The Curious Case of Bengalis

[Gengar’s Ghost]

I'm not coping. I just can't see the point you're trying to make. By the same logic Punjab's and Pashtuns are Dravidians pulled apart by another admixture.

You are definitely coping because you're trying to argue against genetic evidence, JFL. Also, it does apply to some Punjabis; but not all. Unlike Bengalis, whom it all applies to (except for Bengali Brahmins, because Brahmins came from elsewhere). This is about South Asian ethnic groups, not other groups. Not sure why you're bringing others up, might as well bring up Dutch and English people at this point if you're going to keep reaching.

 

[LDARGymmaxx]

View attachment 4304751

This is a South Asian genetic PCA plot, with a focus on specifically Indians, Sri Lankans and Bengalis. You appear here on the basis of DNA.

If you look at the picture, you will notice that Bengalis are pulled away from other Indians (especially Dravidians, since Gujaratis and Punjabis are North Indians) and Sri Lankans. This is because they have significant East Asian admixture from a Tibetan source that Indians (both South Indians and North Indians) and Sri Lankans lack.

In other words, the only reason that Bengalis aren't clustering with Indians and Sri Lankans is because they have East Asian DNA. If it weren't for that admixture, they'd cluster exactly with Indians and Sri Lankans.

cope you wont give me vip

 

[Gengar’s Ghost]

cope you wont give me vip

 

[Gengar’s Ghost]

Pakistan

Das rite whiteboi.

 

[SplashJuice]

So if you removed east Asian component we would be Dravidian? That's total cope you can find many Bengalis who have sub-5% to nil east Asian they still have less ASI than Dravidians.

Then what's it replaced with if it's less AASI? The Sinhalese language is an Indo-Aryan language and it's closest language in the mainland is Bengali (Eastern Indo-Aryan languages), you can see on the genetic map (Sri Lankans) they're close to Dravidians. It's not mutually exclusive that you can be an Indo-Aryan speaker and have mostly Dravidian ancestry.

 

[mriosip]

Das rite whiteboi.

Im not white bro

 

[SecularIslamist]

You are definitely coping because you're trying to argue against genetic evidence, JFL. Also, it does apply to some Punjabis; but not all. Unlike Bengalis, whom it all applies to (except for Bengali Brahmins, because Brahmins came from elsewhere). This is about South Asian ethnic groups, not other groups. Not sure why you're bringing others up, might as well bring up Dutch and English people at this point if you're going to keep reaching.

I'm not denying what you posted. I'm saying your conclusion that if we didn't have east Asian ancestry (I'm pretty sure there are plenty of Bengalis who don't) that would make us Dravidian. That's completely false.

By Dravidian you seem to conflate with South Indian. Yes we are closer to them (water) but even without east Asian input we are closer to ANI. You also have to differentiate Bengalis in the West and East.

Wth is dravidian? Bengalis belong to Indo European speaking people.

Like I said you're just creating a theory out your ass and I could pull the same for others if I wanted to based on the same chart but I'm not dishonest like you. Literally nobody else in the world says Bengalis are Dravidians with east Asian admixture JFL.

@JohnDoe

 

[Gengar’s Ghost]

Then what's it replaced with if it's less AASI? The Sinhalese language is an Indo-Aryan language and it's closest language in the mainland is Bengali (Eastern Indo-Aryan languages), you can see on the genetic map (Sri Lankans) they're close to Dravidians. It's not mutually exclusive that you can be an Indo-Aryan speaker and have mostly Dravidian ancestry.

Precisely. That's why we have Punjabis who are genetically Dravidian as well, but they speak an Indo-Aryan language (Punjabi).

 

[Gengar’s Ghost]

Im not white bro

Then what are you?

 

[mriosip]

Then what are you?

Northaf my name is @mriosip

 

[SecularIslamist]

Precisely. That's why we have Punjabis who are genetically Dravidian as well, but they speak an Indo-Aryan language (Punjabi).

Then what's it replaced with if it's less AASI? The Sinhalese language is an Indo-Aryan language and it's closest language in the mainland is Bengali (Eastern Indo-Aryan languages), you can see on the genetic map (Sri Lankans) they're close to Dravidians. It's not mutually exclusive that you can be an Indo-Aryan speaker and have mostly Dravidian ancestry.

