Are you are asking whether 1.3 billion people are good chess players? Or rather their mean chess playing ability? Or the median? Or maybe if 51% are above the rest of the world's average tournament player rating (whether mean or median)? Or whether they are above tournament average rating for active players (whatever parameter you like to define "active")? Or if the mean, median, or 51% rule(s) applies only to players who actively study and compete in FIDE rated tournaments (need to define actively)? Or some sort of pan-analysis with all of them in a nice Excel-type table? Do you mean Indians from India? Or the racist terms applied to natives of lands such as the Americas? Anand was a world champ, but I beat a 1300+ rated kid who was 10 years old for second place in a local tournament several months ago. Does that help?
Term "American Indian" is not racist, smartass. Some of them actually prefer it over "Native", which is quite new. It's a name. That nation didn't even know where they were (geographically, continent, etc) at the time that name was attributed to them.
Oh, I see ... "alternative" facts. How old is the Earth did you say?
He can be here if he's 10. I'm 12