It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Conclusions from the link above
It will be seen from the above that the general nature of the main problem with the linguistic aspects of most of these theories/claims is very much the same. The authors, relying largely on ‘common sense’ examination of superficial similarities and knowing little or nothing of historical linguistics itself, are ‘stuck’ in the eighteenth century; they are not even failing to re-invent the ‘wheel’ of careful comparative reconstruction, because they have not seen that this ‘wheel’ is necessary, and because the ‘easy’ method of relying on superficial similarities can readily be applied in such a way as to ‘support’ their nationalistic ideas or their revisionist histories.
Being isolated, private workers or small groups of the like-minded, each with a conviction that they alone are right, they do not talk to each other, and so they do not observe that the same unreliable methods ‘work’ more or less equally well for all of their mutually contradictory claims. (If they do ever talk to each other, the discussion usually descends rapidly into mutual vituperation, as noted in the case of Nyland and Kaya.) One can persuade oneself, using such methods, that any two languages are related; as noted, linguists faced with such ideas have occasionally done just this (e.g., for Mayan and English), as a tour-de-force. Even when linguists do make a supportive contribution, they are mainly those who are themselves on the ‘fringe’ of academic scholarship; if they were not, they would scarcely be involved in such ideas.
But in some areas there is hope! I referred above to the occasional involvement of mainstream linguists in commenting on such views; and I myself have been used by the Saturnists as a consultant! They know very well what my own views are, and they have their own ‘pet’ linguists already; but unlike many amateurs they do seem to have some respect for my expertise and they say they intend to try to take my criticisms on board. Of course, I will not induce them to abandon Saturnism; the linguistic nonsense (for so it is) is only a small part of their system of ideas. But perhaps, with my (to them, novel) criticisms, I will be able to show them why their method of finding linguistic connections around the world is as dangerous as it is; and just maybe, if they fail to defend this method even to their own satisfaction, they may even give it up and rely only on non-linguistic evidence. I have now indeed managed to exert similar influence on Seath, who was already the most moderate of the New Zealand diffusionists.
Where such success is obtained, specialists in other disciplines can then chip away further at the non-linguistic aspects of each case, if so motivated. In the meantime, non-linguists who are inclined to become followers of any of these claims can be given authoritative information which should deter them from accepting the linguistic arguments, specifically, as valid. And at the very least I myself am continuing to learn more about these dark outer regions of the world of linguistics.
1. An earlier and shorter version of this article appeared as ‘Linguistic reconstruction and revisionist accounts of ancient history’ in: The Skeptic (Australia) 20 :2 (2000), pp 42-47.
Any ATS member knows that the mainstream "established" views are riddled with holes and inaccuracies.
Originally posted by SpookyVince
According to lots of research, the Hungarian language (Magyar) has no root in Latin, Slavic, Persian, Arabic and no other known language. It is simply unique.
Anyone with ideas/infos on this? Some stories (sorry, no links at the moment, I'll post if I find some) claim that the origin of the hungarian people and language is to be sought in a lost UFO that landed on earth ages ago...
Curiously a lot of big scientific minds came out of Hungary: Nikola Tesla, John von Neumann, Edward Teller, Theodore von K�rm�n... Lots of others.
Especially hungarians (if any reading this?)are welcome to comment as they are probably more keen to know any legend/stories/facts that come with this...
For example, the word for "language" is similar in Finnish (kieli), Estonian (keel) and Mongolian (хэл (hel)).
An interesting aspect is that the former tactics of the Hungarian army were similar to those of the Mongols, but had been forgotten by 1241.
The Hungarians stopped using these tactics in the 11th century
Mar 11 2010
According to historical theories Hungarians originated from beyond the Ural Mountains, next to current day Mongolia. Former Hungarian Finance Minister and National bank Governor zsigmond Jarai, started his economic career as a banker in Mongolia.
Historically this is also the Mongolian MP’s first foreign visit since his appointment in the end of 2009. “My visit to Hungary is extremely important for the Mongolian people,” he told journalists at the press conference.
May 3 2010
Hungary’s new Prime Minister Viktor Orban has always voiced that he will be the premier for an estimated 15 million Hungarians worldwide. This has raised eyebrows in neighboring countries and the European Union (of which Hungary has been a member of since May 1, 2004) as they fear the conservative PM may renew old historical Hungarian territorial claims
The Treaty of Trianon was the peace treaty concluded in 1920 at the end of World War I by the Allies of World War I, on one side, and Hungary, seen as a successor of Austria-Hungary, on the other. The treaty established the borders of Hungary and regulated its international situation. Hungary was shorn of over 72% of the territory it had previously controlled
Originally posted by toolmaker
HUngarian is being researched as tied closely to what was once Sumeria. It is a very ancient language as well.