Assuming that The Flood happened in the first place. Secondly, you are quoting a man whose studies alongside his contemporaries were around 1800 to 1861 or so. People still actively utilized psuedo-science to determine the origin of peoples. You may want to try referencing someone a little less antiquated, and who actually knows what the hell they are talking about when they discuss anthropologic origins of various peoples.
Proof, please. People had already vastly migrated beyond the immediate Fertile Crescent region by that point in time, so claiming that everything came straight from the Babylonian Empire will require some proof.Hindhuism is in fact an offshoot of the Babylonian Mysteries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism#HistoryOver one thousand years had transpired with the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the " seed " promised by God in the garden, being carried by certain men like Abel, Enoch etc before the Deluge and long before God dispersed them of Babel. Therefore nothing at all preceeds Christ.
The average agreed-upon age of the start of the Vedic religions ranges from 3000 BCE to 1500 BCE or so. This is still at least a thousand years prior to any appearance of the alleged Jesus figure. So yes, it precedes Christ. Oh wait, you're using the Bible again as the infallible proof. That old chestnut. I see we won't be having any honest historical discussions here today.