[Ar-Curunir]

I'm not going to respond point-by-point to this nonsense. There's enough genetic evidence now to refute your claims, alongside the linguistic and archaeological claims. Read primary sources and the latest research instead of quoting people who have done absolutely zero peer-reviewed research.

[KorematsuFred]

HN is not the forum for the flame war but not providing any evidence and attacking some researcher has "he is not approved by white people" is not a valid defense.

I am not entirely sure how genetic claims could even play role in dating rigveda.

[Ar-Curunir]

Genetic claims play a role in that you can see in which direction certain genes flowed, and how old they are, and how they’re distributed. See eg: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QoGmPJJS3X8

Also peer review is not just “approval by white people”. There’s plenty of non-white scientists (eg: me)

[KorematsuFred]

> Genetic claims play a role in that you can see in which direction certain genes flowed, and how old they are, and how they’re distributed.

I am not very familiar with Genetic theories to be honest and only work I have read on this topic is from Manu Joseph's not very scientific summary of research on this topic but it is barely conclusive in any direction.

> There’s plenty of non-white scientists

That is besides the point, they will let in those who tow their lines and keep out those who disagree claiming them to be either "they haven't published anything in journals reviewed by us". Afterall british controlled India not through white soldiers but brown soliders handpicked from Indians.

It basically is a citation cartel to begin with very little concern for actual research or truth. Also this is not specific to Indology either. In this day and age it matters very little though as better quality research by such as likes of Talegari or Elst or Danino et al. stands on its own even after decades.