Category Archives: Horses

“From Andalusia to Far West Texas,” by Alpha Unit

The wild ancestor of modern cattle is the aurochs. This nearly seven-foot-tall beast ranged throughout North Africa and Eurasia. Domestication occurred independently in Africa, the Near East, and the Indian subcontinent between 10,000 and 8,000 years ago. Humans have been raising cattle for their milk, meat, tallow, and hides ever since.

But the practice of raising large herds of livestock on extensive grazing lands didn’t begin until around 1000 CE, in Spain and Portugal. Cattle ranching, in particular, was unique to medieval Spain.

During the Spanish Reconquista, members of the Spanish nobility and various military orders received grants to large tracts of land that the Kingdom of Castile had conquered from the Moors. Pastoralists found that open-range breeding of sheep and cattle was most suitable for these vast areas of Castilla-La Mancha, Extremadura, and Andalusia.

It was in Andalusia that cattle ranching took hold, with cattlemen owning herds as large as 1,000 head or more. Those cattlemen oversaw the first cattle drives. Cattle could be driven overland as much as 400 miles from summer pastures in the North to winter ones in Andalusia. The vaqueros who herded the cattle were freemen hired for the year and paid in coin or in calves.

Andalusian ranchers introduced the use of horses in managing cattle – a necessity in the long overland drives to new pastures. They also established the customs of branding and ear-marking cattle to denote ownership. By the time Columbus left Spain on his first voyage, the cattle industry of Andalusia had undergone a few centuries of trial-and-error improvement. On his second voyage Columbus unloaded some stallions, mares, and cattle on the island of Hispaniola, introducing cattle to the New World.

Conquistadors who arrived in the New World in search of gold continued what Columbus began, turning Andalusian cattle loose throughout the Spanish West Indies and other parts of Spain’s colonial empire.

In 1521 Gregorio de Villalobos defied a law prohibiting cattle trading in Mexico and left Santo Domingo for Veracruz with several cows and a bull, importing the first herd of Spanish cattle to Mexico. Hernán Cortés brought horses and cattle to Mexico as well, and by 1540 Spanish cattle are permanently in North America.

Cortés had set about using enslaved Aztecs to herd cattle. Slave labor to herd cattle was overseen mostly by Spanish missions, which came to dominate ranching. Under Spanish law no Indian slave was permitted to ride horses, but this obviously impractical law was ignored. Aztec Indians became the first vaqueros of New Spain (Mexico), where conditions for raising cattle were even better than those in the West Indies.

By the 1600s there weren’t as many Native slaves, as thousands had died over time from exposure to smallpox, measles, and yellow fever, in outbreaks that began among the Spaniards and to which Natives had no immunity. As a result, the vaquero labor force came to include mission Indian converts, African slaves, and mestizos.

New Spain’s borders spread northward into what is now the US Southwest. The sparsely populated northern frontier regions of northern Mexico, Texas, and California didn’t have enough water for farming but the climate and acres of wild grass and other vegetation made them ideal for cattle ranching. Cattle and horses were now a feature of American life and were beginning to shape American identity.

Beginning in the 1820s, Anglo settlers moved to the Texas region of Mexico in search of inexpensive land. Texas was severely underpopulated, so Mexico had enacted the General Colonization Law of 1824, permitting immigration to all heads of households regardless of race, religion, or immigrant status. Anglo Texans were largely farmers and didn’t warm initially to the Spanish-Mexican concept of large-scale ranching. But ranching became popular among Anglos after immigration agents began promoting it. Texas cattle were so plentiful and cheap that most people could begin raising livestock without a large investment.

Anglo Texan cowhands and their counterparts throughout the US were the latest incarnation of the vaquero that got his start in southern Spain. The vaquero rides on, whether he’s Native, mestizo, Black, Hispano, or Anglo.

12 Comments

Filed under Africa, Agricutlure, Alpha Unit, Americas, Amerindians, Animals, Blacks, Caribbean, Colonialism, Cows, Domestic, Eurasia, Europe, European, Europeans, Guest Posts, Hispanics, History, Horses, Immigration, India, Labor, Latin America, Livestock Production, Mestizos, Mexicans, Mexico, Mixed Race, Near East, North Africa, North America, Political Science, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, South America, Spain, Spaniards, Texas, The Americas, USA, West, Whites

Bigfoot News October 20, 2012

Photos of Robin Lynne Pfeifer horses after Bigfoots braided their manes! . This report was met with quite a bit of ridicule at the time, and it was never confirmed by Ketchum to my knowledge. Robin Lynne Pfeifer lives in Michigan at a habituation site. Bigfoots have been coming around to her place for a couple of years now. Her claims are very controversial. Some say she really has Bigfoots on her property. Others say that the whole thing is made up and fake.

At one point, the Bigfoots on her property braided the manes on her horse.

Via a confidential source, I recently received three photos of Pfeifer’s horse showing braiding of the horse’s mane. There are three photos in total.

One of Pfeifer’s horses showing braiding of the mane, distant view.

Closeup view of braiding on the mane of one of Pfeifer’s horses. There is a hand in the photo, but I do not know who the hand belongs to.

Very closeup view of mane braiding on one of Pfeifer’s horses. It is not known whose hand is in the photo.

Although the idea that Bigfoots braid horse’s manes is very odd, there seems to be some support for the idea that they do this. From the Caucasus, we have a long history of reports that the Almas braid the manes on local horses. These reports date far back in time as long as oral history goes.

In the US, we also have many reports that Bigfoots braid horses’ manes. The late Richard Stubstad, a very scientific man, believed that Bigfoots and Almas may well braid horses’ manes, as crazy as it sounds.

Why Bigfoots and Almas would do this, or why this strange behavioral trait would be shared with two relict hominids thousands of miles apart is not known.

Bart Cutino delivered an interesting presentation – a video of five full minutes of thermal footage showing 3-4 Bigfoots in the Sierra Nevada – at Day 5 of the Bigfoot Discovery Days Event at Mike Rugg’s Bigfoot Museum in Felton, California tonight, October 20, 2012. As I am writing this, Bart may well have finished with his presentation. A post describing his presentation is here.

The footage was shot in late August 2012 at a research location in the Sierra Nevada Mountains in California. Those present were Justin Smeja, Shawn Evidence, Bart Cutino, Ro Sahebi and tow other men named “Todd” and “Michael L..”

They went to the location, which is deep in the Sierras away from all crowds at about 7000 feet elevation. They encountered no one along the primitive road to the locale. They camped in either the forest or a meadow – at any rate, they did not camp in a campground, primitive or otherwise.

At around 1:30 AM, Cutino and Shawn took a road that circled up above the camp. The circled up to the top of the loop to a point where they could look down on the campground about 130 yards below where Ro and the new fellow were hanging out by the fire. Justin was asleep at the time.

Bart had a state of the art video camera with FLIR technology for night vision. He was about to give up when he noticed figures in a draw about 100 yards below. Incredulous, he focused further, and noted a bipedal figure moving back and forth in the shadowed and shaded draw. Another bipedal figure was up against a tree, motionless.

Bart filmed about an hour of tape until his last battery ran out. In that hour of tape, an edited down version produced about five minutes of Bigfoot footage within the space of that hour. Hence, the Bigfoots were present about 8% of the time he was filming.

At one point, a larger Bigfoot appeared and threw what appeared to be a rock. Towards the end of the footage, what may be a fourth Bigfoot appears. The Bigfoot walking back and forth may be an adolescent or a female. It was later estimated to be ~6’2. A larger Bigfoot was ~7′ tall, and the biggest one of all was estimated at an incredible 9′.

When they got back to the camp at about 2:30 PM, Ro and the new fellow were quite agitated and jumpy. They had seen “shadows dancing” in the ambient light above the camp just up the hill from the camp. On top of that, at one point, three deer ran into their camp and stood there next to the two men, frozen motionless. The deer were apparently terrified of the Bigfoots.

Bart had to wrestle with himself for some time about releasing it as he did not feel that the footage was conclusive. The footage is from 100 yards away, and all you can see is bipedal figures moving or standing in the woods at a distance.

They look more or less like people. However, there were no other humans spotted on the way into the site that day, and none were heard in the area at night either. Truth is they were in the middle of the wilderness, miles away from any humans or camps. 3-4 bipedal creatures, all of whom were from pretty tall to insanely tall, were heard and then seen and photographed moving around the wilderness woods without using flashlights.

Not sure if you have ever been camping in the wilderness before, but you simply do not see or hear other humans walking around in the woods in the middle of the night with no flashlight. In fact, you won’t see or hear any humans in the woods even with flashlights after the sun goes down. The only thing you see or hear in the deep woods at night are animals.

Hence, I do not believe it is possible that the 3-4 large figures in the video were mysterious humans who sneaked up on a wilderness camp and walked around in the woods at night without flashlights while throwing rocks.

Over the past few months, one 8-night trip was taken to the site. Bill Munns helped with the height identifications. It was only after extensive investigations were done that Bart decided to make the video and make his presentation.

The footage has not yet been released, but I will soon be able to see a version of it. The footage will probably be released in 1-2 months and is sure to be controversial. Surely there will be many cries of “Hoaxer!”

Drama queen soap opera scenario involving Middle America Bigfoot Research Center (MABRC) and a report I made on a possible Bigfoot body.

In my last report, I noticed an oddly worded post by Ed Smith (kook) head of a shadowy group called Orig-6 on the MABRC forums in which Ed implied cryptically that either his organization or MABRC may have a captured Bigfoot in some form or another. I never said, “MABRC has a Bigfoot body.” I simply reprinted the odd post and wondered if that was what they were implying.

DW Lee (kook), head of MABRC, then made a post in Bigfoot Forums in which he said, “We neither confirm nor deny that we have a Bigfoot body. We reiterate that Ed Smith is a friend of ours.”

This attention-getting, histrionic nonsense led to a long, 8-page thread in which DW and Ed made repeated posts and cleared up absolutely nothing about the situation. Does either one of them have a body? Maybe they do. Maybe they don’t. Neither confirm nor deny. On and on with the childish attention whoring.

Reading between the lines of these male drama queens, one comes to the apparent conclusion that neither Orig-6 nor MABRC has a body of a Bigfoot in any form whatsoever. Instead of telling us that, they stand on their heads and yell, “Look at me!” Silly boys.

Orig-6 and MABRC have been around for some time, and neither one has produced much evidence of any value to my knowledge. Nevertheless, Tom Biscardi-style, they are always yelling that they have something big coming up real soon, but then tomorrow never comes and we are left holding the bag once again.

MABRC claims to be the biggest Bigfoot organization in North America, competing with Melissa  Hovey’s (kook) American Bigfoot Society in that dubious regard. Both of these groups spend much of their time in dramatics, fighting with any or all around them, wild competition over nothing, threats, stunts and all-around kookery.

The guys at MABRC have been known for a long time to threaten and belittle other “researchers” in the typical Bigfoot kook style. At one time, they threatened a researcher from North Dakota who accused them of being pro-kill. Recently a pipe bomb of all things was detonated at a conference in Oklahoma that the MABRC was not involved in. It is not known who set off the bomb. Sounds like somebody’s playing for keeps though.

New possible Bigfoot photo out of New Hampshire. Dan Rushlow, a fine researcher with a group called Northeast Bigfoot, took an interesting photo on a recent expedition in New Hampshire. They had been wood knocking and howling all day, and some of the party had turned in for the night.

Dan’s wife was sleeping in the tent when Dan heard a noise in woods in back of the tent. Then he saw a shadow back in the woods. He pulled out his camera and took a photo. With the flash of the camera, the object moved away. Dan later looked at the photo and thought he saw eye shine in back of the tent.

He sent it to a friend in the BFRO who enhanced it for him. Via the enhancements, you can see what appears to be eyes, a head, shoulders and possibly a nose in back of the tent. The tent is 5’8 at its top, so the object with the glowing eyes is over 5’8 tall. Human eyes do not glow in the dark.

Original photo. The possible Bigfoot eye shine can be seen around the red ink just above the tent’s roof.

Enhanced photo showing possible outline of the creatures bodies. You can eye shine well here, and this does look like Bigfoot eye shine to me that I have seen in other photos. It has a certain look to it.

Further enhancements via software. You can see the possible Bigfoot peeking right over the top of the tent in this photo.

Smaller photo with the possible Bigfoot highlighted. In this case, you can make out what may be a nose below the eyes.

Just for the record, I agree that this appears to be a Bigfoot in back of the tent in the photo. Humans don’t have eye shine like that, and no animal has an eye shine that looks like that. Further, the outline of the figure looks very much like various photos of Bigfoots I have seen before. Congrats to Dan and his fine organization on a job well done!

New possible Bigfoot photo from Extreme Expeditions in North Cascades National Park. A new research group called Extreme Expeditions has formed. Among other things, they will be searching for Bigfoots. They appear to be headquartered out of Washington State. A woman named Lori Simmons appears to be heavily involved in the group. Other than that, I know little about them.

On September 4, 2012 they organized a trip to North Cascades National Park in Washington state to an area where a lot of suspected Bigfoot activity was occurring. Throughout the day, a lot of suspected Bigfoot activity was observed.

Night fell, and instead of sleeping in their tent, two members of the team, Lori and Adam Davies, decided to sleep outdoors under the stars. They had a motion camera set up on a nearby tree. At some point in the night, the motion camera was triggered by something moving in front of it.

A picture was snapped of a large object, apparently some sort of an animal, that appeared to be kneeling on the ground in front of the two people sleeping in their sleeping bags. The people were not awoken by the curious creature.

Later they retrieved the strange photo. It appears to be a Bigfoot taken from the rear view. To me, this creature looks a lot like the Patterson creature, the Hovey creature and the Harley Hoffman creature. There are reasons I think it is real, but I will not elaborate them because I do not want to encourage hoaxers. But if you look back at those photos or photos and then look at this creature, you may see some interesting parallels.

Thom Cantrall (kook) recently posted that he felt that this creature was definitely a juvenile Bigfoot. Now whether this is a juvey Bigfoot or not, I have no idea.

The creature is estimated to be 5’tall, which is why Thom may be saying it’s a juvey, as juveys are ~5′ tall. However, this creature has a very wide back, and I feel it is kneeling down. Even kneeling down, it is 5′ tall, so it may be much taller than 5′. For some reason, I feel this Bigfoot may be a female, but I am not sure as I am still developing a theory about gender differences in Bigfoots.

The original, shocking photo of a possible Bigfoot apparently kneeling in front of two human females sleeping on the ground. Note the vast width of the back and shoulders of the creature. This is probably a view of its back.

Recreation by Thom Cantrall, who is reportedly a big fellow, kneeling down. This shows that the creature is quite a bit taller and much wider than Thom, who is said to be a big guy.

Although Cantrall is a kook for sure, he can also be a very good researcher when he is not off in la-la land with his nutty paranormal theories. In this case, Thom is to be commended for the excellent job he did researching this photo.

I know little about Extreme Expeditions, but I have high hopes for them. They appear to be a professional, high class group that is doing some fine and careful research and staying above the Sasquatch Scuttlebutt. That’s what this stuff is all about – serious work, not endless feuding.

31 Comments

Filed under Americas, Animals, Apes, Bigfoot, California, Domestic, Horses, Mammals, North America, Northeast, Regional, USA, Washington, West, Wild

Last Word on the Aryan Migration Theory: More

I have added 12 more points to my original article. I will print them here since most will not go back and read the original article again. Some of you may find these additions interesting. As you can see, I have totally immersed myself in this debate over the past few weeks or so.

1. Archeoastronomy. OIT proponents like to push this theory. Supposedly, the positions of stars are mentioned in the Vedas. By analyzing the positions of stars in the Vedas, we can make claims about when the Vedas were written via tracking the movements of stars in ancient days.

However, archeoastronomy is a field in poor standing. All we can learn for sure from archeoastronomy is that the Vedas were written some time in the past 8,000 years. All else is up in the air.

The Indian astrophysicist Rajesh Kochhar has clearly mentioned that the astronomical data in the Vedas is not reliable.

2. The association of Andronovo culture with Indo-Iranians is controversial. So say the OIT proponents. This is not true.

Andronovo is a culture associated with the proto Indo-Iranians that stretched, in its formative location, around northern Kazakhstan and and west into Russia to near Samara, then down to the Caspian Sea, covering most of the northwest quadrant of Kazakhstan.

Later its borders enlarged.

At maximum, its northern boundary was from Samara in the Volga Basin east to Anzhero Sudzhensk northeast of Novosibersk in southern Siberia.

The eastern boundary bordered on the Afansevo Culture in eastern Kazakhstan, southern Siberia and Xinjiang. Andronovo did include part of Xinjiang in the far north where the Altai Mountains come down into China.

The eastern border then encompassed most of eastern Kazakhstran except the area east of Balquash Koli, moving down to the border with Kyrgyzstan in the south, encompassing most of Uzbekistan except the far south and the northern half of Turkmenistan all the way to the  southeastern shore of the Caspian Sea. The Aral Sea was the realm of the Andronovo People.

The relation of Andronovo to the Indo-Aryan people in particular, as opposed to Indo-Iranians in general, is more controversial, but has been suggested by some experts.

3. Chariots could not go over the Hindu Kush. Another OIT argument. But as noted above, the Aryans did not move down through the Hindu Kush; instead, they came east from the BMAC through northern Iran to Herat in west Afghanistan east to around Ghazni in east Afghanistan over to the Bannu region in the NWFP of Pakistan. That’s a much easier route than the Hindu Kush.

4. There was no invasion. The invasion scenario has been replaced in the past 40 years to a migration scenario. It seems more likely that instead of defeating the Dravidian people and pushing them to the south, or destroying the Indus Valley Civilization (IVC), instead the Aryans merely profited from the collapse of the IVC that was already underway.

5. There was no genocide of the Dravidian people; all Indians look alike genetically. No one ever said there was a genocide of the Dravidians by the Aryans. Instead, the Aryans moved in, and there was intermingling and intermarriage with the Dravidians, the combined result being the culture of the Vedas.

6. The linguistic evidence. The case for the AMT and the total non-case for the OIT is made by the linguistic evidence. Everything else is secondary. The case was clinched by Hock 1999 (see references).

7. Indians descend overwhelmingly from the Paleolithic population of India. It’s true that 80% of Indian genes go all the way back to the Paleolithic era. But 80% of European genes go all the way back to the Paleolithic too. Same in Britain. Therefore, Europe and Britain has never experienced any migrations of invasions in the past 10,000 years?

The Aryan genetic footprint on Indian genes, if it exists, is doubtless less than 10% of the total. It’s well known by now that the Aryans left language but few genes in India. Identifying genetic history with linguistic history is naive.

Keep in mind that the Aryans were probably installed as a superstrate over the existing Dravidian population. The Aryans were probably no more than 10-15% of the population genetically, and the remaining 85-90% were Dravidians.

8. How could the language of a more primitive people like the Aryans replace the language of the more civilized people, the IVC Dravidians? So ask the OIT theorists. However, let us note that Greek speakers in the Levant, Aramaic speakers in Mesopotamia, Coptic speakers in Egypt and Romans in northern Africa all got their languages replaced by the culturally inferior Bedouins of Arabia. This sort of thing happens all the time.

9. There is no solid proof an Aryan migration to India in archeological terms. This is true as far as it goes, but all it means that is that archeologists typically refuse to characterize migrations in terms of who is migrating where. While there is no archeological proof for an Aryan migration, there is also no proof for Greek, Germanic, Italic, Celtic or Armenian migrations in those branches of IE either.

10. The Rig Veda says that the Sarasvati River flows to the sea. According to OIT folks, since the river dried up 3900 YBP, if the Vedas discuss it flowing the sea, they must have been written before 4000 YBP. However, this statement is only in one sentence of the Vedas, and the word “sea” in question is actually samuda, which Sanskrit experts say can mean lots of things, but in this case means an inland sea or lake as formed by a river emptying into a desert. Which is what the Sarasvati did. The Sarasvati never emptied into the sea at any time.

11. Horses. OIT proponents keep claiming that they have found horse bones or evidence of horses on seals or objects at some early date. None of this has been confirmed, and some cases have involved overt fraud by Indian nationalist “scholars.” The earliest confirmed horse in the region is at Pirak 3800 YBP. Many horse remains have been found after that, but none earlier.

12. The AMT was invented by Max Muller in 1848. Muller was a British spy – agent – whatever who was sent by the British to falsify the history of India so the Indians would lose their national pride. Hence, the AMT is a British conspiracy. Yes, OIT supporters actually say this. The long version is that he was hired by the British East India Company as part of a nefarious plot to denigrate Hinduism.

First of all, the theory was not invented in 1848 nor was it invented by Muller, as it substantially predates 1848, and Muller was not the first to come up with it.

There is no evidence at all that the AMT was hatched as a British conspiracy (other popular theories say that the entire linguistic community was in on this conspiracy), nor has anyone offered any reason how the British could profit by making up the theory of a Bronze Age culture in India. Or why the British, who supposedly hated Indians and thought they were inferior, would invent a theory that said that Indians were in part related to the great British people.

