Almost everyone competent outside India now rejects the "Aryan invasion theory" in terms of rejecting that term for the arrival of the Indo-European languages f

Almost everyone competent outside India now rejects the "Aryan invasion theory" in terms of rejecting that term for the arrival of the Indo-European languages from the northwest. Today terms like "Aryan migration theory" are preferred. Not that this placates Hindu fundamentalists; it is the very notion that their sacred language arrived from outside (and is just about 3000 years old, not millions of years old) that they find offensive, not the term itself. There are a few European or American scholars (or "scholars") who reject the idea that the Indo-Aryan languages ultimately arrived from outside the continent. They usually tend to be converts to Indian spirituality and so their objections have a partly religious basis. Koenraad Elst is perhaps the most famous. The OP's claim that the notion is rejected across Asia is something he pulled out of his arse; India aside, linguists across the region very much uphold the scholarly consensus.