The evidence is so overwhelming,IMO its pointless to argue. As far back as the 50s Telugu and W.African were noticed. B B Lal stated the Harappan BRW and megaliths were Nubian in origin. B.K Chatterjee and G.D Kumar identified the Harappans from 18 skeletal remains as Veddoid/Proto Australoid which compared closely to skulls found in Egypt,Palestine,Sumer and other parts of Asia.
In the 80s Aravanaan,a Tamil scholar noted African/Dravidian similarities of stature,blood type,dolichocephalic index and platyrrhine nasal index. However,in the mainstream domain,Dravidians/Veddoids/Harappans are referred to as Meditteranoid/Caucasoid or Eurafrican. Why is this? What explains this successful attempt to divorce Africans from early Indian history?
Btw,these are the same Africans who reached as far as N.E Asian by the early Neolithic. Indeed,India was their gateway into Asia.
I can't post links but check karanjaz place secret histories black people 1.
In the 80s Aravanaan,a Tamil scholar noted African/Dravidian similarities of stature,blood type,dolichocephalic index and platyrrhine nasal index. However,in the mainstream domain,Dravidians/Veddoids/Harappans are referred to as Meditteranoid/Caucasoid or Eurafrican. Why is this? What explains this successful attempt to divorce Africans from early Indian history?
Btw,these are the same Africans who reached as far as N.E Asian by the early Neolithic. Indeed,India was their gateway into Asia.
