I would rather read wikipedia. Let us debunk the this article, point by point, step by step. 1 - >Sanskrit is the liturgical language of Hinduism, so sacred t

I would rather read wikipedia. Let us debunk the this article, point by point, step by step. 1 - >Sanskrit is the liturgical language of Hinduism, so sacred that lower castes (more than 75% of modern Hindus) weren’t even allowed to listen to it being recited. Dog barking, no source or authenticity of the claim. 2 - > The earliest form of Sanskrit is that used in the Rig Veda Again, no source for this claim ? 3 - > a dynasty called the Mitanni ruled over the upper Euphrates-Tigris basin, ............... Hers is the wiki link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitanni https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitanni Here is the wiki link for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurrian_language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurrian_language Here is when the author writes like the edgy teens . "magine that: the irritating, snot-nosed Subandhu from school shares his name with an ancient Middle Eastern prince. Goosebumps. (Sorry, Subandhu)." This is the problem with such authors, instead of posting, exact point by point details, they pump in their own opinions. Here is when the author starts attacking others, >;Were PN Oak and his kooky Hindutva histories right?; Here is when the author starts making up facts and building upon facts he has not proven yet. >;Popular national myths in India urgently paint Sanskrit as completely indigenous to India.; Again, he is debunking something the opposite of which he has not been able to prove yet. >;, has not a shred of supporting evidence, either linguistic or archeological”; Why would I read website which constantly publishes fake news and provocative headlines? This website constantly abuses and produces fake headlines. Here are examples. Please watch out for yourself. http://www.opindia.com/tag/scroll/ http://www.opindia.com/tag/scroll/