References

Hock, Hans H. 1999. Out of India? The Linguistic Evidence. In: J. Bronkhorst & M. Deshpande, Aryan and Non-Aryan in South Asia: Evidence, Interpretation and Ideology, 1-18. Harvard Oriental Series. Opera Minora, Vol. 3. Cambridge, MA. 

Kochhar, Rajesh. 2000. The Vedic People: Their History and Geography. New Delhi: Sangam Books. 2000.

36 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, Animals, Anthropology, Antiquity, Asia, Asian, Britain, China, Culture, Domestic, East Indians, Ethnic Nationalism, Eurasia, Europe, Hinduism, History, Horses, India, Kazakhstan, Linguistics, Literature, Nationalism, Physical, Political Science, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Religion, Russia, Science, South Asia, South Asians, Uzbekistan

The Rapid Spread of a Great Idea

The spread of chariots in all directions from their birth in northwest Kazakhstan 4000 YBP.

Wow! Look at how fast a great idea spreads. The spoke-wheeled chariot was invented by the Indo-European (IE) people in NW Kazakhstan 2000 YBP. The culture was called the Andronovo culture and appears to be proto-Indo-Iranian. From there, next it goes to the BMAC in Turkmenistan only 200 years later.

Next, 3600 YBP, all the way to the coast of China, probably via the IE Tocharian people.

Then, 3500 YBP, to Swat in Pakistan, all the way through Iran to Anatolia and then all the way down through the Levant to Egypt!

Then, 3300 YBP, to Greece and all the way to northern Europe around southern Sweden, northern Germany, Denmark and Holland. Note that there were not yet any Germanic people in that area yet. I am not sure if the ancient Greeks were yet in Greece. They may have just arrived from parts unknown.

By 3200 YBP, they were in Punjab writing the Rig Veda.

By 2600 YBP, chariots had spread all the way to France and the lower half of Iberia.

By 2500 YBP, all the way to southern England.

Once you come up with a great idea, it spreads pretty fast!

The horse was domesticated on the Pontic Steppe about 6000 YBP. The Pontic Steppe extends about from Ukraine across southern Russia through the Volga Basin past the Urals and down into Northern Kazakhstan. This area is known as “the steppes.” The horse was not particularly important militarily for the next 2000 years.

However, the invention of the chariot suddenly made the horse very important for military reasons. Near Eastern empires show an intense interests in the chariot for this reason from 3800 YBP. It’s not often stated, but the chariot was probably one of the great military inventions of all time.

3 Comments

Filed under Africa, Ancient Greece, Animals, Antiquity, Asia, China, Culture, Domestic, Egypt, Eurasia, Europe, Greece, History, Horses, Iran, Kazakhstan, North Africa, Pakistan, Regional, Russia, South Asia

The Aryan Migration Theory: Last Word

It has been known for 150 years now that the Indo-Aryan languages came from outside of India. The evidence is overwhelming, primarily linguistic, but there is also some archeological evidence. In scholarly circles, there is no debate on the Aryan Migration Theory (AMT) and there has been little debate for 150 years. It is only among Indian nationalists and a few hacks and kooks that it is not accepted.

1. There is a substrate of a language that looks like a Munda language in the Rig Vedas. A Munda language was probably spoken in the Punjab when the Aryans migrated there. About 4% of the words in Rig Vedas are these early Munda loans. None of these Munda loans are found outside of Indic.

They would be found all through IE if the Out of India Theory (OIT) was true. The OIT holds that Aryans inhabited North India for 8,000 years, all the while the Dravidians were in South India and Munda tongues were in East India. Obviously, the Aryans came into Punjab and there mass language shift from a Munda language to Indo-Aryan (IA). The language shift is evident in the sparse Munda loans into Vedic Sanskrit.

There are also a few place names left in North India from the original Munda language of the Greater Punjab area. There are some river names left in Eastern Punjab and Haryana where the local Indus Valley Civilization (IVC) continued for some time after the arrival of the Aryans. These names would not be there if the OIT was true.

There are a large number of IA words for local plants and animals and for agriculture that have been borrowed from the Munda language of Punjab. There would be no reason for the IA people to borrow these terms if the IA people were native to Punjab. Instead, this borrowing is precisely what we would expect to see when pastoralists from Central Asia move into the tropics, encounter new plants and animals and start farming – they borrow the terms for these new living things and technologies from the locals.

This is particularly so in the case of farming, which was left to the local people – the Sudra caste. The IA people only brought a few farming related words with them from Central Asia – the remainder were borrowed from the new locals.

40% of Hindi agricultural words still derive from an unknown pre-Munda language of the Indo-Ganges Plains. Nahali, a small language in Madhya Pradesh, at successively lower levels of its vocabulary, displays high levels of borrowing from earlier tongues. 36% of vocabulary is of Kurku (Munda) origin and 9% is Dravidian. At the oldest level, 24% have no cognates in any known language and appear to have derived from the oldest language known from India.

2. There is an old set of shared loans between proto-Indo-Aryan and proto-Iranian for a number of agricultural and other cultural items that appeared in the Bactria-Margiana (BMAC) 3700-4200 YBP. The BMAC is located more or less in present day Turkmenistan. Obviously, these shared loans were picked up by the proto-Indo-Iranian people as they moved down from the steppes of Kazakhstan and Russia into the BMAC, conquering the people who lived there.

There are references in the Rig Vedas to the conquest of the BMAC peoples by the Arya. For this sequence of events to have occurred, the Indo-Aryans would have had to have moved through the BMAC during this time period and later moved into Iran and India, not the other way around. The language of the loans is not known, but it is apparently the language of the BMAC people.

So there is a BMAC or Central Asian substrate in Indo-Iranian. A possible guess for the language of the BMAC people might be a relative of the Burushaski language of northern Pakistan.

The substrate of the Rig Vedas is a Munda language. The substrate of the earlier Proto-Indo-Iranian language is the language of the BMAC. This sequence is not possible under the OIT and is only possible under the AMT.

3. There are early Indo-Aryan loans into the Caucasian language of the Mittani, who lived in northern Iraq and Syria. These loans are dated to ~3400 YBP. These loans are from an earlier form of Indo-Aryan than is used in the Vedas. Therefore, the Vedas must have been composed 3000-3500 YBP and could not have been composed any earlier.

Also, the Mittani could not possibly have come out of India as the OIT demands, since the IA loans do not show any Indic influences. Nor could the loans have come from Iran, as there are numerous IA Gods in the Mittani texts who are marginalized or do not exist in Iran. The loans must have come from somewhere else, apparently the north.

4. We have numerous references in the Vedas to battles between the Arya with their stone forts, metals, horses and chariots against the more sedentary peoples living in South Asia at the time.

5. There are pottery shards in the BMAC that resemble that shards found in the steppe culture to the north. This indicates that there is cultural resemblance between the two cultures. The suggestion is that the shards are Indo-Aryan and appear first on the steppes and then again in the BMAC with its conquest by the Aryans.

6. The chariot appears in the Urals 4000 YBP and then spreads rapidly in many directions with the spread of IE languages, to Europe, to China via the Tocharians and of course to India and Iran via the Aryans. The horse also appears in South Asia (Pakistan) 3700 YBP in conjunction with the chariots. The modern horse is not native to South Asia, so obviously it came from outside, obviously from the Aryans. The indigenous horse of South Asia, the Siwalik horse, was long since extinct.

7. There are specific Punjabi and Uttar Pradesh loans in Vedic Indic that are not found in Iranian. Therefore, Iranian could not possibly have come from Indic as the OIT demands. The languages must have split in the BMAC, one line going to Iran and another line going to India.

8. The Soma ritual originates in the high mountains of Central Asia  – the mountains of Iran, the Himalayas and the Pamirs – with the proto-Indo-Iranian peoples. The original name for the plant is a Central Asian term amsu . This term is borrowed into Indo-Iranian and eventually becomes soma, etc. Later, it moves down into Iran and India and appears in the Vedas. Therefore, the Aryans brought the Soma ritual with them from Central Asia to Iran and India.

9. There is tremendous evidence for a common Indo-Iranian language, mythology and ritual. This shared heritage is not possible with the OIT. It is only possible if there was an Indo-Iranian people, who then split into the Iranian and Indic branches.

10. The Vedic branch of IA becomes innovated and Indianized (in particular, the retroflex consonants) after its arrival in Punjab, while the Iranian branch escapes this development because it did not enter the subcontinent then. In addition, Iranian lacks any specific Indic terms. According to the OIT, the Iranian branch must be Indianized too, or else all of the Indic terms were somehow lost in Iranian.

Since it is not, both branches came from outside India, to the northwest. Iranian languages cannot possibly have come from the Punjab. An early date for Iranian to leave India is preposterous, and Old Iranian (Avestan) is too archaic to have left India after the Vedas. All this means that Iranian and Indic must have split before the Vedas and thus, not inside India. The OIT for Iranian lies in ruins.

11. Zero specifically Indic words are found in IE languages outside of India. For the OIT to be correct, many Indic terms should be found in all the other branches of IE. After all, the Gypsies left India 1000 years ago and took a large specifically Indic set of terms with them to Europe and beyond.

12. Retroflexion. According to the OIT, all branches of IE would have had to have lost their retroflexion after they left India. How likely is that? What we do find, though, is that those branches of Iranian which move east to abut the Indic languages do acquire retroflexion. Since retroflexion is in general not present outside Indic or languages abutting Indic, it must be a late development in IE specific to Indic and cannot have been part of the original IE language as required by the OIT.

Retroflexion only effects those moving into the Indic plain and the eastern Iranian lands, but everyone moving out of South Asia somehow loses it. This does not make sense.

13. Chariots. For the OIT to make sense, chariots must be exported from India 7,000 YBP. However, chariots only appear 4000 YBP in the Urals and NW Kazakhstan and from there spread from Ukraine to Mongolia. The western IE languages retain an IE root rotho for wheel because they had already moved away before the chariot had actually been developed in the Urals. Everyone to the east uses the IA form ratha. This could only be the case if the IA languages moved south from Urals.

Further, according to the OIT, chariots that appear in the Rig Vedas must show up in the text before they have even been invented. Linguistics shows that the word must have been innovated in proto IA at the Urals, for it is present in both branches of IA. This word, along with its invention, can be proved to have been innovated in the steppes and and then carried into India and vice versa could not possibly be the case.

