo descendants of the Early Bronze Age horse-based, pastoralist and chariot-using Sintashta culture, located in the grasslands and river valleys to the east of the Southern Ural Mountains and likely speaking a proto-Indo-Iranian language, probably expanded east and south into Central Asia by ~3.8 ka. 3.8 ka = 1800 BCE which is the 2nd millennium BCE not 3rd millennium. Quote Archaeological evidence suggests that Middle Bronze Age Andronovo descendants of the Early Bronze Age horse-based, pastoralist and chariot-using Sintashta culture, located in the grasslands and river valleys to the east of the Southern Ural Mountains and likely speaking a proto-Indo-Iranian language, probably expanded east and south into Central Asia by ~3.8 ka. 3.8 ka = 1800 BCE which is the 2nd millennium BCE not 3rd millennium.

Dear K.E. Eduljee: Thank you for editing your quote of Strabo. You also state this incorrectly as being Aryan trade when in fact the "Aryans" did not trade lapis Lazuli until much later. Please correct this error: Notice how there are no mentions of Aryans in this academic link on Lapis lazuli trade? https://www.penn.museum/sites/expedition/lithic-technology-behind-the-ancient-lapis-lazuli-trade/ And see how the Aryans moved into the area much later then second half of 4th millennium BCE? Quote Deh Morasi Gundai was eventually abandoned about 1500 BC, perhaps because of the westward shift of the river on which it was built. Mundigak continued another 500 years. Two successive invasions by a nomadic tribe from the north forced the inhabitants to abandon the city after more than 2,000 years of continuous occupation. https://www.cemml.colostate.edu/cultural/09476/afgh02-02enl.html Quote Aryan Migration After 2400 BC, throughout Central Asia the growth of urban societies was severely challenged. Within a span of some three hundred years, none of the major centers that developed during the first half of the 3rd millennium were still occupied. The precise reasons for this "urban collapse" remain a mystery. Yet toward the end of 3rd millennium, across northern Afghanistan and southern Turkemenistan and Uzbekistan, a series of events fueled the rise of cities and settlements that was to have a major impact. Large numbers of nomadic invaders or migrants, pastoral citiless people travelling on horseback and by chariot, long known (conveniently, perhaps wrongly) as Aryans (derived from the Sanskrit word for "nobles"), migrated south from the Caspian Sea region across the Oxus (present-day Amu Darya) River to present-day Afghanistan during the late early 2nd millennium (by circa 1700 BC). But this Lapis Lazuli trade was not "Aryan" until a couple thousand years later. So it is factually incorrect to claim that is Aryan trade at that early history. Quote Deh Morasi Gundai was eventually abandoned about 1500 BC, perhaps because of the westward shift of the river on which it was built. Mundigak continued another 500 years. Two successive invasions by a nomadic tribe from the north forced the inhabitants to abandon the city after more than 2,000 years of continuous occupation. https://www.cemml.colostate.edu/cultural/09476/afgh02-02enl.html

Blah blah - changing your mind all the time aren't you?

Dude had to change his quote due to the email I sent him. Hilarious. Now is he gonna change his whole "Aryan Lapis Lazuli" trade claim when it was NOT Aryan trade for thousands of years? Guess I'll email him again.

You can't spell Vigorous correctly. You're claim about my google search engine is silly as Apeche used duckduckgo and so did I - for his "old aryan empire" search. Duckduckgo brought up the same "four hits" So nice try dude. The "four hits" I got was at the very beginning of this thread before google would have reweighted my search results.

I have made 139 links in this thread that are not Wiki and 6 links that are Wiki. So let's do a percentage. 4% Wiki links of all my links on this thread. Or in other words 96% of my links are not Wiki.

First of all - "ad hominems" are boring - so don't waste your time. 2ndly you state this: So we are talking about the trade of lapis lazuli (stone of blue). You have claimed it is an "Aryan trade" yet I just documented it started a couple thousand years before the "aryans." You state - "that means the start of the trade." Duh - that's exactly my point - it was started and continued for a couple thousands of years - therefore trading Lapis lazuli is not "Aryan trade" contrary to the claims of the Pan-Aryan website you embrace. So you link to UPENN. Great. Any mention of Aryans trading Lapis Lazuli on that site? Nope. Now to your claims of Pan-Aryanism not being genetic. As I have stated - that is just a cover up for ethnocentrism as elitism. Abdulaziz Ali4 months ago So that perfectly describes the claim you are making. And so when did the Aryans develop their language? When the tribes invaded the area - long after the Lapis Lazuli trade was going on. https://www.cemml.colostate.edu/cultural/09476/afgh02-02enl.html So that's how Proto-Indo-European turned into Proto-Indo-Iranian or Proto-Aryan.

