Out-of-India - From Theory to Truth

member_23700 · Post by **member_23700** » 14 Aug 2012 19:19

RajeshA wrote:hanumadu ji, AntuBarwa ji,

welcome to the discussion!

Thank you Rajesh ji. I was exploring BRF and found this forum interesting. 87 pages! wow! Thank you for your great work and great work of others.

I will go back to my lurk mode...

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 14 Aug 2012 19:25

ravi_g wrote: Now just imagine how the ‘seams’ would have behaved, especially in the context of expressing a Phonologic Sanskrit in a Cuneiform Akkadian.

One too many cows on top of each other, I am afraid.

Absolutely.

The language used in some articles to cover up, obfuscate and simply fudge things is amazing. The thing is if you work in a technical line like I do you get accustomed to being scathingly critical of imprecise language and fudging. The meaning should be precise and clear. That kind of standard seems to be absent from the community that writes our history from our texts.

Read this pdf about the Kikkuli horse texts. Some of the words are straight forward Sanskrit, and Sanskrit meanings have been applied. But the word Sanskrit appears only once in these 21 pages - only to say why the language is not Sanskrit but "Indo-Aryan" These guys are fukking with us and we have swallowed all this like morons.

http://www.lrgaf.org/Peter_Raulwing_The ... c_2009.pdf

Due to certain linguistic developments, Indo-Aryan represents an older dia-
lect than the oldest Sanskrit (Vedic). Indo-Aryan as attested in the ancient Near East and Ve-
dic must have been separated before the 16th century B.C.

wtf? Due to "certain linguistic developments" - which are not mentioned, a date is applied to say that "indo-Aryan" (wtf is that?) separated from Sanskrit. This is bullshitting of the highest order. These guys bluff using the language we are accustomed to learning from. So they are taken seriously.

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 14 Aug 2012 19:40

shiv wrote:Read this pdf about the Kikkuli horse texts. Some of the words are straight forward Sanskrit, and Sanskrit meanings have been applied. But the word Sanskrit appears only once in these 21 pages - only to say why the language is not Sanskrit but "Indo-Aryan" These guys are fukking with us and we have swallowed all this like morons.

http://www.lrgaf.org/Peter_Raulwing_The ... c_2009.pdf
Due to certain linguistic developments, Indo-Aryan represents an older dia-
lect than the oldest Sanskrit (Vedic). Indo-Aryan as attested in the ancient Near East and Ve-
dic must have been separated before the 16th century B.C.
wtf? Due to "certain linguistic developments" - which are not mentioned, a date is applied to say that "indo-Aryan" (wtf is that?) separated from Sanskrit. This is bullshitting of the highest order. These guys bluff using the language we are accustomed to learning from. So they are taken seriously.

Thanks for that link. Can't think of a more blatant and outrageous example of cultural banditry than this !! Obvious references from Sanskrit are coolly passed off as 'Indo-Aryan' - WTF !! Needs to be widely circulated as an example of how low these Nazis can stoop to.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 14 Aug 2012 19:57

Online Books

AIT-Nazi Books

Publication Date: May 17, 2001
Author: Calvert Watkins
How to Kill a Dragon: Aspects of Indo-European Poetics [Google] [Amazon]

Download Link

Code: Select all

http://www.4shared.com/office/m0zNMJiI/how_to_kill_a_dragon_aspects_o.html

An Essay:
By Calvert Watkins
Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans

Talks about "reconstruction" of PIE!

Publication Date: September 13, 2011
By Calvert Watkins
The American Heritage Dictionary of Indo-European Roots, Third Edition [Google] [Amazon]

Code: Select all

eMule/eDonkey link: 
ed2k://|file|%5B%E8%AF%8D%E6%BA%90%E8%B5%84%E6%96%99%E4%B8%8D%E5%AE%8C%E5%85%A8%E5%90%88%E9%9B%86%5D.The.American.Heritage.Dictionary.of.Indo-European.Roots.pdf|28902460|fb92a6f12508e54a60fb4d926282f0f0|h=2yvbtpp4nyin7xomujm42rlywk7f5xpg|/

shiv saar, brihaspati garu,
you may like the essay, and the books too! Also these other books as well!

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 14 Aug 2012 20:00

Arjun wrote:
But the word Sanskrit appears only once in these 21 pages - only to say why the language is not Sanskrit but "Indo-Aryan" These guys are fukking with us and we have swallowed all this like morons.

wtf? Due to "certain linguistic developments" - which are not mentioned, a date is applied to say that "indo-Aryan" (wtf is that?) separated from Sanskrit. This is bullshitting of the highest order. These guys bluff using the language we are accustomed to learning from. So they are taken seriously

Obvious references from Sanskrit are coolly passed off as 'Indo-Aryan' - WTF !! Needs to be widely circulated as an example of how low these Nazis can stoop to.

Need to aware of the reason for this deep malicious plan.
And this is 2009 publication!
It is not about explaining their own language, history and antiquity.

The plan it remove the sanskrit and India out of the entire contribution to civilization and Indian civilization is reduced to a derivative civilization. They want to make it like mesopotamia which is only in the museum or academic world.

Extraordinary use of foreign culture to explain their own language and ancient history

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 14 Aug 2012 20:07

I would urge all to use any download links available next to AIT-Nazi books, and download them. These links usually do not have long lives. And it is not always easy finding new replacements.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 14 Aug 2012 21:14

Online Books

AIT-Nazi and PIE-Charlatan Books

Publication Date: February 9, 2009
Author: Martin Litchfield West
Indo-European Poetry and Myth [Google] [Amazon]

Download Link

Code: Select all

http://www.4shared.com/office/kt-j24He/Indo-European_Poetry_and_Myth.html

Publication Date: October 18, 2007
Author: James Clackson
Indo-European Linguistics: An Introduction (Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics) [Google] [Amazon]

Download Link

Code: Select all

http://depositfiles.com/files/opn3l9j5b

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 14 Aug 2012 22:11

Acharya wrote:Need to be aware of the reason for this deep malicious plan.
And this is 2009 publication!
It is not about explaining their own language, history and antiquity.

The plan is to remove sanskrit and India out of the entire contribution to civilization and Indian civilization is reduced to a derivative civilization. They want to make it like mesopotamia which is only in the museum or academic world.

Extraordinary use of foreign culture to explain their own language and ancient history

Basically we Indians have either been

too ignorant about the issue, and have completely ignored this phenomenon (I would consider the majority here), or
too over-confident in our own identity and saw no danger in these theories (I would consider the majority of Hindus well-read in scriptures here), or
too taken in by the Macaulayite education and deference to the West to question these theories (I would consider the majority of middle-class yuppie class here), or
too busy showing the horse bones to the Whites in their AIT-courts and journals (I would consider the tiny weeny few nationalist academics here)

Awareness can be increased. Over-confidence should be moderated. Macaulayism needs to be cured. Right strategies to resist have to be formulated.

Over-confidence has the downside that a person may escape the Macaulayization, but those who are less fortunate in their knowledge would be swept off by this propaganda bombardment, until that person would be the only one standing on an island of Bharat surrounded by a sea of deracinated and "derived" Indians.

One just needs to look around in the Internet to see just how deep this lie of Central Asian Aryans with PIE as language has been buried. Tons and tons of books and academic journal articles have been published in the meantime, each making reference to the other. Generations of Europeans and Indians have been inculcated with alternate reality. Dravidian, Dalit and even Islamist politics have been built over the bones of truth. White Supremacists have been on the rampage thinking they are "pure Aryans" and that is the "Aryan way"! Whole PIE dictionaries have been written taking PIE as a done thing, and most normal dictionaries have started making reference to "PIE roots"! One sees almost the whole West acting India-blind to all contributions and accomplishments of Indian Civilization - in Linguistics, in Writing, in Mythology, in Astronomy, in Mathematics, in Medicine, in Philosophy, in Culture! Everything is being digested and source references being water-hosed!

Overturning this cart of lies and cleaning up the PIE-trash is going to take some serious work spanning continents! The West has already invested a lot in this lie, and they will not take any rebellion from docile Indians lightly!

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 14 Aug 2012 23:18

ManishH wrote: Yogi avare,

What most of these astronomical back-calculations do not provide is the error probability. For one such example, dating of texts is done without knowing if the intercalary months was inserted, or even how frequently was it inserted at the period in question. Vedic and Epic texts variously mention a month to range from 27-35 days. Just the variation of 8 days would translate to a time depth of 576 years, if all one had to begin with is the name of the month and a solar event (eg winter solstice in Māgha). Add to that other missing parameters like when exactly would a month begin (new or full moon). That adds another 1000 or so years (assuming 1deg precession / 72 years).

Reading through early pages of this (OIT) thread, came across this, sounds impressive, isn't it?

Words 'error' and probability' - not just in one sentence but one 'fact' that is not provided by juvinile Archeo astronomers?

I had pleasure of spending my last 20 years on error and probability, but never ever had to deal with them together. No, I am not asking for explanation of 'error probability'. No time to read BS. However I am asking for an example/illustration of one. Any takers?

A month of 27 (and 29/30) days is commonsense. Where do (which and where) Vedic/epic texts mention a month of 35 days. I am not saying they don't, but would want to know where the reference appears and in what context. Any takers?

Variation of 8 days (in estimation of month) leading to error (probability too?) of 576 years is hog wash. Such thing may occur in a calendar such as 'Gregorian' where length (or nomenclature) of the month is removed from astronomy reality (I am specifically referring to positions of the Sun and the Moon).

An uncertanity due to Purnamanta or Amant reckoning of Indian Lunar months (add to it need of intercalary month every ~2.8 years) may add ~1000 years to estimation of specific event. However this error is NOT in addition to garbled nonsense stated prior. More critical, which specific reference is been affected by this potential error?

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 15 Aug 2012 04:43

RajeshA wrote:One religious ceremony of the ancient Greeks, I find interesting is the use of fire altars.

The fire ritual is something very much Indo-Iranian, that is something shared by the PUrus and Anus, whereas the Druhyus, who expanded into Central Asia, have forgotten about it.

So only those Greeks were privy to the fire ritual who moved into Greece from the Southern route, i.e. South of the Caspian - the Alinas, the Hellenes. Possibly the Mycenaean were these Greeks.

Another rituals Greeks shared is that of cremation- of dead - on fueneral pyre.

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 15 Aug 2012 09:10

ManishH wrote:I asked you a simple question - pick any phonetic reconstruction of a Hittite cuneiform syllabogram from Melchert's book and show me how it is fake.

I think Shiv ji is onto a "the emperor has no clothes" finding in this whole business of linguistic reconstruction of dead languages.

Firstly, Old Persian is 'reconstructed' phonetically using Sanskrit, Avestan (a sister language to Sanskrit) and what is known of middle Persian. This assumed correct phonetic reconstruction of Old Persian is used to phonetically recreate Akkadian. The assumed correct phonetic reconstruction of Akkadian is used to phonetically recreate Hittite.

In this whole business, the impreciseness of conveying exact phonetics in a logographic / logo-phonographic script is ignored. Also, inconvenient words that don't fit in with existing Indo-Aryan language theory are pushed out and 'assumed' to belong to a substrate language (eg Median in Persian, when there is absolutely no other record of the Median language other than the supposed 'loanwords' into Old Persian).

Finally, after Hittite has been 'phonetically reconstructed' using Sanskrit (or 'Indo Aryan') phonetics - linguists claim that Hittite proves PIE by fitting in with a prediction in the development of the Indo-Aryan language ! Very likely that this whole edifice is a prime example of circular reasoning.

Murugan · Post by **Murugan** » 15 Aug 2012 10:37

Similarity between Macedonian and Sanskrit Language

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ew7L5WF ... detailpage

Comparison of various words from 1:40 onwards

***

German Latin/English Sanskrit words

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqMSGJKg ... sults_main

***

For Phonologists: Sanskrit chanting by...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3Mzu-mfutk

***

Added Later:

Mantra-Singen mit Kavita

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtWN5N0KgMs

Mantra-Singen mit Pandit Jasraj (4:30)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8J9S6-rsK-4

Murugan · Post by **Murugan** » 15 Aug 2012 11:39

Follies' Paradise: The Myth of AIT

Archaeologically, Genetically or Linguistically or by Studies of Cultural Continuity Proven: AIT is a Bigtime BS

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn-ql-NG ... re=related

Murugan · Post by **Murugan** » 15 Aug 2012 11:49

D A Joseph (!!) On Aryan Migration in very SDRE Tongue

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=en ... qcxGw&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLAZWiSM ... ure=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXmRTtJs ... ure=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F82-DOAS ... ure=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TesHCjaG ... ure=relmfu

More about D A Joseph
http://www.dajoseph.com/

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Aug 2012 14:15

Murugan wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn-ql-NG ... re=related

Thanks. Good video

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 15 Aug 2012 15:08

Nilesh ji, The cremation is something I am interested in understanding. Can you provide some resources. And about Greek and Indic similarities also. Another thing I would like to understand is how did the Native Americans treated their dead. Uptill now everything suggests that cremation is something that came after burials and some people who used burial changed their customs (well most of it) in favour of cremation. But I would like to understand through what lineage and with what reasoning cremation came about.

Murugan bhai, from the link you provided we have the following:
http://www.dajoseph.com/PDFs/Darwin-DAJ.pdf

dajoseph ji has found his point of no return, as Rajiv Malhotra ji would most likely put it. To me his attack against Darwin seems very childish and I would not be surprised if his criticism of AIT is weak. If you decide to rely on his work I would suggest you be careful. He could be a Christian version of a confused desi.

Murugan ji something dajoseph ji said for the RSS youth. Unfortunately for me I dont know Tamil. Would like to understand what it is.
http://www.dajoseph.com/PDFs/Trichy-Rss.pdf

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 15 Aug 2012 15:37

Review of Prometheus The Movie

Yesterday I went to see Prometheus the Movie. I am a big science fiction lover and loved Ridley Scott's Alien movies. I had also heard there is some "Sanskrit" in it! Some spoilers below!

Well there was no "Sanskrit" in there. It was the cooked-up PIE!!! There are three scenes that one needs to expand on.

1) The Cyborg David (Michael Fassbender) is the only one way awake on a deep space journey of the ship Prometheus, while the rest of the crew is in stasis chambers. Michael Fassbender is learning Proto-Indo-European language from a hologram teacher. He would need the language to talk to the Aliens who speak PIE language and were responsible for creating human-beings on the planet. Sounds corny!

In the movie the holographic professor, takes him through the ABC’s and recites Schleicher’s Fable. An artificial text composed in the reconstructed PIE, in 1868, to demonstrate the language’s use.

hjewɪs jasmə hwælnə nahəst akʷunsəz dadʳkta (Translated as: a sheep that had no wool saw horses) – Excerpt from Schleicher’s Fable – The Sheep and the Horses

The ‘Professor’ in the clip is in fact the real-life linguistics consultant used for the film and taught Michael Fassbender (David) the dialogue. Dr. Anil Biltoo teaches in the SOAS Language Centre in London.

The movie is of-course a story, but it is still going to capture the imagination of the people and leave behind some precipitate. And that precipitate is that early humans' natural language was Proto-Indo-European (PIE). In fact the language has a cosmic connection. It is the language of our makers! Since the Anglo-Germans are today the guardians of this cosmic language PIE, they are the ones who will intermediate between the gods and mankind on our behalf.

What I found sad about it was that a SDRE was employed as linguistics consultant and he too dished out the same PIE crap and gave it more legitimacy. Even as a Sanskrit professor, he did not push the idea of using Sanskrit. I don't know. It probably wouldn't have sat well with the Western academics and Western financiers, since they were following a different agenda!

As a hologram, we see the doctor wearing a Nehru topi and a Nehru jacket. They probably explain his bent of mind.

2) The archaeologists show the rest of the crew why they made the journey. They are showing through hologram projectors, pictures of various stelae or plaques or tablets found in many ancient civilizations, in which a hominid is being shown pointing at some stellar constellation as a form of invitation.

This is what is written on the plaques

Code: Select all

Egyptian 
2470 BCE
Memphis agricultural region
Western NILE DELTA

Mayan 
620 CE
Destruction excavation site b central TEOTINUAGAN


Sumerian 
3590 BCE
early Sumerian settlement lower ERIDU


Isle of skye 
35000+ BCE
North island 
EILEAN A’ CHEO’ – cuinllin region

Babylonian
1540 BCE
ancient cultural region 
central – southern MESOPOTAMIA 

Hittite 
1760 BCE
Central Anatolia fields 
South western UGARIT

Hawaiian
680 CE
One alli park region refugio sanctuary HONAUNAU

As we see Isle of Skye, