In the department of muddy thinking, we must class not only the mechanistic and thoroughly discredited equation of language with culture, but also the conflation of culture with ethnicity, and thus of language with ethnicity. Once and for all, at the end of the 20th century, we can state with certainty that there is nothing genetic about language. Conversely, a single language may shared by several cultural and ethnic groups. There is, however, a biological component to ethnicity, and that raises the specter of race. Again, the history of racist ideologies and their use of antiquity during the past two centuries has been adequately ghastly to horrify mainstream scholarship into silence on the subject.
Much unexamined residue is the result.
Anthropology today is unequivocal on the recognition that there is no such thing as a biology of race. An isolated skeleton cannot tell you anything about the color of the person's skin. On a continuum constructed by careful analysis of many contemporary skulls, an individual skull can be ascribed, with greater or lesser degrees of certainty, to a certain group consisting of individuals with similar types of skulls. When you do not have the statistical basis for comparison, a single skull taken out of context can tell you little. Dolichocephaly is not a reliable marker of a postulated Aryan, Indo-European, or Dorian race.