So here's your Pan-Aryan right-wing ideology site that you love to rely on - even though it made the silly error of claiming Strabo was referring to the Tarim Basin!! haha. Seems nice right? But the problem with that claim - is the science I just posted proves that Central Asia was not "Aryan" yet by the 3rd millennium BCE. 3.8 ka = 1800 BCE which is the 2nd millennium BCE not 3rd millennium. In other words - this Aryan trade that you refer to is actually pre-Aryan - the older Near Eastern Afroasiatic neolithic culture. So back to your site on Aryan blah blah b.s. Yeah that's great trade but it's not Aryan trade.

Comments policy Genetic evidence for the spread of Indo-Aryan languages June 22, 2017 @ 9:19 pm · Filed by Victor Mair under Historical linguistics, Language and archeology, Language and genetics « previous post | next post » My own investigations on the Bronze Age and Early Iron Age peoples of Eastern Central Asia (ECA) began essentially as a genetics cum linguistics project back in the early 90s. That was not long after the extraction of mtDNA (mitochondrial DNA) from ancient human tissues and its amplification by means of PCR (polymerase chain reaction) became possible. By the mid-90s I had grown somewhat disenchanted with ancient DNA (aDNA) studies because the data were insufficient to determine the origins and affiliations of various early groups with satisfactory precision, neither spatially nor temporally. Around the same time, I began to realize that other types of materials, such as textiles and metals, provided powerful diagnostic evidence. By the late 90s, combining findings from all of these fields and others, I was willing to advance the hypothesis that some of the mummies of ECA, especially the earliest ones dating to around 1800 BC, may have spoken a pre-proto-form of Tocharian when they were alive (some people think it's funny or scary to imagine that mummies once could speak). This hypothesis was presented at an international conference held at the University of Pennsylvania in April, 1996, which was attended by more than a hundred archeologists, linguists, geneticists, physical anthropologists, textile specialists, metallurgists, geographers, climatologists, historians, mythologists, and ethnologists — including more than half a dozen of the world's most distinguished Tocharianists. It was most decidedly a multidisciplinary conference before it became fashionable to call academic endeavors by such terms (see " Xdisciplinary" [6/14/17]). The papers from the conference were collected in this publication: Victor H. Mair, The Bronze Age and Early Iron Age Peoples of Eastern Central Asia (Washington, D.C.: Institute for the Study of Man Inc. in collaboration with the University of Pennsylvania Museum Publications, 1998). 2 vols. See also: J. P. Mallory and Victor H. Mair, The Tarim Mummies: Ancient China and the Mystery of the Earliest Peoples from the West. (2000). Thames & Hudson. London. "Early Indo-Europeans in Xinjiang" (11/19/08) It is only very recently, within the last ten years or so, that Y-chromosome analysis has been brought into play for the study of ancient DNA. See Toomas Kivisild, "The study of human Y chromosome variation through ancient DNA", Human Genetics, 2017; 136(5): 529–546; published online 2017 Mar 4. doi: 10.1007/s00439-017-1773-z.* Since only males carry the Y-chromosome, this has made it possible to trace the patriline of individuals. This, coupled with the massive accumulation and detailed analysis of modern DNA with increasing sophistication and the rise of the interdisciplinary (!) field referred to as genomics, has made studies on the genetics of premodern people, including their origins, migrations, and affinities, far more exacting than it was during the 90s when I did the bulk of my investigations on the early inhabitants of the Tarim Basin. Now it is possible to draw on the results of genetics research to frame and more reliably solve questions about the development of languages from their homeland to the far-flung places where they subsequently came to be spoken. One such inquiry is described in this article: Tony Joseph, "How genetics is settling the Aryan migration debate", The Hindu (6/16/17). It is significant that this substantial article appeared in The Hindu, since there is a strong bias against such conclusions among Indian nationalists (see "Indigenous Aryans"). It begins thus: New DNA evidence is solving the most fought-over question in Indian history. And you will be surprised at how sure-footed the answer is, writes Tony Joseph The thorniest, most fought-over question in Indian history is slowly but surely getting answered: did Indo-European language speakers, who called themselves Aryans, stream into India sometime around 2,000 BC – 1,500 BC when the Indus Valley civilisation came to an end, bringing with them Sanskrit and a distinctive set of cultural practices? Genetic research based on an avalanche of new DNA evidence is making scientists around the world converge on an unambiguous answer: yes, they did. Joseph's paper is informed, sensitive, balanced, and nuanced. This is responsible science journalism. The scientific paper itself, “A Genetic Chronology for the Indian Subcontinent Points to Heavily Sex-biased Dispersals” by Marina Silva, Marisa Oliveira, Daniel Vieira, Andreia Brandão, Teresa Rito, Joana B. Pereira, Ross M. Fraser, Bob Hudson, Francesca Gandini, Ceiridwen Edwards, Maria Pala, John Koch, James F. Wilson, Luísa Pereira, Martin B. Richards, and Pedro Soares, was published in BMC Evolutionary Biology (3/23/17) ( DOI: 10.1186/s12862-017-0936-9). I'm skeptical of many of the claims put forward by geneticists concerning origins and dispersals, not just about humans, but also about