half of it is pure quackery that wouldn t be so bad if it didn t mix up the nonsense with the reasonable parts the reader could still stick to the latter But mixing up respectable 19th century scholarship Elst s tendentious speculations and complete loonies like Frawley Knapp and anonymous websites makes it essentially useless OIT supporters believe that the idea that Sanskrit is a language originating with Central Asian nomadic people who have been described as primitive is very improbable this is from Frawley s Sanskrit is supposed to be the language of primitive invaders so first of all it belongs in the Frawley section What OIT supporters Schlegel And then Frawley doesn t even himself call the invaders primitive he alleges that AIT supporters allege that invaders were primitive so it remains unclear who has described Indo Iranians as primitive in the first place Frawley doesn t understand the first or last thing about linguistics of course he is just piling on rhetorics therefore this article has just two possibilities separate the loony stuff Frawley Knapp and friends into a separate popular religious literature section and keep the main part focussed on scholarly discussion peer reviewed linguistic journals and the like tag the whole article as pseudoscientific Hindutva Cateogry propaganda and be done with it but do not keep mixing up reasonable arguments with all this batshit