>>213601272
You're changing topics. The Fijian was talking specifically about the racial origin of the IVC-people, who are mostly closely related to Dravidians.
>millions
Completely untrue. The number of racially Dravidian peoples in Pakistan is minuscule compared to their overall population. You could talk about Dravidian migrants from the Partition, however those people immigrated from India less than a 100 years ago and largely from Southern India far from the Pakistani border. Maybe you mean the Brahui who are linguistically Dravidian but racially are heavily intermixed with Indo-Iranian peoples like the Baloch and more closely resemble Indo-Iranians than pure Dravidians. Having a token handful of Dravidians isn't the same as having an actual population. No one is saying IVC-sites didn't exist in Pakistan, OP's illustration literally mentions Pakistan before India. However, if we're speaking in strictly racial terms it is fair to say that Dravidian populations in Southern India are far closer to the IVC people than those in Northern India and Pakistan. That said, almost everyone on the subcontinent has Dravidian blood in some measure, so I don't understand what the big deal is.