horses, dogs, cats, plants, and so forth. This study, however, is both cautious and solid. Moreover, it fits well with the archeological evidence (more below). Here are two key paragraphs from the scientific paper (numbers in square brackets are to accessible references): Although some have argued for co-dispersal of the Indo-Aryan languages with the earliest Neolithic from the Fertile Crescent [88, 89], others have argued that, if any language family dispersed with the Neolithic into South Asia, it was more likely to have been the Dravidian family now spoken across much of central and southern India [12]. Moreover, despite a largely imported suite of Near Eastern domesticates, there was also an indigenous component at Mehrgarh, including zebu cattle [85, 86, 90]. The more widely accepted “Steppe hypothesis” [91, 92] for the origins of Indo-European has recently received powerful support from aDNA evidence. Genome-wide, Y-chromosome and mtDNA analyses all suggest Late Neolithic dispersals into Europe, potentially originating amongst Indo-European-speaking Yamnaya pastoralists that arose in the Pontic-Caspian Steppe by ~5 ka, with expansions east and later south into Central Asia in the Bronze Age [53, 76, 93, 94, 95]. Given the difficulties with deriving the European Corded Ware directly from the Yamnaya [96], a plausible alternative (yet to be directly tested with genetic evidence) is an earlier Steppe origin amongst Copper Age Khavlyn, Srednij Stog and Skelya pastoralists, ~7-5.5 ka, with an infiltration of southeast European Chalcolithic Tripolye communities ~6.4 ka, giving rise to both the Corded Ware and Yamnaya when it broke up ~5.4 ka [12]. An influx of such migrants into South Asia would likely have contributed to the CHG component in the GW [VHM: genome-wide] analysis found across the Subcontinent, as this is seen at a high rate amongst samples from the putative Yamnaya source pool and descendant Central Asian Bronze Age groups. Archaeological evidence suggests that Middle Bronze Age Andronovo descendants of the Early Bronze Age horse-based, pastoralist and chariot-using Sintashta culture, located in the grasslands and river valleys to the east of the Southern Ural Mountains and likely speaking a proto-Indo-Iranian language, probably expanded east and south into Central Asia by ~3.8 ka. Andronovo groups, and potentially Sintashta groups before them, are thought to have infiltrated and dominated the soma-using Bactrian Margiana Archaeological Complex (BMAC) in Turkmenistan/northern Afghanistan by 3.5 ka and possibly as early as 4 ka. The BMAC came into contact with the Indus Valley civilisation in Baluchistan from ~4 ka onwards, around the beginning of the Indus Valley decline, with pastoralist dominated groups dispersing further into South Asia by ~3.5 ka, as well as westwards across northern Iran into Syria (which came under the sway of the Indo-Iranian-speaking Mitanni) and Anatolia [12, 95, 97, 98]. The spread of R1a into South Asia had earlier been securely documented in Peter A. Underhill, et al., "The phylogenetic and geographic structure of Y-chromosome haplogroup R1a", European Journal of Human Genetics (2015) 23, 124–131; doi:10.1038/ejhg.2014.50; published online 26 March 2014. The precise coalescence of R1a within South Asia was identified in Monika Karmin, et al., "A recent bottleneck of Y chromosome diversity coincides with a global change in culture", Genome Research (2015); doi: 10.1101/gr.186684.11; published in advance March 13, 2015 (supplemental material available electronically). This kind of male migration theory is proposed with arguments based on archeological evidence in the last pages of H.-P. Francfort, “La civilisation de l'Oxus et les Indo-Iraniens et Indo-Aryens”, in: Aryas, Aryens et Iraniens en Asie Centrale (Collège de France. Publications de l'Institut de Civilisation Indienne, vol. 72), G. Fussman, J. Kellens, H.-P. Francfort, et X. Tremblay (eds.) (Paris: Diffusion de Boccard, 2005) pp. 253-328. The complete paper is on academia website. Michael Witzel has favored this, the (Indo-)Aryan Migration view, on linguistic and textual grounds since at least 1995 and was constantly criticized for saying so. See his papers of 1995, 2001: "Autochthonous Aryans? The Evidence from Old Indian and Iranian Texts." EJVS (May 2001) pdf. "Early Indian History: Linguistic and Textual Parameters." In: Language, Material Culture and Ethnicity: The Indo-Aryans of Ancient South Asia. Ed. G. Erdosy (Berlin/New York: de Gruyter 1995), 85-125; — Rgvedic history: poets, chieftains and politics, loc. cit. 307-352 combined pdf (uncorrected). and the substrate paper of 1999: "Early Sources for South Asian Substrate Languages." Mother Tongue (1999, extra number) pdf Some relevant Language Log posts: "Dating Indo-European" (12/10/03) "The Linguistic Diversity of Aboriginal Europe" (1/6/09) "Horse and wheel in the early history of Indo-European" (1/10/09) "More on IE wheels and horses " (1/10/09) "Inheritance versus lexical borrowing: a case with decisive sound-change evidence" (1/13/09) "The place and time of Proto-Indo-European: Another round" (8/24/12) "Irish DNA and Indo-European origins" (12/31/15) *For those who are interested in the development of aDNA Y-chromosome studies beginning in the 2000s, I have some additional documentation and several relevant papers that I can send to you. [Thanks to Richard Villems, Toomas Kivisild, and Peter Underhill] June 22, 2017 @ 9:19 pm · Filed by Victor Mair under Historical linguistics, Language and archeology, Language and genetics Permalink http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:SxXz1ipGI8MJ:languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/%3Fp%3D33410&num=1&hl=en&gl=us&strip=1&vwsrc=0