14. Lack of tropical core vocabulary in IE. The core vocabulary of IE shows that the IE homeland was a temperate or even cold place. The plants and animals in the IE language include such cold weather animals, plants and weather words as the otter, beaver, wolf, bear, lynx, salmon, elk, red deer, hare, hedgehog, mouse, birch, willow, elm, fir, ash, oak, beech, juniper, poplar, apple, maple, alder, hazel, nut, linden, hornbeam, and cherry in addition to snow.

A few of these are found in South Asia, but most are not. There are no specific Indic plant and animal names found outside of India, even where these plants do occur outside of India. The OIT would assume retention of at least some of these terms, would it not? Instead, what we find is that a few core IE terms are modified inside India to apply to new plants and animals.

For instance, IE beaver bheber is adopted for the mongoose in South Asia, since beavers do not exist there. IE willow becomes reed, cane in India. So we see that IE temperate plant and animal terms are adopted for the newly encountered tropical living things in India. The flow is into India, not out of India.

For the OIT to be right, the IE languages would have had to have coined these terms after they left India. However, this is not what happened. Instead, the words were IE words from the core IE language itself, which, according to the OIT, was only spoken in India. But these plant and animal names could not possibly have been created in India because most don’t even exist there.

For the OIT to be correct, IE core vocabulary should indicate a tropical climate.

15. Early loans in very early IE. The earliest loans in IE are from Semitic languages of the Middle East. This is possible with an IE homeland in SW Russia or Anatolia, but not possible if the IE homeland is in India, as the OIT requires.

16. Typological features of IE. The typological features of IE are between Kartvelian in Georgia and Uralic in the Urals, as we would expect with an IE homeland in SW Russia, and unlikely with an IE homeland in India.

17. Skeletons. Where are the Indian bones? The OIT requires not a trickling out of India, but a massive migration out of the Punjab. Yet Indian bones look remarkably different from Middle Eastern and European bones. With the massive migration out of India required by the OIT, we should find Indian bones in all of the branches of IE. One would have to argue that the IE speakers who left India did not look like the rest of the Indian people.

18. Facial characteristics. DNA analyses of burials in the Kurgan area near the IE homeland 6000 YBP shows that 60% of the early IE people there had light hair and green or blue eyes. How many Indians, even North Indians, have light hair and light eyes? Almost none. Clearly, the Kurgan peoples were a European type of people. They moved down into Iran and India and mixed with the darker folks already there, creating the present day swarthy peoples of South and Central Asia.

19. Very early Proto IA loans in Finno-Ugric. The homeland of the Finno-Ugric people is somewhere in the Urals. The homeland of the Proto Indo-Aryan people is also somewhere in Urals, especially at the very southern end. The only way for these early PIA loans to get into Finno-Ugric is if the PIA homeland is in the Urals. It’s not possible with the OIT, which generally makes a separate Indo-Aryan branch impossible anyway.

20. Vedic is later than Hittite. For the OIT to be correct, Vedic must be the most ancient branch of IE of them all, very close to Proto IE itself. Yet Hittite, attested from 4000 YBP, is earlier than Vedic. In fact, it is later than Eastern IE, Proto IA, and even pre-Vedic, so Vedic must be a fairly late development in IE. In fact, Vedic is even later than the early forms present in Mittani 3400 YBP.

21. Sanskrit is the most ancient language in all of IE and looks a lot like the original IE language. This is the OIT claim. In fact, IE does not look much like Sanskrit at all. And Sanskrit is not even the oldest attested IA language. Vedic comes first, then Epic Sanskrit and then Classical Sanskrit, and Vedic itself cannot possibly be older than 3500 YBP. The IE language is dated to 6500-8000 YBP (I favor the earlier date). Epic Sanskrit appears only 2500 YBP and Classical Sanskrit comes even later.

22. Lack of IA archeological sites. This is a classic OIT argument. Actually, we do have quite a few site. From the original Proto-Indo-Iranian sites in Sintashta southeast of Urals to the BMAC in Turkmenistan to the Yaz Culture in northeast Iran to the Swat Culture in the Swat Valley of Pakistan to the Cemetery H Culture in Punjab to the Copper Hoard Culture to the south, to the Painted Grey Ware Culture to the south and east, we have a long stretch of cultures that have long been associated with the AMT by archeologists.

Cemetery H in particular shows a possible move away from IVC culture. While the pottery is of course the same, there is a new design on the pottery. On funeral urns we see a small picture of a man with a bird inside of him. This seems to indicate the Vedic belief that the souls of men could fly like birds. Cemetery H also shows a new burial style – cremation and deposit of remains in burial urns. These changes in culture are probably due to Aryan influence.

The ideal Aryan archeological site, however, has typically not yet been found. The ideal site would have the remains of horses and their furnishings, chariots, A Vedic ritual site with three fireplaces west of a river, a flimsy and primitive building pattern of bamboo huts, tools made of stone, copper and bronze, gold and silver ornaments, food consisting of barley, milk products and the meat of cows, sheep and goats. However, the pottery style would remain local, as the Aryans did not innovate pottery.

Such a site has continued to elude searchers, but one has been found in Swat. Swat is mentioned in the Vedas as Aryan territory – suvastu.

23. No Aryan bones. Another OIT argument. It’s quite common for migrations to not be represented by skeletal remains. The remains of the Huns, a large force of proven invaders who conquered Hungary have only just been found in the past 20 years. The most recent research indicates that the Aryans left language, but few genes, in India.

This is reasonable and is often the case with many migrations and invasions. The Huns left as little genetic imprint on the Hungarians as the IA people did on Indians. The Magyars also left their language in the Danube, as the IA people left their IA language in India.

24. European appearance of Indo-Iranian peoples. There is no getting around it. The speakers of Indo-Iranian (II)languages often look strikingly European. This is particularly the case of Iranians, who consider themselves White, or Europeans outside of Europe. The speakers of II languages in Afghanistan often look very European. People in northern Pakistan are some of the most European looking people in the region. Punjabis often look very European, and they look much different from the South Indians to the south.

For the OIT to be correct, this should not be the case. All across the region, all II speakers should look like South Indians, and so should the Punjabis of North India. That II speakers look so European is evidence that they are partly descended from the very European looking peoples of the Kurgan culture of southern Russia. They moved south and east into Central and South Asia, bred in with darker locals, but still retain a strong resemblance to their European roots.

25. LANDSTAT photos indicate the drying up of the Sarasvati River 3900 YBP. A stable of the OIT argument. Since the Sarasvati is mentioned as “the great river” in the Vedas, this proves that the Vedas are much older than 4000 YBP, despite the copious linguistic evidence. The problem is that LANDSTAT photos cannot indicate geographic times.

Further, the Sarasvati River situation is very tricky. The situation as represented in the Vedas is the same situation as exists today. The upper Sarasvati is a significant river, and this is where the settlements were. The lower Sarasvati had already begun to dry up, and by the time of the Vedas it emptied into an inland lake. In a few places, the lower river goes underground in the alluvial Punjabi plains and disappears.

Archeological investigation indicates that settlements along the lower river were abandoned as the river dried up around this time. As you can see, the “Sarasvati River dried up” meme is a huge red herring.

26. No memories of an Aryan migration. Another OIT line. First of all, it is quite typical of most people to have no memories or false memories of wherever they came from. The Romans said they came from Greece. The Gypsies say they came from Egypt.

However, the Vedas do contain vague references to former habitations, such as what appears to be the BMAC and there are references to journeys over mountains and mountain passes. Many place names in Afghanistan are from proto-II words from Central Asia and often lead back to ancient Central Asian enemies of the Arya referred to in the Vedas. One of these is the Parni, associated with the BMAC and later with a northern Iranian group. They had stone forts and well-built cow stables in northern Iran that look a lot like earlier BMAC structures.

The route of migration did not take place over the high passes of the Himalayas and the Pamirs. Few groups have migrated over these treacherous mountains in the last 2000 years. Instead, the migration went from the BMAC down through northern Iran to Herat in West Afghanistan to the Gomal River in near Ghazni in East Afghanistan to the Swat Valley.

There are frequent references in the Vedas to southward and eastward movements of various groups of Arya. There are no references to westward groups as would be required by the OIT. Some of these movements to the south and east are described in military terms as victorious conquests. There are also references in the late Vedas of movements of the Arya east from the Afghan/Pakistan border to Haryana, Uttar Pradesh and all the way to Bihar.

27. Archeoastronomy. OIT proponents like to push this theory. Supposedly, the positions of stars are mentioned in the Vedas. By analyzing the positions of stars in the Vedas, we can make claims about when the Vedas were written via tracking the movements of stars in ancient days.

However, archeoastronomy is a field in poor standing. All we can learn for sure from archeoastronomy is that the Vedas were written some time in the past 8,000 years. All else is up in the air.

The Indian Astrophysicist Rajesh Kochhar has clearly mentioned that the astronomical data in the Vedas is not reliable.

28. The association of Andronovo culture with Indo-Iranians is controversial. So say the OIT proponents. This is not true.

Andronovo is a culture associated with the proto Indo-Iranians that stretched, in its formative location, around northern Kazakhstan and and west into Russia to near Samara, then down to the Caspian Sea, covering most of the northwest quadrant of Kazakhstan.

Later its borders enlarged. At maximum, its northern boundary was from Samara in the Volga Basin east to Anzhero Sudzhensk northeast of Novosibersk in southern Siberia.

The eastern boundary bordered on the Afansevo Culture in eastern Kazakhstan, southern Siberia and Xinjiang. Andronovo did include part of Xinjiang in the far north where the Altai Mountains come down.

The eastern border then encompassed most of eastern Kazakhstran except the area east of Balquash Koli, moving down to the border with Kyrgyzstan in the south, encompassing most of Uzbekistan except the far south, the northern half of Turkmenistan all the way to the the southeastern shore of the Caspian Sea. The Aral Sea was the realm of the Andronovo People.

The relation of Andronovo to the Indo-Aryan people in particular, as opposed to Indo-Iranians in general, is more controversial, but has been suggested by some experts.

29. Chariots could not go over the Hindu Kush. Another OIT argument. But as noted above, the Aryans did not move down through the Hindu Kush; instead, they came east from the BMAC through northern Iran to Herat in west Afghanistan east to around Ghazni over to the Bannu region in the NWFP of Pakistan. That’s a much easier route than the Hindu Kush.

30. There was no invasion. The invasion scenario has been replaced in the past 40 years to a migration scenario. It seems more likely that instead of defeating the Dravidian people and pushing them to the south, or destroying the IVC, instead the Aryans merely profited from the collapse of the IVC that was already underway.