Bruh wtf is this? Punjabis aren't genetically Dravidians even if they share similar AASI ancestry. Wtf is this?

Idk why you're lumping in everyone with Dravidians today.

 

[Gengar’s Ghost]

I'm not denying what you posted. I'm saying your conclusion that if we didn't have east Asian ancestry (I'm pretty sure there are plenty of Bengalis who don't) that would make us Dravidian. That's completely false.

By Dravidian you seem to conflate with South Indian. Yes we are closer to them (water) but even without east Asian input we are closer to ANI. You also have to differentiate Bengalis in the West and East.

Wth is dravidian? Bengalis belong to Indo European speaking people.

Like I said you're just creating a theory out your ass and I could pull the same for others if I wanted to based on the same chart but I'm not dishonest like you. Literally nobody else in the world says Bengalis are Dravidians with east Asian admixture JFL.

@JohnDoe

I didn't create it out of thin air, bud. I created it on basis of the genetic evidence that's right in front of you.

Also, ANI/ASI are ancient components, so no, you wouldn't be closer to ANI. You're closer to ASI and this PCA plot reflects that.

You're Indo-Aryan linguistically, but ethnically mainly Dravidian + some East Asian. Your phenotypes (on average) show this, too.

Not sure why you are accusing me of being dishonest; I said I'd provide proof that you'd be the same as Dravidians if it weren't for your East Asian admixture. And then I did exactly that. Where's the dishonesty here?

@JohnDoe

 

[LXR]

Personally, I can see the difference between East Asians and Africans as well. I may not be able to pinpoint them correctly, but I'm not going to say that they look alike unlike other ignorant people do. And yes, South Asia is very diverse from a genetic perspective; it's the second-most genetically diverse place, next to sub-Saharan Africa.

Yeah, South Asia is diverse but unfortunately no one bothers to learn more about it

 

[Gengar’s Ghost]

Northaf my name is @mriosip

What kind? We have a lot of Moroccans here in NL.

 

[JohnDoe]

I didn't create it out of thin air, bud. I created it on basis of the genetic evidence that's right in front of you.

Also, ANI/ASI are ancient components, so no, you wouldn't be closer to ANI. You're closer to ASI and this PCA plot reflects that.

You're Indo-Aryan linguistically, but ethnically mainly Dravidian + some East Asian. Your phenotypes (on average) show this, too.

Not sure why you are accusing me of being dishonest; I said I'd provide proof that you'd be the same as Dravidians if it weren't for your East Asian admixture. And then I did exactly that. Where's the dishonesty here?

@JohnDoe

you two niggas tagging me but it's 5am and i ain't finna talk bowt dat genetics sheet bruh

 

[Gengar’s Ghost]

Bruh wtf is this? Punjabis aren't genetically Dravidians even if they share similar AASI ancestry. Wtf is this?

Idk why you're lumping in everyone with Dravidians today.

Uh, yes some of us are definitely genetically Dravidian. Just look at the PCA plot, some samples cluster exactly with Dravidian populations. That's because Punjabis are genetically diverse. Some are AASI-shifted.

 

[SecularIslamist]

I didn't create it out of thin air, bud. I created it on basis of the genetic evidence that's right in front of you.

Also, ANI/ASI are ancient components, so no, you wouldn't be closer to ANI. You're closer to ASI and this PCA plot reflects that.

You're Indo-Aryan linguistically, but ethnically mainly Dravidian + some East Asian. Your phenotypes (on average) show this, too.

Not sure why you are accusing me of being dishonest; I said I'd provide proof that you'd be the same as Dravidians if it weren't for your East Asian admixture. And then I did exactly that. Where's the dishonesty here?

@JohnDoe

Those guys who have 50%+ ASI are hindujeets in the West.

 

[Gengar’s Ghost]

Yeah, South Asia is diverse but unfortunately no one bothers to learn more about it

That's why we gotta correct people when they try to lump us into the same category.

 

[Gengar’s Ghost]

you two niggas tagging me but it's 5am and i ain't finna talk bowt dat genetics sheet bruh

Check it tomorrow bhaijaan. And wtf it's 6am already? Dang.. it's 6:22am here.