You need to be "authenticated"? Pretending you didn't write the above huh? hilarious.

Right - the "term" was used by the Persians - but that does not mean an actual "empire" existed. https://books.google.com/books?id=a0IF9IdkdYEC&pg=PA51&lpg=PA51&dq=vendidad+,+English+translation+aryan+empire&source=bl&ots=g-DwcqDf9M&sig=t8L7FuAgWytxScTs19CgcBSBWvg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjS9MqT3IzVAhWJxFQKHaW2A5YQ6AEIQzAF#v=onepage&q=vendidad %2C English translation aryan empire&f=false The reference to the term you give is from the 2nd century A.d. while in the OP you are referring to the 5th C. BCE. and yet the archeological digs in the Tarim Basim go back to what - 2nd millennium BCE. You used the term in the OP to describe an Aryan Empire stretching from China to the far West. Again this was never true. In the 4th hit - under google searching "old Aryan Empire" - you get an empire of India which again is not what you were describing. Now you say you meant an empire of Persia. You say it refers to "culture and language" but as that book link points out even your "old Aryan empire" could not actually be called an empire - in contrast Romans considered all non-latin and non-Greek speakers to be Barbarians. Maybe that was the goal of the "aryan empire" but it did not achieve it. Maybe you consider such ethnocentrism to be admirable. A “Persian” Iran?: Challenging the Aryan Myth and Persian Ethnocentrism https://iranian.com/main/blog/ajammc/persian-iran-challenging-aryan-myth-and-persian-ethnocentrism.html https://ajammc.com/2012/05/18/a-persian-iran-challenging-the-aryan-myth-and-persian-ethnocentrism/ As I already documented the Aryan theory uses "language and culture" as code for race. To say race doesn't exist or is not referred to is just a tautology - of course race doesn't exist, just as "Jews have "jewish traits" is a self-circular tautology. That does not mean it isn't the basis for racism. So using "language and culture" as an attempt to hide racism - is the same excuse as Aryan meaning "pure" as an aristocratic elite. So then you get this racist argument from the same meaning of "pure" Aryan language and culture: Genetic Similarity Theory as a Cause for Ethnocentrism https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/03/17/genetic-similarity-theory-as-a-cause-for-ethnocentrism/

Genocidal colonialism did cause tribes to become more war-like indeed.