31. There was no genocide of the Dravidian people, all Indians look alike genetically. No one ever said there was a genocide of the Dravidians by the Aryans. Instead, the Aryans moved in, and there was intermingling and intermarriage with the Dravidians, the combined result being the culture of the Vedas.

32. The linguistic evidence. The case for the AMT and the total non-case for the OIT is made by the linguistic evidence. Everything else is secondary. The case was clinched by Hock 1999 (see references).

33. Indians descend overwhelmingly from the Paleolithic population of India. It’s true that 80% of Indian genes go all the way back to the Paleolithic era. But 80% of European genes go all the way back to the Paleolithic too. Same in Britain. Therefore, Europe and Britain has never experienced any migrations of invasions in the past 10,000 years. The Aryan genetic footprint on Indian genes, if it exists, is doubtless less than 10% of the total. It’s well known by now that the Aryans left language, but few genes, in India. Identifying genetic history with linguistic history is naive.

Keep in mind that the Aryans were probably installed a superstrate over the existing Dravidian population. The Aryans were probably no more than 10-15% of the population genetically, and the remaining 85-90% were Dravidians.

34. How could a more primitive people like the Aryans replace the language of the more civilized people, the IVC Dravidians? So ask the OIT theorists. However, let us note that Greek speakers in the Levant, Aramaic speakers in Mesopotamia, Coptic speakers in Egypt and Romans in northern Africa all got their languages replaced by the culturally inferior Bedouins of Arabia. This sort of thing happens all the time.

35. There is no solid proof an Aryan migration to India in archeological terms. This is true as far as it goes, but all it means that is that archeologists typically refuse to characterize migrations in terms of who is migrating where. While there is no archeological proof for an Aryan migration, there is also no proof for Greek, Germanic, Italic, Celtic or Armenian migrations in those branches of IE either.

36. The Rig Veda says that the Sarasvati River flows to the sea. According to OIT folks, since the river dried up 3900 YBP, if the Vedas discuss it flowing the sea, they must have been written before 4000 YBP. However, this statement is only in one sentence of the Vedas, and the word “sea” in question is actually samuda, which Sanskrit experts say can mean lots of thing, but in this case means and inland sea or lake as formed by a river emptying into a desert. Which is what the Sarasvati did. The Sarasvati never emptied into the sea at any time.

37. Horses. OIT proponents keep claiming that they have found horse bones or evidence of horses on seals or objects at some early date. None of this has been confirmed, and some cases have involved overt fraud by Indian nationalist “scholars.” The earliest confirmed horse in the region is at Pirak 3800 YBP. Many horse remains have been found after that, but none earlier.

38. The AMT was invented by Max Muller in 1848. Muller as a British spy – agent – whatever who was sent by the British to falsify the history of India so the Indians would lose their national pride. Hence, the AMT is a British conspiracy. Yes, OIT supporters actually say this. The long version is that he was hired by the British East India Company as part of a nefarious plot to denigrate Hinduism.

First of all, the theory was not invented in 1848 nor was it invented by Muller, as it substantially predates 1848 and Muller was not the first to come up with it.

There is no evidence at all that the AMT was hatched as a British conspiracy (other popular theories say that the entire linguistic community was in on this conspiracy), nor has anyone offered any reason how or why the British could profit by making up the theory of a Bronze Age culture in India. Or why the British, who supposedly hated Indians and thought they were inferior, would invent a theory that said that Indians were in part related to the great British people.

References

Hock, Hans H. 1999. Out of India? The Linguistic Evidence. In: J. Bronkhorst & M. Deshpande, Aryan and Non-Aryan in South Asia: Evidence, Interpretation and Ideology, 1-18. Harvard Oriental Series. Opera Minora, Vol. 3. Cambridge, MA. 

Kochhar, Rajesh. 2000. The Vedic People: Their History and Geography. New Delhi: Sangam Books. 2000.

225 Comments

Filed under Animals, Anthropology, Asia, China, Domestic, East Indians, Eurasia, Europe, Europeans, Finno-Ugric Languages, Horses, India, Indic, Indo-European, Indo-Hittite, Indo-Iranian, Indo-Irano-Armenian, Indo-Irano-Armeno-Hellenic, Iran, Kazakhstan, Language Families, Linguistics, Literature, Pakistan, Physical, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Roma, Russia, Sanskrit, Scholarship, South Asia, South Asians, Wild

More Out of India Madness

We continue to have crazies coming here proposing the OIT (Out of India Theory) of Indo-European. The theory is a pitiful joke and has virtually no support among any mainstream academics. In fact, it is so ludicrous that the mainstream does not even bother to respond to the respond to the arguments, because they are deemed not worthy of response.

What is sad, and frightening, is that almost every intelligent or intellectual Indian I have ever met is a fervent supporter of the OIT. They have all the arguments down pat, and they roll them right out for you. Supporting the OIT goes along with opposition to the Aryan Migration Theory (AMT) which the Indians hate. The idea is that “our history came from the White man.”

Indians hate Whites, mostly due to British colonialism, so the idea that the White man came to India and gave them quite a bit of their civilization and their religion is resisted ferociously.

What’s pitiful is that the smartest Indians believe the most insane and stupid things. There is something deeply sick and wrong with Indians, and Indian nationalism and Hindu nationalism are exemplary of that sickness. As with all fanatic nationalisms, Indian nationalism stems from deep-seated feelings of inferiority. This sense of inferiority was magnified by colonialism.

In recent years, the rejection has spread to all things Western. I know an Indian man who almost refuses to patronize Western medicine, I suppose because it is the medicine of the White man. Instead, he believes in some weirdness called Ayurvedic medicine. His fury and hatred towards Western medicine is shocking to behold.

Nevertheless, their ridiculous arguments must be refuted, because they have so much support inside India, along with some support outside of India.

That they have support outside India can be seen in the comments of Sojournertroof in the comments section. This fellow is an anti-White White man. He supports the OIT simply because it is anti-White, that is, the OIT is in opposition to the AMT which is seen as a pro-White theory.

Hydrology. Much of the OIT is based, believe it or not, on hydrology. It is true that rivers in the north of India all have Indo-Aryan names, not Dravidian or Munda names. Dravidian and Munda were the language families spoken in India before the arrival of the Indo-Aryans. The idea is that since the Indo-Aryans were migrants, some of the earlier names should have been retained. Since they were not, obviously, the Aryans must have been indigenous to India.

What must have occurred was total replacement of the earlier names with new names for the rivers. As language replacement in North India was total (all North Indians speak Indo-Aryan languages) apparently they changed the old names of the rivers to new Indo-Aryan names.

The Sarasvati River. This is one of their favorite arguments. The argument goes something along the lines that this river existed 6000 YBP, and therefore the OIT is correct.

No one quite knows what river we are referring to here. The Sarasvati appears to be two rivers. The earliest Rigveda references are probably to the Helmand River in Afghanistan. Later references are to the Ghaggar River. But the Sarasvati is always this sort of mystical unseen river in the Rigveda. It became fuzzy and mystical early on. So all arguments about the Sarasvati are null and void anyway.

The OIT is counterintuitive. Exactly what evidence is there that IE speakers left India, moving north towards the steppes 6500 YBP, then moved to Persia 5000 YBP, then moved to Arabia and Anatolia 4000 YBP? Yet somehow it took them a full 2,500 years to even cross the Ural River. The theory is insane.

After much debate, in the 1990’s, the Journal of Indo-European Studies (JIES) granted the OIT folks a chance to show their stuff. The issue was so contentious that JIES had to void peer review in order to publish the issue, which was authored by an OIT proponent named Kazanas. Kazanas is a crank operating out of Greece who has picked up on the OIT. In the next two issues of JIES, Kazanas was utterly demolished, and the matter has not come up again.

Lack of memories of an Urheimat. An Urheimat is a homeland. The homeland of the Indo-Aryans is in the north, on the steppes of Russia. Yet there is a lack of legends of memories of this homeland or any migration, so this is said to be evidence that there was no AMT. However, most peoples lack memories of their migrations from wherever they came from to wherever they ended up. This is true even in Europe. The Greeks had no memories of any immigration to their lands, though they clearly came from somewhere.

Nevertheless, Harvard professor and Sanskrit expert Michael Witzel notes:

It has frequently been denied that the Rig Veda contains any memory or information about the former homeland(s) of the Indo-Aryans. […] However, in the RV there are quite a few vague reminiscences of former habitats, that is, of the Bactria-Margiana area, situated to the north of Iran and Afghanistan, and even from further afield.

Such a connection can be detected in the retention by the Iranians of Indo-Aryan river names and in the many references in the RV to mountains and mountain passes.

Also, there are some sources in the Vedas or in the Gathas that point toward a migration of the Indo-Iranians from Central Asia, including the Zend Avesta – Vendidad: Fargard 1:

“…There (Airyanem Vaejah – “Land of the Aryans”) are ten winter months there, two summer months; and those are cold for the waters, cold for the earth, cold for the trees…”

That is a description of the cold steppes of Central Asia. There are also descriptions of warfare being waged by the semi-nomadic Vedic and Avestan populations against urbanized people who were not “Arya.”

The sequence of the AMT was as follows: The speakers of the linguistically slightly later, though still pre-Iron Age Indo-Aryan language, then moved into Arachosia (*Sarasvatī > Avestan Hara aitī), Swat (Suvåstu) and Punjab (Sapta Sindhu), before 3200-3000 YBP – depending on the local date of the introduction of iron.

We can trace the movements of the AMT by the introduction of iron, that is, they brought metals with them, in particular iron smelting technology. They also brought stone forts, chariots and horses. We can trace all of these things in the archeological record and they are powerful evidence for the AMT.

Recently, Armenians have come out with an Armenian Theory of Indo-European which states that Armenia was the homeland of Indo-European. It is almost universally rejected, yet pitifully it has much more support for it than there is for the OIT.

Genetic evidence. One of the major R1 clades, R1a1, associated with Indo-European, has indeed been traced back to India. However, this is not evidence for the OIT, since this clade goes back to 18,000 YBP, long before IE existed into far pre-IE times. Long after the clade was birthed, some members of the clade left India to go towards Europe and the steppes, where they became the IE peoples. There is a lot of debate going on now about R1a1, but none of the points being debated detract from the theory of Bronze Age Indo-Aryans moving into India.

There are also reports that there are little to no Central Asian genes in Indians, that is, there are few if any genetic markers of Aryan migration. Yet many invasions leave no genetic trace later on, and genetics generally gives little to no support for or against prehistoric migrations. It’s quite common. For instance, there is no trace of Italian genes in the British, but does this prove that there was no Roman invasion? Clearly, there was a Roman invasion.

There are also few to no Central Asian genes in Europeans either, but Europeans speak IE languages, and these languages came out of the steppes. By the way, there are also no South Asian genes in Europeans. We should expect some of those if OIT is correct, no?

Anthropomorphic evidence. What do IE speakers look like? They look like Europeans. Even the IE speakers in Central and South Asia look quite European. Afghans, Pakistanis, Iranians and North Indians look strikingly European. This is because of their IE roots. The IE people were an European/Caucasoid appearing people. Notice the striking difference in appearance between North Indians and South Indians or Dravidians.

If IE speakers all came out of India and moved to Europe, everyone should look like people from India. But this is not the case. Even Iranians don’t look like people from India. No one does. Only people from India look like Indians.

There is indeed a Dravidian substrate in Indo-Aryan, which is what would be expected if Dravidian speakers gave up speaking Dravidian and started speaking Indo-Aryan. It’s true that there are few Dravidian loans, and the substrate cannot be seen in hydrology. But the substrate is nevertheless clear, as is influence on Indo-Aryan from Munda languages.

Thomason and Kaufman note that the substrate looks like what we would expect in the case of language shift, and language shift is what occurred as Dravidian speakers shifted to Indo-Aryan. The Dravidian speakers appear to have shifted to Indo-Aryan yet retained their Dravidian accent.

Among IE tongues, only Indo-Aryan has a full set of phonemic contrasting retroflex consonants. Dravidian also has a full set of phonemic contrasting retroflex consonants dating all the way back to proto-Dravidian. Obviously, this set was borrowed from Dravidian into Indo-Aryan.

In terms of Dravidian loans, there are in fact some:

Parpola writes:

…numerous loanwords and even structural borrowings from Dravidian have been identified in Sanskrit texts composed in northwestern India at the end of the second and first half of the first millennium BCE, before any intensive contact between North and South India. External evidence thus suggests that the Harappans most probably spoke a Dravidian language.

Mallory:

The most obvious explanation of this situation is that the Dravidian languages once occupied nearly all of the Indian subcontinent, and it is the intrusion of Indo-Aryans that engulfed them in north India leaving but a few isolated enclaves.

Zero evidence of Munda and Dravidian influence in the rest of IE. If IE came out of India, all IE languages should show influence of Munda and Dravidian. Instead, only Indo-Aryan does. Therefore, Indo-Aryan moved into India and came in contact with Munda and Dravidian, and IE could not possibly have come out of India.

No accounting for IE once out of India. The OIT is great at talking about the Indian origin of IE, but is terrible at anything outside of that. There is no account of models of language development of IE after leaving India, or how IE is supposed to have spread elsewhere. Once IE is out of India, the OIT folks forget about their theory. It’s crazy.

Timeframes in the Rigveda. There is no reliable historical dating of anything in India prior to the 1500’s. So all Indian texts prior to that time must be treated very dubiously in terms of dating. There is no way to date anything in the Rigveda reliably, since the Rigveda uses no reliable method for dating.

Hindu culture is strongly ahistoric. It is not interested in dates and events. The fact that Hindu culture is so hostile to history itself and so lacking any sense of history is what opens up this whole field for debate. Hindus simply lack the ability to imagine that there is such a thing as historical change.

Archeoastronomy. This is a very dubious field. B. B. Lal uses archeoastronomy in an effort to buttress his OIT. However, the use of this method is treacherous. The model attempts to date astronomical events on the basis of astronomical calculations and is rife with error and speculation. Nevertheless, there are archeoastonomical journals. Lal’s theory has never been submitted to or discussed in any of these journals, therefore the validity of his claims is dubious. Even Lal notes that his theory is widely discredited.

The Bangani language. This language is referred to nowadays as Garhwali. Claus Peter Zoller claimed to have found Centum elements in Garhwali, which if true, would boost the OIT. Centum is part of the Satem-Centum split in IE that occurred about 4000 YBP with the splitoff of Indo-Aryan from the rest of IE. The split occurred on the steppes of Central Asia. Zoller made his claim eight years ago. No one believed him at the time, and that’s where the debate stands.

It appears that what he found instead dates from the Indo-Greek or Kushan periods of Indian history and has somehow persisted for about 2,000 years. That’s remarkable if true, but in no way does it support OIT. At any rate, most scholars don’t even believe that there is any Centum left in Garhwali, and most who do are fringe cases. Bangani-Centum is discredited and lies in ruins.

Occam’s Razor. OIT is so complex. India is a marginal area of IE distribution, not a central area. The main area of IE languages, with the greatest variety, is in Europe, especially southeastern Europe. This is obviously the linguistic center of gravity for IE. If OIT was true, we would not expect India to be such a marginal territory for IE languages.

OIT requires more and longer migrations than the standard theory in order for all of the branches to leave India. It requires a much more complex chronology in terms of isoglosses and archeology. The archaic shared isoglosses such as Satem/Centum are in Central Asia. Further, it requires the re-invention of the chariot by Indians, since they could not have acquired the Aryan chariot from Aryan migrants.

It requires all sorts of complex arguments of internal Indo-Aryan development to explain what appears to be substrate influence from Dravidian. In addition, all of this internal mess must have occurred in a short period of time – from the time between when the last Indic group left India to the beginning of the writing of the Rigveda. In contrast, the Dravidian substrate theory is much simpler.

The Kurgan theory is better. The Kurgan people fit the accepted time frame, expand their territory archeologically with time and have the basic cultural patterns of an IE people close to the center of linguistic diversity. Therefore, the Kurgan theory fits the IE model much better than OIT.

OIT requires an early dating of the Rigveda. The Rigveda is the ultimate book of Hindu literature. OIT proponents take the Rigveda back as far as 6000 years, but this is not possible, as the split between Indic and the rest of Indo-Aryan happened no earlier than 4000 years ago, even according to OIT. Furthermore, such an ancient date for the Vedas would have to reflect a Stone Age society, and the Vedas do not reflect that. The Rigveda cannot possibly be dated further back than 3,500-4000 YBP.

OIT seems to require a 7000 YBP date for the Rigveda. This is beyond the realm of possibility. Chariots? Horses? Stone forts? Metals? The culture of the early Rigveda is 2nd millennium BCE – 3,000-4,000 YBP. The Bronze Age. It’s as clear as air.

Vedic is much older than Hittite. This is a central claim of OIT folks and is necessary for their argument. It’s patently ridiculous.

Sanskrit is archaic. So what? So are Greek and Hittite, and none date back but a few thousand years. Ancient traits in IE are most commonly observed in Baltic and Hittite. Do IE reconstructions appear Vedic? Not at all. PIE look nothing like Vedic.

Horses. Horses are not indigenous to India. Horses are often seen on Vedic Aryan seals dating back 2,500-3,000 YBP. Obviously, horses, along with iron, came with the Aryan migrants.

PIE culture. The reconstructed PIE language does not fit with India. It fits with a much colder place, probably to the north of India on the steppes. India had a highly civilized culture before the arrival of the Aryans – these were the Dravidians. The PIE people did not have a highly civilized culture – instead, they were nomads, pastoralists and horse-riding warriors.

For OIT to be correct, the highly civilized Indians would have had to have lost the civilization and degenerated into a less civilized nomadic culture without writing or architecture (they lost their writing and architecture with the move to the steppes) after they left India, which then went to Europe.

This does not follow according to history. Less civilized cultures develop into more civilized ones and not the other way around. According the standard theory, less civilized Aryans contacted more civilized Dravidians and the result was Indian high culture – the Aryans went from a less civilized stage to a more civilized one, as we expect.

Early dates for Indo-Aryan don’t prove OIT. Early dates for Indo-Aryan are compatible with standard theories of IE development. The Anatolian homeland theory, which I subscribe to, pushes Indo-Aryan back to 4,600 YBP, which seems a stretch. Renfrew pushes Proto-Indo-Aryan all the way back to 5,000 YBP.

Red herrings. OIT proponents have all sorts of red herrings about the AMT. One of them is “there was no Aryan invasion.” But AMT proponents have abandoned the invasion theory a long time ago. Another is that there is no way that inferior horse-riding nomads of the steppes could have create the wonderfully complex language of Sanskrit, the Vedas, complex Indian culture, etc.

First of all, cultural complexity and linguistic complexity are not the same thing. Uncivilized peoples can speak very complex languages. Anyway, nomads did not bring fully-formed Sanskrit to India. Sanskrit, the Vedas, Hinduism, etc. were created in India by the confluence between Aryans and Dravidians.

This is a frankly racist argument anyway – that Central Asians were too stupid to create the great Indian culture – only wonderful Indians could do that. There is also a racist assumption that Sanskrit is better than other languages – or that it is the greatest language of all.

Physical anthropology. Skeletons look similar all over India for many thousands of years, so there is no evidence of an Aryan migration. Skeletons look similar all over Europe for thousands of years too. Continuity is typical in anthropology.

Northern Dravidian. There are isolated pockets of Dravidian speakers in the northern part of South Asia. These are obviously the remnants of a large area in northern South Asia that was entirely Dravidian speaking. Indo-Aryan speakers moved in, and there was mass language shift except for a few pockets here and there, the lingering pockets being just as we would expect in the case of mass language shift.

Horses. Horses have long been associated with IE societies, even in the Vedas. However, there were no horses in India at the time of the supposed migration out of India.

Impression of validity. Most of the arguments for the OIT are misleading, gratuitous, irrelevant or biased. They are pushed by kooks, nuts, chauvinists and fringe types. Mainstream academics usually don’t consider them worthy of a reply, contradiction or debunking, so the OIT arguments remain unanswered. This gives the impression that the theory carries some kind of weight. This is the case with a lot of fringe science, and OIT is very much fringe science.

Linguistic center of gravity. The linguistic center of gravity for IE is in Europe, specifically somewhere around the Balkans. Most branches are in Europe – Italic, Celtic, Germanic, Baltic, Slavic, Albanian, Greek and various extinct branches. The Balkans seems to be the center of gravity for IE, clearly not where IE originated, but possibly a secondary spread inside of Europe. Central and South Asia appear to be ruled out.

Confusion of arguments. Typically, OIT arguments take the form of, “There was no Aryan migration into India.” That is, they argue against the AMT and not for the OIT. They waste all their breath on the AMT, attempting to disprove it, but then when evidence comes for migration out of India as required by the OIT, they are silent. OIT and AMT are separate arguments. You do not prove OIT by “disproving” AMT.

References

Mallory, JP. 1998. “A European Perspective on Indo-Europeans in Asia.” In: The Bronze Age and Early Iron Age Peoples of Eastern and Central Asia. Ed. Mair. Washington DC: Institute for the Study of Man. 

Parpola, Asko. 1998. “Aryan Languages, Archaeological Cultures, and Sinkiang: Where Did Proto-Iranian Come into Being and How Did It Spread?”, in Mair, The Bronze Age and Early Iron Age Peoples of Eastern and Central Asia. Washington, D.C.: Institute for the Study of Man.

Witzel, Michael. May 2001. Autochthonous Aryans? The Evidence from Old Indian and Iranian Texts. Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies 7(3): 1-11.

67 Comments

Filed under Afghanistan, Afghans, Animals, Anthropology, Antiquity, Armenians, Asia, Asian, Central Asians, Colonialism, Culture, Domestic, Dravidian, East Indians, Ethnic Nationalism, Europe, Europeans, Hinduism, History, Horses, India, Indic, Indo-European, Indo-Hittite, Indo-Iranian, Indo-Irano-Armenian, Indo-Irano-Armeno-Hellenic, Iran, Iranians, Language Families, Linguistics, Literature, Nationalism, Near Easterners, Pakistanis, Physical, Political Science, Race/Ethnicity, Racism, Regional, Religion, Sanskrit, South Asia, South Asians, Whites

Peek-a-boo Horsey

Horses have no sense of humor at all.

3 Comments

Filed under Animals, Domestic, Horses, Humor

사 동물 하나 분쇄기

I am looking for translators to translate this post into Spanish, Polish and Finnish. Email me if you are interested.

This post has been translated into Italian as Quattro Animali, Un Macinatore (traduzione in Italiano) and into French as Quatre Animaux, Un Broyeur (en Français).

Hello folks, this is a Korean translation of Four Animals, One Grinder. The translator was 미피캣. I don’t even know this person yet,but I am very grateful to them for this translation as this post is quite popular!

I am going to keep on publishing this video until WordPress tells me to take it down. I am not sure if it is ok with them or not, but they have not told me to take it down yet, so up it stays.

첫 번째 동물은 소, 두 번째는 돼지, 세 번째도 소, 그리고 마지막은 말입니다.

믿 을 수 없는 비디오입니다. 이곳의 나머지 동영상과 마찬가지로 굉장히 무섭습니다. 끔찍하지만 뭐 사는 게 그렇죠. 영상은 육류 폐기장치를 계속 비출 뿐입니다.죽은 가축이 리프터로 들어 올려져 폐기장치로 떨궈집니다. 그리고 뼈, 머리, 내장 등등, 모조리 갈려버립니다.

인터넷에서는 소는 살아있다는 말이 돌고 있지만 사실이 아닙니다.분쇄기가 돌려질 때 움직이는 것처럼 보이는데, 칼날 때문인 것이죠.

또 다른 오해는 이 갈아진 동물들이 핫도그 등의 음식에 쓰인다는 것입니다. 물론 사실이 아닙니다.

본 영상의 동물은 농장에서 늙어 죽은 가축들입니다. 저렇게 갈려진 고기들이 사료(특히 닭)나 펫 푸드로 간다고도 하는데, 딱히 틀린 말은 아닙니다(광우병도 이런 이유로 일어났죠). 펫 푸드로 쓰인다고 하면 좀 찜찜하군요. 다시는 개 사료를 먹지 않겠습니다.

제 생각엔 저렇게 갈려진 고기들은 비료로 쓰일 것 같습니다. 또는 기계에 바르는 윤활유 등의 기름을 만드는 데 갈 것 같군요. 또 비누로 만들어지기도 할 것입니다.

많은 사람이 농장에서 가축이 어떤 식으로 죽는가에 대해 잘 알지 못합니다. 죽은 말이나 소, 돼지를 어떻게 처리하는가? 아마도 쓰레기 수거업자에게 맡겨 땅에 파묻는다고 생각할 것입니다. 그렇지만 소나 말을 파묻는 무덤은 있지도 않을뿐더러, 소각로에서 태우는 것도 허용되지 않습니다. 바로 이런 이유로 육류 폐기장치가 사용됩니다.

저 공장 부근에 사는 사람이 증언하듯이, 저 폐기장치에서 나오는 냄새는 굉장히 끔찍합니다. 리프트 차를 움직이는 일은 아마도 이 나라의 가장 더러운 직업일 것입니다. 저 분쇄기를 씻어내는 걸 상상해본 적 있습니까? 굉장히 끔찍합니다.

마지막 장면에서 말이 갈아지는 장면은 특히 굉장합니다. 특히 뼈와 두개골이 부서지는 소리가 압권입니다. 와우!

두 번째 소(2:11)가 갈아지면서 어떤 액체가 강하게 뿜어져 나오는 장면도 굉장합니다. 아마도 저 소는 많은 가축이 그렇듯이 고창증으로 죽어 꽤 오랫동안 방치되어 있던 것 같습니다. 이 고기들이 음식으로 쓰이지 않는 이유죠.

저 비디오가 촬영된 것은 몇 년 전이지만, 화제가 된 것은 최근 2009년 8월 중순부터입니다.

인터넷에서 저런 영상을 볼 수 있다는 게 놀랍지 않습니까?

앨 고어가 인터넷을 발명하지 않았더라면 그 누가 분쇄기가 돌아가는 장면을 알 수 있었겠습니까.

이 분쇄장치는 덴마크제이며, 제품명은 PB 30/60 Crusher입니다.

1 Comment

Filed under Agricutlure, Animals, Cows, Domestic, Gross, Horses, Korean, Livestock Production, Pigs, Rendering Plants, Sick, Sick and Evil, Translations

Quattro Animali, Un Macinatore

I am looking for translators to translate this post into Spanish, Polish and Finnish. Email me if you are interested.

This post has been translated into French as Quatre Animaux, Un Broyeur (en Français).

This is an Italian translation of Four Animals One Grinder by “Natalie From France.”

Il primo animale è una mucca, il secondo un maiale, il terzo una mucca, e l’ultimo un cavallo.

Il video non è proprio raccapricciante o catastrofico come la maggior parte degli altri filmati presenti nel blog. E’ abbastanza difficile da guardare. Si vede quello che succede in un centro di raccolta e macinazione di carcasse animali. Il bestiame morto è spinto da un montacarichi verso il macinatore, poi viene tritato da questo apparecchio incredibile: ossa, teste, zoccoli e tutto il resto.

Ci sono un sacco di articoli in internet che sostengono che le mucche sono vive. Non è vero. sembrano vive soltanto quando il macinatore si mette in moto; in realtà si muovono a causa dell’enorme potenza dell’apparecchio.

Un’altra idea errata è che gli animali tritati siano destinati all’alimentazione umana, per produrre hot dogs per esempio. Non è vero.

Si tratta di animali morti in azienda agricola, e quindi impropri al consumo. Certe persone sostengono che i prodotti derivati dalla macinazione delle carcasse potrebbero essere destinati all’alimentazione animale (pollame) oppure per l’alimentazione degli animali domestici.

Non è un pensiero gradevole, in effetti questo tipo di “riciclaggio” è la causa dell’apparizione del morbo della mucca pazza. L’idea che tutto questo finisca nella ciottola dei nostri animali di compagnia mi spezza il cuore. Davvero. Non mangero’ mai più crocchette per cani.

Penso che di solito gli animali finiscano come fertilizzante, il che rappresenta un metodo inoffensivo di utilizzarli. Si produce pure del grasso animale per motori. Si riesce anche a fare del sapone di questa purè di cavallo (Mr Ed nel testo, ndt).

La gente non si rende conto che il bestiame muore ogni giorno, particolarmente nelle moderne aziende agricole. Non ci si pensa mai, ma come fare per smaltire cavalli, mucche e maiali morti ? Non si puo’ mica depositarli nel cassonetto. E’ difficile scavare un buco per seppellirli. Non esistono cimiteri per mucche e cavalli, e gli inceneritori non li accettano.

Ed è qui che entra in ballo il centro di smaltimento carcasse animali. Immagino che si vende l’animale morto al centro di smaltimento, gli addetti vengono a prenderlo. Lo portano al centro e lo macinano per produrre fertilizzante o qualcosa di simile. In questi centri l’odore è insopportabile, come lo attestano le persone che abitano in prossimità.

Il tizio che si occupa del montacarichi ha sicuramente il peggior lavoro del paese. Pensate al tizio che pulisce il macinatore. Guardate il disordine.

Alla fine il montacarichi butta un cavallo nell’apparecchio, è incredibile…il rumore del macinatore gigantesco quando trita le ossa e i crani. Wow !

C’è una sequenza particolamente sgradevole, alla seconda mucca (2’11) si vede un getto enorme dalla carcassa mentre viene tritata. Significa che l’animale è andato in decomposizione durante abbastanza tempo, ed è gonfiato. E’ un’altra delle ragioni per le quali la carne è impropria al consumo.

Questo video era disponibile in rete da qualche anno, ma da metà agosto risquote un gran successo.

Esiste un’incredibile quantità di roba da guardare in internet. Prima di Al Gore, chi di voi aveva già visto funzionare un centro di smaltimento carcasse ?

La società che produce questo macinatore si trova in Danimarca. Pensate un po’ alla tecnologia adoperata in questo apparecchio. Si chiama PB 30/40 Crusher.

Alcuni pensieri:

Sarebbe un aggeggio fantastico per l’applicazione della pena di morte ! Basta con l’iniezione letale ! Omicidio premeditato ? Condannato al macinatore ! Si potrebbero vendere i biglietti per una bella cifra, la gente verrebbe a vedere il condannato frullato vivo. Il ricavato andrebbe nelle casse dello Stato, così lo Stato potrebbe adoperare questi soldi per aiutare i cittadini.

Un macinatore lo voglio anch’io !!!! Dove posso comprarlo ? Mi piacerebbe adoperarlo contro qualche nemico. Lo legherei, lo butterei sulla rampa di carico e me ne sbarazzerei nel Macinatore. Poi incasserei 1000 dollari a spettatore e me ne andrei con il ricavato.

Si dovrebbe adoperare questa macchina per tritare gli esseri umani. Cosi’ potremmo salvare tanto spazio cimiteriale, ed adoperare le aree dei futuri cimiteri per costruire supermercati e altre cose altrettanto indispensabili.

Attualmente penso che quando moriro’, desidero essere frullato cosi’. Si potrebbe organizzare un funerale, con invitati che guardano mentre mi faccio tritare, mangiando pop corn e cose simili.

Una volta tritato desidero diventare scatolame col nome “Robert Lindsay Kitekat” ed essere dato in pasto al mio gattino, supponendo che ne abbia uno. Se non ho un gatto voglio comunque essere trasformato in cibo per gatti, perchè li amo.

Così i gatti festeggieranno mangiando qualcuno che li ha amati con tutto il cuore. I gatti mi hanno dato cosi tanto amore in vita mia e questa sarebbe la mia maniera tutta speciale di tornarglielo.

C’é un rock brutale, mortale e metallico come sottofonodo, vero ?

Sarebbe divertente vedere un elefante morto o una giraffa, buttati nel macinatore, tanto per farci quattro risate…

Nel mio paese dei sogni ci sarebbe la tele con 600 canali via cavo. Un canale chiamato “tele-macinatoio” mostrerebbe l’apparecchio in funzione tutto il giorno. Per rendere i programmi più interessanti, si potrebbe macinare ogni sorta di animali. Guarderei la tele tutto il giorno, mentre lavoro, anche come sottofondo. Cambierei canale all’ora dei pasti.

Ci sono molte possibilità d’impiego per questo apparecchio.

Si potrebbe prendere un bambino Bianco obeso, cresciuto da una madre single a forza di Twinkies e videogiochi, per metterlo sotto il macinatore. La carne trita cadrebbe intorno a lui, sul suo viso, ricoprendolo interamente. Gli operai spalerebbero la carne in modo da evitare di seppellirlo.

Potrebbe tenere la bocca aperta, la carne cadrebbe dentro, facendolo diventare sempre più grasso. Dopo dieci anni di questa “dieta” sarebbe cosi’ grasso che potrebbe diventare il Re della Germania.

Si potrebbe tritare il bestiame e darlo a Disney. Disney potrebbe ricostituire gli animali in esseri umani, in particolare le star preferite dai teen agers Selena, Miley e Britney. Ci vorrà poco tempo ai fan isterici per rendersi conto che il loro idolo era un cavallo macinato.

Si potrebbe adoperare il macinatore per tentare di risolvere i conflitti impossibili da risolvere. Macinando mucche e maiali, riprendendo le immagini e distribuendone i film nelle zone di guerra potremmo far progredire il conflitto indo musulmano in Cachemire.

Le possibilità sono infinite !

2 Comments

Filed under Agricutlure, Animals, Cows, Gross, Horses, Humor, Italian, Livestock Production, Pigs, Rendering Plants, Sick and Evil, Translations

Quatre Animaux, Un Broyeur

I am looking for translators to translate this post into Spanish, Polish and Finnish. Email me if you are interested.

This post has been translated into Italian as Quattro Animali, Un Macinatore (traduzione in Italiano).

Hi folks, this is a French translation of 4 Animals, 1 Grinder , a post I made a while back. Regular readers feel free to watch it, unless you don’t like gross stuff. No bad reactions have been recorded so far other than temporary loss of appetite.

Translation by Natalie From France, one kickass translator. She also translates to Italian too, believe it or not. She was brought up by French-speaking parents in Trieste, Italy. There is an old French population there happens to include a lot of the city’s elite upper class. I’m not sure of their history.

Le premier animal est une vache, le second un cochon, le troisième une autre vache, et le dernier un cheval.

Je n’en crois pas mes yeux, ce n’est pas vraiment horrible ou catastrophique comme la majeure partie des autres vidéos ici. C’est assez brut, mais c’est la vie mec. Cela nous montre ce qui se passe dans un centre d’équarrissage. Tout le bétail mort est poussé vers un broyeur par un ascenseur puis broyé par cette machine incroyable : os, têtes, sabots et tout le reste.

Un tas d’articles sur le Net affirment que ces vaches sont vivantes. Ce n’est pas vrai. Elles paraissent vivantes seulement quand le broyeur se met en marche ; en fait, elles bougent dans tous les sens à cause de la puissance de l’appareil.

Une autre idée fausse est que les animaux sont mixés et destinés à l’alimentation humaine, comme les hot dogs par exemple. C’est faux.

Ce sont des animaux qui sont morts à la ferme, donc ils sont sûrement impropres à la consommation (humaine). Certaines personnes affirment que les produits de l’équarrissage pourraient être destinés à l’alimentation animale (en particulier pour les poulets) ou pour l’alimentation des animaux de compagnie, ce n’est pas une pensée agréable (en effet c’est la cause de la maladie de la vache folle)…L’idée que tout ceci finisse dans la gamelle de nos animaux de compagnie me fait de la peine. Si, c’est vrai. Je ne mangerai plus jamais de croquettes pour chien.

Je pense que d’habitude les animaux broyés finissent en engrais, ce qui est une façon inoffensive de les utiliser. On produit aussi de la graisse animale, pour les moteurs. On en fait même du savon de cette purée de cheval. (purée de Mr Ed dans le texte original ndt)

Les gens ne se rendent pas compte que le bétail meurt tous les jours, en particulier dans les exploitations modernes. Ils n’y pensent jamais mais…comment se débarrasser des chevaux, vaches et cochons morts ? Vous ne pouvez pas les déposer au coin de la rue pour les éboueurs. Et il n’est pas facile de les enterrer dans un trou. Nous n’avons pas de cimetière pour vaches et chevaux, et les incinérateurs ne les acceptent pas.

C’est là qu’intervient le centre d’équarrissage. J’imagine que l’on vend la carcasse à l’usine d’équarrissage, qui vous envoie du personnel pour emporter l’animal. Ils le ramènent à l’usine, le broient et en font du compost ou autre chose. Une chose que vous devriez savoir à propos de ces centres d’équarrissage est que l’odeur y est nauséabonde, comme l’affirment les riverains.

Le gars qui s’occupe du monte charge doit avoir le pire boulot de ce pays. Imaginez-vous à la place de ce gars qui doit nettoyer le broyeur. C’est un sacré désordre.

À la fin le monte charge jette un cheval dans l’appareil, regarder cet appareil en train de broyer est incroyable. Ce qui m’a soufflé, c’est le bruit de ce mixeur géant quand il hache les os et les crânes. Super !

Il y a un passage assez désagréable, lors de la deuxième vache (2’11 dans la vidéo) où la carcasse laisse échapper un énorme jet, pendant qu’elle est broyée. Cela signifie que l’animal est resté en décomposition pendant un certain temps et a gonflé. C’est une autre raison pour laquelle cette viande est impropre à la consommation humaine.

Cette vidéo était disponible depuis quelques années, mais depuis la mi-aoùt 2009 elle cartonne !

Il y a une incroyable quantité de choses que l’on peut regarder sur Internet. Avant Al Gore, combien d’entre nous avaient déjà vu une usine d’équarrissage en action ?

La société qui produit cet appareil se trouve au Danemark. Pensez à la technologie employée dans cet engin. Il s’appelle le PB 30/60 Crusher.

Quelques considérations:

Ça pourrait quand même être une super machine pour appliquer la peine de mort ! Fini cette connerie d’injection létale. Meurtre au premier degré? Je vous condamne au broyeur! On pourrait vendre des tickets pour une coquette somme, pour que les spectateurs viennent voir le meurtrier qui se fait mouliner vivant. On pourrait ensuite utiliser les bénéfices pour aider les caisses de l’état, ainsi l’état pourrait dépenser l’argent pour aider les gens.

Je veux une de ces machines ! Où est-ce que je peux en acheter une ? J’aimerais m’en servir pour quelques uns de mes ennemies. Je les ficellerais, je les jetterais sur la rampe de chargement et m’en débarrasserais dans le Broyeur. Puis j’encaisserais 1000 euros par spectateur, deviendrais riche et me barrerais avec la recette.

Nous devrions utiliser cet appareil sur les êtres humains pour les broyer. De cette façon nous pourrions sauver pas mal de place dans les cimetières et utiliser l’espace de futurs cimetières pour construire des épiceries, des supermarchés et autres choses indispensables.

À présent, je pense que quand je mourrai, je souhaiterais être broyé de cette façon. On pourrait le faire sous forme d’enterrement, et tous les invités pourraient regarder pendant que je suis haché, en grignotant du pop corn et d’autres trucs.

Après avoir été haché je souhaiterais être mis en boite de conserve sous le nom “Robert Lindsay Pâtée” et donné à mon chaton, en supposant que j’en ai un. Si je n’ai pas de chat je demanderais à devenir de la nourriture pour chat, parce que je les aime. De cette façon les chats feraient un festin avec quelqu’un qui les aime vraiment. Les chats m’ont donné tant d’amour dans ma vie que cela serait ma manière tout à fait spéciale de le leur rendre !

Il ont du avoir un sacré rock brutal, mortel et métallique joué en fond sonore, n’est-ce pas ?

Ça serait sympa de voir un éléphant mort ou une girafe jetés dans cette machine, juste pour rire…

Dans mes rêves, il y aurait 600 chaînes sur le câble. Une serait « la chaîne de la déchiqueteuse d’animaux ». Cette chaîne montrerait le broyeur en train d’hacher des animaux, toute la journée. Pour rendre les programmes plus intéressants, ils pourraient varier les sortes d’animaux à broyer. J’allumerai la télé durant des heures, en faisant mon travail, même en bruit de fond. Je changerai probablement de chaîne lors du repas.

Il existe plein de possibilités d’utilisation de cette machine.

Nous pourrions prendre un enfant Blanc obèse , élevé par une mère célibataire avec des Twinkies et des jeux vidéo, et le coller sous la machine. La viande du broyeur à bétail sortirait tout autours de lui et même sur lui. Elle atterrirait sur son visage tout en le recouvrant.

Nous aurions des ouvriers avec des pelles, pour lui enlever la viande ainsi il ne serait pas enterré. Il pourrait garder sa bouche ouverte, et un peu de la viande tomberait dedans. Puis il la mangerait. Nous le tiendrions là-dessous, il deviendrait de plus en plus gras. Après 10 ans de ce traitement, il serait si gras qu’il pourrait devenir le Roi d’Allemagne.

Nous pourrions mouliner les animaux et les donner à Disney. Disney pourrait les reconstituer en êtres humains, particulièrement en stars préférées des teen-agers Selena, Miley et Britney. En peu de temps les fans hystériques se rendront compte que leur idole était un cheval haché.

On pourrait utiliser cet appareil pour tenter de résoudre les conflits insolubles. En broyant des cochons et des vaches, en faisant des films de cela et en les distribuant dans les zones de conflit, peut-être que nous pourrions faire des progrès dans le conflit hindo musulman au Cachemire.

Les possibilités sont infinies !

If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.

19 Comments

Filed under Agricutlure, Animals, Cows, French, Gross, Horses, Humor, Livestock Production, Pigs, Sick and Evil, Translations