 

[JohnDoe]

Check it tomorrow bhaijaan. And wtf it's 6am already? Dang.. it's 6:22am here.

my blood pressure and cortisol levels are through the roof after watching my manlet brother get ridiculed non-stop for the past 30 miutes

 

[SplashJuice]

Bruh wtf is this? Punjabis aren't genetically Dravidians even if they share similar AASI ancestry. Wtf is this?

Idk why you're lumping in everyone with Dravidians today.

In Punjab there's Christians that have more AASI than the other 3 religions, there was another caste I'm forgetting the name of but I believe they did street sweeping or something like that and they have more AASI on average compared to the average Punjabi

 

[Gengar’s Ghost]

View attachment 4304885

Those guys who have 50%+ ASI are hindujeets in the West.

The 40-50% AASI is the same range of AASI as Dravidians, that's why you'd be clustering with them. And even AI is repeating what I said about the component that makes you not cluster with Indians and Sri Lankans even though you have the same levels of AASI as them.

 

[Gengar’s Ghost]

my blood pressure and cortisol levels are through the roof after watching my manlet brother get ridiculed non-stop for the past 30 miutes

Lol, check it tomorrow. Get some sleep bhai.

 

[SecularIslamist]

Uh, yes some of us are definitely genetically Dravidian. Just look at the PCA plot, some samples cluster exactly with Dravidian populations. That's because Punjabis are genetically diverse. Some are AASI-shifted.

It's the same for Bengalis - you can go region to region to find different levels of AASI. It will differ.

Anyway AASI ≠ Dravidian. Having more might overlap but not necessarily.

The 40-50% AASI is the same range of AASI as Dravidians, that's why you'd be clustering with them. And even AI is repeating what I said about the component that makes you not cluster with Indians and Sri Lankans even though you have the same levels of AASI as them.

Did you read correctly? 40-50% ASI and 35-45% ANI. I already said there is regional variation - I'm from the north east anyway. The hindus are in the West.

 

[twilight]

i'd give anything to go back to the days of you and justinzayns ramblings about this shit

 

[SecularIslamist]

I really don't know the point you're trying to argue here. I'm not denying what you're saying factually - but you are distorting facts to say "Bengalis are Dravidians without east Asian admixture". That's just completely false.

Then leaning on higher ASI genetic component relative to others like as if that's a defining factor.

 

[Gengar’s Ghost]

i'd give anything to go back to the days of you and justinzayns ramblings about this shit

I wonder where he is, I hope he's OK. Back then I wasn't aware about genetics, but he was mainly spewing phenotypes stuff. About Indo-Brachid and other shit.

 

[Gengar’s Ghost]

It's the same for Bengalis - you can go region to region to find different levels of AASI. It will differ.

Anyway AASI ≠ Dravidian. Having more might overlap but not necessarily.


Did you read correctly? 40-50% ASI and 35-45% ANI. I already said there is regional variation - I'm from the north east anyway. The hindus are in the West.

It said 40-50% AASI, not ASI. There's a difference between ASI and ANI; we don't use those terms here. ASI stands for Ancestral South Indian whereas AASI stands for Ancient Ancestral South Indian.

See what AI has to say:

"The difference is that AASI (Ancient Ancestral South Indian) refers to the ancient indigenous people of the Indian subcontinent, while ASI (Ancestral South Indian) is a more recent genetic component derived from the AASI that also includes other genetic influences."

It's because of high levels of AASI that lands Bengalis on the Dravidian side of the PCA plot. And it's because the East Asian admixture that you're pulled upward.

What is the name of your region? I can look for some samples and I'll show them to you here.

 

[Gengar’s Ghost]

I really don't know the point you're trying to argue here. I'm not denying what you're saying factually - but you are distorting facts to say "Bengalis are Dravidians without east Asian admixture". That's just completely false.

Then leaning on higher ASI genetic component relative to others like as if that's a defining factor.

I said "because of East Asian admixture, you're not clustering with Dravidians." That's it. Without the EA admixture, you'd be clustering with Dravidians. What you make of that is on you.

And like I just clarified, it's not ASI but AASI, they are two different populations.