Exactly - we can agree that something later - after the Taoist crocodile dragon went extinct - was turned into your dragon. But this is a thread about the Taoist crocodile dragon. Everyone knows about the common Chinese dragon chimera from all the line dancing. I mean Lion dancing.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2014/01/what-killed-great-beasts-north-america So you got your "third paragraph" wrong. On your first paragraph: http://www.uapress.arizona.edu/Books/bid1872.htm I don't idealize the "noble savage" - I'm just saying it was not as bad as Western genocidal colonialism - or call it IndoEuropean Ecological Imperialism if you want to. haha.

What do you call the birds who migrate every year? No one "owns" the land and that is also what first indigenous peoples believed. Modern human civilization has wiped out life on Earth faster than any previous mass extinction. So to compare current migrations with the first people using spears to hunt megafauna after the last ice age is a bit silly.

This was already covered earlier in the thread. Your claim is factually incorrect. You need to read the links. I'll go back in the thread for you and repost the material. Page 2: So take your first claim: Google search it. First hit: https://books.google.com/books?id=FOnsCwAAQBAJ&pg=PT284&lpg=PT284&dq="old+aryan+empire"&source=bl&ots=uQtVQt4brZ&sig=8DWn6a1I7n9_vMQtW043pB8goQQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjnys_31O7UAhXDwVQKHSoEAxgQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage&q="old aryan empire"&f=false The "movement" referred to is Neo-nazi. So that was the third hit. The 2nd hit uses this phrase shah "old aryan empire" - now google that with neo-nazi. https://www.quora.com/Why-did-Hitler-consider-Iranians-to-be-Aryans-and-Russians-not and Read more: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tehranbureau/2010/08/post-2.html#ixzz4msaopQu3 Iranian Identity, the 'Aryan Race,' and Jake Gyllenhaal by REZA ZIA-EBRAHIMI in London 06 Aug 2010 13:34 Read more: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tehranbureau/2010/08/post-2.html#ixzz4msauDa2l So that puts the 2nd hit as also Neo-nazi. As I said - the 4th hit just refers to India, which is not how the OP used the phrase.

As I said - neo-nazi hits. The 4th hit refers to just India - which is not how the term was used in the OP. Aryan Race in Iran, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Pakistan,and ... ... Aryan Race in Iran, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Pakistan,and India. A great post! ... Unfortunately the Empire of the old Aryan Empire (the Persian empire) ... https://www.stormfront.org/forum/t642152/ Ancient Mesopotamia, Near East and Greater Iran: Shah Nameh ... ... is made that one does not have to be Aryan born to have a Shah title of royal station or to even be an Shah of this old Aryan Empire. allempires.com/forum/printer_friendly_posts.asp?TID=19774 Religious Diversity in The movement believes that Slavs are actually "Slav-Aryans", although other Aryan nations exist as well, and the Lithuanians are among the descendants of the ol

obviously you know that a search in "quotes" is entirely different than just three separate words searched together. Nice try though. This is "old aryan empire" the phrase used in the OP - you get Neo-Nazi hits: Aryan Race in Iran, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Pakistan,and ... ... Aryan Race in Iran, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Pakistan,and India. A great post! ... Unfortunately the Empire of the old Aryan Empire (the Persian empire) ... https://www.stormfront.org/forum/t642152/ Ancient Mesopotamia, Near East and Greater Iran: Shah Nameh ... ... is made that one does not have to be Aryan born to have a Shah title of royal station or to even be an Shah of this old Aryan Empire. allempires.com/forum/printer_friendly_posts.asp?TID=19774 Religious Diversity in The movement believes that Slavs are actually "Slav-Aryans", although other Aryan nations exist as well, and the Lithuanians are among the descendants of the old Aryan Empire.

That is not true. The OP introduced the term "Aryan Empire" which is an empirical lie and only used by Neo-Nazis - as I then referenced with evidence. I'll spell it out for you: Now google the phrase: "old Aryan Empire" and presto - Neo-nazi links. That I posted as evidence. There never was an "old Aryan Empire" but that is what Neo-Nazis call it.

Because of the "but" - nice try. Semantics - not a logical error. Try dealing with the actually evidence instead of playing semantics.