Yes they are, that's why both are in different branches.
No, they aren't. Hence why they are Balto-Slavic.
It is disputed.
It's not disputed
Indo-European > Baltic > Eastern Baltic > Lithuanian.
Indo-European > Bato-Slavic > Baltic > Eastern Baltic > Lithuanian.
Yeah sure, somehow most archaic languages that are closest to Indo-European one is just a branch of mutated Slavic languages. Stop, you make me laugh.
They are not closest to the indo european. They are just Balto-Slavic separated during the period of the great migration.
Polish neo nazi, what a joke. :DD
Who is calling me a nazi. A villagemen, who grandpa was a Nazi policeman and who is living in a property stolen from Poles who lived there for 600 or more years, whike ruining the once beautiful city to the state of 3rd world while braggin about the fact that Balts are different than Slavs, while they are clearly not. And calling Slavs not normal race, while it's not a race. You're genetical Russians. And Lithuanians as Latvians and Russians are all half Uralic peoples as during the period of great migration the Balto-Slavic people leaved the area of Tzrciniec culture, separated and moved North and East to the regions of Todays eastern coast of the Baltic Sea and Western Russia which before was inhabited by Uralic peoples.
So calling you a mongol is not an overstatement.
Also as for cilivilization. Lithuania as Latvia did not contribute nothing into Europe's science, literature, art or music. Nothing. Cultural vacuum. Lithuanians invented their own alphabet in 20th century, because before the Poles had to do it for them and they stole some czech letters to distinguish themselves from us.
So I don't see nothing nazi about that.
Yes, because you're mutated Slavs.
Balts are just mongoloided Slavs and your grammar and many words are identical to Russian, which is East Slavic language.