Proven, pakistanis more closer to iranians

the following data proves that all pakistani populations, pashtun, baloch, punjabi, sindhi are closer to Iranians genetically then central indian, east indians and south indians

now when i used the K10 spreadsheet: https://spreadsheets...=CP-9p_wC#gid=0 that Birko provided, the difference between pashtuns and Gujaraties for example is 73.5, so this says that pashtuns are closer to Gujaraties then Iranians, which is fine because Gujaratries are western indians, however this shows that Pashtuns are much closer to sindhis then Gujaraties.

This again comes to my point that indians as you go east and more south become much different from pakistanis, that once you enter the central/ south indian and possibly east indian zone that iranians become more closer to pakistanis then those people, it makes sense geogrphically too because pakistan is closer to iran then south india or eastern parts of india

so again people should really stop saying the pakistan and india are very similar countries genetically, yes western parts of india are, but from central india, south and east wards, they are much different, iranians are closer to pakistanis then them. Even north indians like Punjabies or Rajahistanis would be probably more closer to iranians then south indians and possibly east indians like Biharies/bengalies

DNA can be misleading @ times. however as far as my knowledge is concerned kashmiris of the kashmir valley ( presently under indian occupation ,from where i belong) and the dardic races of gilgit and cetrâl as well as the nuristani people of east afghanestan belong to one race called the dardic race , which can be totally considered a caucasian race , with no visible difference from european stock . the pakhtun race can be considered an iranic race and balûçis as well , whereas panjâbis ,sindis and muhâjir communities can be considered to be of indic origin. the region of northern pakistan adjacent to kashmir is inhabited wholly by caucasians whereas the west and the north west has iranic ( paxtun and balûç ) ethnicity and the rest of the country is of mainly indic race . thanx

Originally posted by kamran_koshur DNA can be misleading @ times. however as far as my knowledge is concerned kashmiris of the kashmir valley ( presently under indian occupation ,from where i belong) and the dardic races of gilgit and cetrâl as well as the nuristani people of east afghanestan belong to one race called the dardic race , which can be totally considered a caucasian race , with no visible difference from european stock . the pakhtun race can be considered an iranic race and balûçis as well , whereas panjâbis ,sindis and muhâjir communities can be considered to be of indic origin. the region of northern pakistan adjacent to kashmir is inhabited wholly by caucasians whereas the west and the north west has iranic ( paxtun and balûç ) ethnicity and the rest of the country is of mainly indic race . thanx

Well, I see that some Afghans look white and have grey eyes but I am sure they are still somewhat different from European stock. Just a question, I thought Baloshis were in south of Iran not India, why are you bringing them up?

Dear Balochi,

You probably know that Iranians & Indians have a common origin.

Therefore it is not surprising that Iranians, Afghanis, Pakistanis, North & Central Indians are close genetically.

Regarding South India, you should know that the great ancient South Indian Kingdoms such as the Cheras, Pandyas, Pallavas & the Cholas derived their ancestry from Great North Indian dynasties which to me suggests that there is North Indian Paternal ancestry in South Indians.

Hence, they are not an entirely different set of people. They hold the ancient historical Figures mentioned in the Epics, Puranas, Vedas and other Sanskrit literature in extremely high veneration as their own forefathers. Infact, a great sage by the name of Agastya who is even mentioned in Rigveda is said to have created the Tamil language.

They also take pride in the ancient Sanskrit literature and many great scholars of Sanskrit have existed in South India since a long time.

Hence, you cannot deny that there is a continuity among all people right from Iran to the South of India.

Infact, you can even count the Sri Lankans among them for it is said that the Sinhalese ancestor was an ancient Indian Prince called Vijaya from Bengal who came to Sri Lanka about 2550 years ago along with about 700 of his followers. Also, read Sri Lankan names carefully, they are sanskritized names.  They have names like Arjuna, Kumara, Aravinda, Romesh, Jayasuriya etc. which are derivations from Sanskrit.

Finally, regarding the common origin of Indians, Pakistanis, Afghanis & Iranians, let me say that in our ancient literature a man by the name of Manu is said to be the ancestor of all humans. In Iranian ancient books, Yima or Yama is said to be the original ancestor of all humans.

However, Manu & Yama were the sons of the same father, Vivaswan (or Vivanghana in Avestan).
It may be that Iranians have descended from Yama and Indians from Manu, both of whom were brothers.

Originally posted by Baal Melqart Well, I see that some Afghans look white and have grey eyes but I am sure they are still somewhat different from European stock. Just a question, I thought Baloshis were in south of Iran not India, why are you bringing them up?