But AASI is so influential that it pulls you away from Europeans the more you have it. It's really foreign to the genome of Europeans. That's why even Gulf Arabs cluster closer to Europeans than Punjabis do, because they (Gulf Arabs) don't have any AASI even though they look like they might have it. But that's a different discussion, this wasn't about "who's more European." I already clarified what this thread was about.

 

[JohnDoe]

Peak incel arguing about ganeticks at 6am/7am, so over for us oldcels
i haven't read anything will raed it tomorrow but gengar knows his shit, secular doesnt know shit about ganeticks so i will have to side with my countryman

 

[SecularIslamist]

It said 40-50% AASI, not ASI. There's a difference between ASI and ANI; we don't use those terms here. ASI stands for Ancestral South Indian whereas AASI stands for Ancient Ancestral South Indian.

See what AI has to say:

"The difference is that AASI (Ancient Ancestral South Indian) refers to the ancient indigenous people of the Indian subcontinent, while ASI (Ancestral South Indian) is a more recent genetic component derived from the AASI that also includes other genetic influences."

It's because of high levels of AASI that lands Bengalis on the Dravidian side of the PCA plot. And it's because the East Asian admixture that you're pulled upward.

ASI or AASI none of these are equivalent to Dravidian despite shared ancestry.

Again I'll ask - without east Asian influence do Bengalis just suddenly become dravidian?

What is the name of your region? I can look for some samples and I'll show them to you here.

Sylethi as far as I'm aware - at least going up to the late 1800s. I asked my parents if we were anything else beyond that but they don't know.

I have cousins in Chittagong but as far as I'm aware nothing stretching back there...

 

[Doesitmatter?]

Everyone who's not white is a pajeet, I say this as a bangali

 

[Gengar’s Ghost]

Peak incel arguing about ganeticks at 6am/7am, so over for us oldcels
i haven't read anything will raed it tomorrow but gengar knows his shit, secular doesnt know shit about ganeticks so i will have to side with my countryman

29 year old South Asian truecel versus 30 year old South Asian manlet.

 

[SecularIslamist]

so i will have to side with my countryman

You will side with countryman over anything. Tribe over truth always for you

 

[Sociobiology]

View attachment 4304751

This is a South Asian genetic PCA plot, with a focus on specifically Indians, Sri Lankans and Bengalis. You appear here on the basis of DNA.

If you look at the picture, you will notice that Bengalis are pulled away from other Indians (especially Dravidians, since Gujaratis and Punjabis are North Indians) and Sri Lankans. This is because they have significant East Asian admixture from a Tibetan source that Indians (both South Indians and North Indians) and Sri Lankans lack.

In other words, the only reason that Bengalis aren't clustering with Indians and Sri Lankans is because they have East Asian DNA. If it weren't for that admixture, they'd cluster exactly with Indians and Sri Lankans.

Joy Bangla

 

[SecularIslamist]

Everyone who's not white is a pajeet, I say this as a bangali

Swarth belt theory

 

[Gengar’s Ghost]

ASI or AASI none of these are equivalent to Dravidian despite shared ancestry.

Again I'll ask - without east Asian influence do Bengalis just suddenly become dravidian?

Sylethi as far as I'm aware - at least going up to the late 1800s. I asked my parents if we were anything else beyond that but they don't know.

I have cousins in Chittagong but as far as I'm aware nothing stretching back there...

Nobody said that AASI = Dravidians. But Dravidians have high AASI, and Bengalis have similar levels of this.

And no, you don't become Dravidian by not having the East Admixture, you're still Indo-Aryan linguistically. But you would cluster with Dravidians genetically. Dravidians, like Bengalis, also have West Eurasian ancestry (or ANI as you call it).

I'll check for Sylheti and Chittagong samples, gimme a sec. To get a more precise breakdown of the hunter-gatherer/farmer components. Gimme a sec.

 

[JohnDoe]

29 year old South Asian truecel versus 30 year old South Asian manlet.

AHA BUT ONE IS A MASTER IN DISGUISE OF GANETICKS, SECULAR MUST BE USING CHATGPT TO RESPOND TO YOU, THERE'S NOWAY HE KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT GANETICKS, NO WAY IN HELL

 

[Gengar’s Ghost]

Everyone who's not white is a pajeet, I say this as a bangali

Everyone on the planet is a jeet one way or the other.

