G'day (again) IS MISE...You could've fooled me, apropos you've never taught a class in English? Seriously, that's most interesting. There's no doubt about it, the National Geographic digs around, and undertakes an enormous amount of scrupulous research before they publish or speak about anything.

A question of you if I may? Are the Indians renowned as seafarers and if so, explorers? My own minimal knowledge of the great explorers most came from England, France, Portugal and of course the Spanish. I'm not in any way discounting small exploratory groups, more overland treks of the type undertaken by 'Lewis & Clark' in the US. And Maco Polo following the 'silk routes' across Asia minor. Thanks, Mate.

Dear Is Mise,

You wrote;

“My own guess is that a great many of the Aboriginal Australian's ancestors came from India.”

But your own link shows how relatively recent the DNA incursion was. 4,000 years ago compared to archaeological evidence of over 50,000 years of habitation by aborigines.

The sampling for the study you quoted was “Purified DNA samples from 105 individuals from northwest Australia (Great Sandy Desert and Kimberley regions) derive from five locations: Balgo, Christmas Creek, Derby, Looma, and Turkey Creek.”.

Some of these individuals showing Indian DNA incursion which would make sense because of the location ie closest parts of Australia to India.

There is no way in the world though that the claim “that a great many of the Aboriginal Australian's ancestors came from India” can be derived from this study nor any other.

Aidan, it used to be that the day was celebrated on the closest weekend to the 26th, thereby taking off Monday making it a long weekend, an excuse to have another 'bludgers' holiday, and another non-productive day, as if we needed any more.
By chance, it happened to fall on the weekend this time, so of course, we had to make it a long weekend to accommodate the the 'hard working Aussies' and their 'I (don't) work to live' mantra.

Steeley, c'mon get grip man.
I know you don't want to believe it but these are facts and figures derived from experts that have been studying and researching this topic for a lot longer than you or I.
So it also blows the 50,000 to 60,000 year myth out of the water.
More like between four and ten.

not long back historians had the Indigeneous living in Australia for 10000 years, then 20000, then 40000 and now 60000? What a joke. Sounds like they have to continue to make up lies in order to fulfil the narrative justt like the evolutionist have done.

//Well, DUH, let me see, oh yes, because I was 'born here'.//

Well in that case so-called 'Indonesians' that are born here are just as Australian as you. QED.

//if you take a 'mummy' look again at the information, you will find that they speak in ten's of thousands of years, long enough for a breed/race/type/kind of people to earn the the nationality of that country, even though it wasn't a country back then.//

Yep, and the people who migrated from Africa via Indonesia to Australia have been settled here for approx. 6.5 ten thousand years, long enough to earn Australian nationality.

So why do you claim they're Indonesian?

//So if you don't want to call them Indonesians then call them what you like, but they still came from somewhere else and settled here.//

So did you. So did I. So did everybody in the entire country, because we all came from Africa originally.