Every human language evolved from 'single prehistoric African mother tongue

Originally posted by Tephra
This whole ridiculous theory of total human african migration followed by some type of odd darwinian quintuple racial mutation has to be about as ludicrous as global warming.

This African migration theory has become the new "It" theory, these lazy people just can't think for themselves anymore and just theorize based off the last guys theory....

This is not how language evolved, language is part of our species.

I might add the main problem these days is that all these goofs basically consider Darwin's theories to be fact, when in reality, he was wrong.

edit on 16-4-2011 by Tephra because: (no reason given)

Right... and our species being human? What evidence do you have that the scientists dont, or are you an armchair expert?

not sure if this holds any weight,

but it is worth a look...

really it is...

may stop a lot of bickering here...

african history

Originally posted by guessing
not sure if this holds any weight,

but it is worth a look...

really it is...

may stop a lot of bickering here...

african history

Thanks for that, very interesting will start reading now

PS: There is so much to learn about our ancestors.

>


Come, let us go down and take away the sense of their language, so that they will not be able to make themselves clear to one another.




Give some thought to the implications of above information .

Hopefully , the biggest conspiracy in the world would become clearer .

This isn't really new knowledge. It is simply new for European scholars. If one were to take an unbiased look at the evidence, they could clearly see the evidence of commonality in religion, language, and even technology with a clear path back to Africa. A book I would recommend on the subject is "African cosmology of the Bantu Kongo" written by Fu-Kiau Bunseki, Ph.D.. Dr. Fu-Kai is an expert in the filed of African religion and culture and is an intiate into many African "secret societies" which are the vessels of unspoken knowledge of our ancient past. In his humble efforts to share that knowledge with the world he wrote the above mentioned book detailing theories and concepts which the scientific world is just now coming to accept.

The book isn't an expensive book averaging less than $20.00, nor is it a voluminous tome of dull repetition. It is insightful and illuminating and will give every reader a sense of awe at the history of Man, where we come from, and just how much we have forgotten over the years. The work will reveal new insights into Judaism and Christianity, the symbolism of Pagan faiths around the world, and the glorious knowledge of the heavens above.

From the life and death cycles of the planets above, to the mysteries of the life and death of Man, and his journey through the stars, it is a fascinating read and a clear understanding of our existence through the eyes and mind of our oldest ancestors.

SAMBI ARRIBA SAMBI ABAJO SAMBI A LOS CUATRO COSATADO

God is above, God is below, God is at the four corners

Such is the meaning of the ancient symbol of the Cross.

With Love,

Your Brother

I don't see how great a scientific breakthrough this is really. Surely it's just common sense that wherever the first humans came from the first language came from also? If one believes the 'Out of Africa' theory as most scientists do, then one must also conclude that it's most likely that the first language came 'Out of Africa' as well. With so many lost dialects we'll never be able to conclusively prove that the languages are related.

reply to post by Itop1


Wonder what they would say about the Tower of Babel as a theory now?

Originally posted by 547000
reply to post by Itop1

 

Wonder what they would say about the Tower of Babel as a theory now?

Tower of Babel is linked to religion and god, if im not mistaken? Im not religous and nor do i believe in god, i believe we were put here by what you might like to refer to as ET

The mind boggles.

reply to post by Sounds_of_Silence


Africa is a big continent. Egypt, the great empire is in Africa. Timbuktu is in Africa, at one point had the greatest library and scholars in the world. Both these empires declined and great change came to those regions over time.

The great civilization of the Phoenicians led by Hannibal was from North Africa, that almost destroyed Rome. The great civilization that conquered Spain, the Moors, are from Africa

The point is . . . that Africa is not just those primitive tribesmen you see in movies and documentaries.

This is essentially true all language did evolve out of a mother tongue, one in which I myself speak, following is an example of the mother tongue...

Grunt, ug, ug, grunt, oooo, yuch, ewww, grunt, arrrggh.

Translation:

I have been up for 15 minutes and where is my coffee!

The above can also mean...

I told you, your Mother in law needs to find a new place to stay!

A versatile language where clubs were often used to hit people to stress certain words!

this is hardly news breaking or otherwise.
Linguistics and Linguistic anthropology are fields which concern themselves, among other things, with the origins and commonalities of languages- never mind structures and word use etc.
you have libraries filled with information like this.
the Proto-Indo European language base for the same family of languages, is one such base people are attempting to sort out.
this is similar how you see Latin as a base for the romance languages and Germanic or Proto-Germanic giving rise to those languages....
and the African language theory is but one, after all the migrations of hominids doesn't require them to bring language, although it is likely, it may have developed outside, even in the fertile crescent rather than in the sub Saharan region.

reply to post by Itop1

Every human language evolved from 'single prehistoric African mother tongue

I don't buy it simply because I am not convinced about the current theories of evolution. That is not to say that humanity hasn't a mother tongue or that it didn't originate in Africa. But to date, there is no inarguable evidence to support this theory.

