> These invaders brought the Vedas (sanscript) which become modern day Hinduism This is a pervasive myth due to accademia superficially spreadjng such nonsense

> These invaders brought the Vedas (sanscript) which become modern day Hinduism This is a pervasive myth due to accademia superficially spreadjng such nonsense, and Indians are broadly speaking quite correct to disagree. The oldest layers of the rigveda describes an environment that seems to lie elsewhere, probably further north. Indo-Aryan religion is different, and Sanskrit is quite different from Iranian too, and this is likely due to local influences. The language too is full of non-indo-european elements (more recently an article by Lubotsky considers a Baktrian substrate for example, but without a solution). It's not really clear where and when Indo-Iranian actually split up, and I'm personally not too fond of tree models that branch out, unless you can trace it to the individual level in detail. The grandparent's comment to the effect that the genetic lineage and socio-linguistic affiliation has been well understood is misleading as well. I'm not too deep into archaeogenetics but a society to be associated with the putative homeland remains illusive and not just as a matter of finding the bones. > DNA shows most Europeans are from 5 males 5000 years ago when the Yamnaya invaded Europe from the step (likely Ukraine). That shows a severe misunderstanding, that can even be found in wikipedia articles. Yamnaya is way too late and shows not the genetic profile to be the ancestor of Corded Wear, Bell Beakers and other archaeological groupings who are associated with the westward expansion. > The people in Europe before this were called the European hunter gathers This is not even wrong. There are also CHG (Caucasian), WHG (Western), etc. and as the names betray these are rather loose groupings. You are very wrong on the level of a typical pop-sci article, and this doesn't even begin to touch upon the linguistic side of things, which is full of Affirming the consequent and denying the antecedent. It's all very topical because ring species typically emerge around seas, mountains or other barriers when the end of a long line of developed comes back to the start changed beyond recognition. The Indo-Iranian north-west route around the Caspian sea therefore has to deal with the subaltern counter clockwise route, the fact that Greek is considered the closest relative language (and possibly donor of the Indic script, next to Armenian), the problem of tracing Scythian where there is barely any evidence of the language, the fact that Dravidian, Turkic and other origins are so uncertain that it can't be clear to what extent they had an influence, the Armenian homeland problem, as well as the Tocharien and Hittite's origin. There is simply no esteblished hronology, just as different timelines for the Levante are a crutch. The point where some sense of superiority is aduced and identified with, it becomes racist no matter which side of the debate you stand on, whenever you take a side.