 

[JohnDoe]

You will side with countryman over anything. Tribe over truth always for you

Wrong, it just so happens my countryman happens to always be right in arguments with you

 

[Gengar’s Ghost]

AHA BUT ONE IS A MASTER IN DISGUISE OF GANETICKS, SECULAR MUST BE USING CHATGPT TO RESPOND TO YOU, THERE'S NOWAY HE KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT GANETICKS, NO WAY IN HELL

He actually did use AI, he showed a screenshot of asking Google or something.

 

[Doesitmatter?]

Everyone on the planet is a jeet one way or the other.

White people are not. Having a skin even a shade darker than pure pale white is subhuman pajeet trait

 

[Gengar’s Ghost]

You will side with countryman over anything. Tribe over truth always for you

You're the countryman here, you're from the UK like him. Meanwhile I'm just a foreigner, an outsider from the NL.

 

[Gengar’s Ghost]

White people are not. Having a skin even a shade darker than pure plae white is subhuman pajeet trait

They are. The jeet is universal.

 

[SecularIslamist]

AHA BUT ONE IS A MASTER IN DISGUISE OF GANETICKS, SECULAR MUST BE USING CHATGPT TO RESPOND TO YOU, THERE'S NOWAY HE KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT GANETICKS, NO WAY IN HELL

Lmao I'm literally listening podcasts on biology not necessarily from a genetic / racial perspective (more investment / tech based).

The difference is I don't drone on about genetics and even care about it as much as people on here because it's just another cope. If we were Dravidians I'd be the first to admit it. We look Indian more than any other group outside India so why wouldn't I admit this?

He actually did use AI, he showed a screenshot of asking Google or something.

Yeah I googled level of AASI / ANI. Do you ever use Google? Nothing proves what you say anyway.

 

[yussimania]

 

[SecularIslamist]

Do you have any interest in longevity and anti aging?

I also believe biotech could be the next big thing

Yeah beside rare disease and cancer, this will be one of the next big things billionaires focus their money on. I think GLP1 drugs like Ozempic are the first in a line of many targeting de-aging or anti aging. Added hundreds of billions to market cap of Eli Lily and Novo.

I can remember a podcast talking about this. Guys like George Church, Drew Endy and Andrew Hessel are good at explaining the impacts and trends of biotech on aging. Not necessarily from investment perspective though.

 

[Chadeep]

What's the difference between @Lightskin Ethnic and @SecularIslamist Apart from Religion

 

[Gengar’s Ghost]

@SecularIslamist

Here's a Chittagong sample (the components are named after the group it peaks in) on HarappaWorld (breaks down the genetic data into ancient parts):

S-Indian: 46%
Baloch: 27%
Caucasian: 1.71%
NE-Euro: 4.51%
SE-Asian: 7.87%
NE-Asian: 6.12%.

That's basically 14% East Asian admixture.

Spoiler: Source

Here's a Sylheti sample:

S-Indian: 45.78%
Baloch: 25.54%
Caucasian: 3.86%
NE-Euro: 4.2%
SE-Asian: 7.39%
NE-Asian: 5.31%

Spoiler: Source 2

Another Sylheti sample:

S-Indian: 48.24%
Baloch: 28.37%
Caucasian: 0%
NE-Euro: 3.19%
SE-Asian: 9.15%
NE-Asian: 6.05%

Spoiler: Source 3

Another Sylheti sample:

This is a sample not from either two regions, but an Islamic Bengali:

Sylhetis and Chittagongis to seem to have lower S-Indian compared to others but not by much, like a 5% difference. Which isn't enough for you to be placed drastically different. I think you'd just go further up because eastern Bengalis seem to have more East Asian ancestry (which makes sense because you literally border SEA).

 

[Gengar’s Ghost]

What's the difference between @Lightskin Ethnic and @SecularIslamist Apart from Religion

@Lightskin Ethnic is a West Bengali Brahmin, his ancestors migrated from elsewhere. In terms of the PCA plot, he would cluster where the Kshatriyas and Punjabis are.

@SecularIslamist is a Bengali from Bangladesh (East Bengal).

They're going to have different genetic make-up. Brahmins from all region seem to cluster together which makes sense because they descended from the same place.