Politically, it is a good fit because there are powerful forces at work to create a single world government. The more that the human race can be stuffed into a single package in history, the better they will be able to convince the world that the globalist vision fits our modern society.

Originally posted by Itop1

Originally posted by 547000
reply to post by Itop1

 

Wonder what they would say about the Tower of Babel as a theory now?

Tower of Babel is linked to religion and god, if im not mistaken? Im not religous and nor do i believe in god, i believe we were put here by what you might like to refer to as ET

The mind boggles.

Who put ET here?
Just asking.

reply to post by Itop1


What bull#.

This theory has as much objectivity as the so called Indo European language. Both hypotheses they treat as fact.

This is not true. We have yet to find a human being that possesses a hyoid bone (which enables articulation of sound) beyond 5800 years. Until we find a fossil of a homosapien that possesses this bone, we can not just assume that "language was spoken" tens of thousands of years ago in africa.

Interestingly enough, the oldest fossil found with such a bone came from Jericho, in Israel.

Also, man may have spoken beyond 6000 years ago, but his language and his speech was primitive, not touching on subjects that transcended his immediate practical needs. And even than 'spiritual' ideas were represented through cave paintings and art, and through conventional language.

The developmet of language is not rooted in some primitive african lingua franca. Language is actually quite sophistiated, and before cuneiform of Sumer we have no indications of such an evolution, anywhere. Infact, one may aswell submit to the facrt (if one is educated in this area) the all language derives from a common, edenic ancestor about 5800 years back. This language is not like Cuneiform, which was strictly a symbolic representation of ideas, without being a spoken language, but some other language, possibly Hebrew.

Originally posted by RADHESYAM
I say BULL#
all Latin based languages + Ancient Egyptian and Greek can be traced back to Sanskrit

Forget this whole "man came out of Africa,,we came from monkeys" BS disinformation
there is far more proof that man came out of the Subcontinent (India) - I'm not gonna hijack the thread with that topic tho .. so go google it.

Yes... But the folks on the subcontinent and the celts both started in the Indus valley AFTER migrating out of Africa....

You gotta go back far enough to really know your history

Originally posted by dontreally
reply to post by Itop1

 

What bull#.

This theory has as much objectivity as the so called Indo European language. Both hypotheses they treat as fact.

This is not true. We have yet to find a human being that possesses a hyoid bone (which enables articulation of sound) beyond 5800 years. Until we find a fossil of a homosapien that possesses this bone, we can not just assume that "language was spoken" tens of thousands of years ago in africa.

Interestingly enough, the oldest fossil found with such a bone came from Jericho, in Israel.

That last sentence is simply untrue

Originally posted by dontreally
reply to post by Itop1

 

What bull#.

This theory has as much objectivity as the so called Indo European language. Both hypotheses they treat as fact.

This is not true. We have yet to find a human being that possesses a hyoid bone (which enables articulation of sound) beyond 5800 years. Until we find a fossil of a homosapien that possesses this bone, we can not just assume that "language was spoken" tens of thousands of years ago in africa.

Interestingly enough, the oldest fossil found with such a bone came from Jericho, in Israel.

Of course the hyoid bone is rarely found in fossils as it is the only bone in the human body which is not attached to any other bone in the body. It rides in the muscle tissue like a rock suspended in jello. When the muscle tissue breaks down or is torn apart by predators and scavengers, it is easily seperated from the rest of the skeleton and lost in time.

Occassionally a skeleton is found with the hyoid bone still present, such as the one in Jericho. Take for instance this skeleton found in Ethiopia from one of our earlier ancestors, the Australopithecus afarensis.

Alemseged uncovered a hyoid bone in the skeletal remains, which is the first time that bone has been discovered in the early part of the hominin fossil record.

Link

Of course it is well known that even our sister Species, the Neanderthal possessed a hyoid bone for it has been found in several skeletons from that species. So, just because it is rare to find it in all the skeletons, does not mean that it was not present. Nor does finding it present in one fossil in one location, indicate that that location had a sudden evolutionary trait of that bone. There are far more pieces of the puzzle that must be examined objectively to trace the roots of our ancestry.

The only ones who make the leap that the hyoid found in Israel is an indication that speech began in Israel are those who try to make the evidence fit their belief in the Genesis story as a literal telling of the history of Man.

With Love,

Your Brother

Originally posted by dontreally
Also, man may have spoken beyond 6000 years ago, but his language and his speech was primitive

And how do you know this? were you around 6000 years ago?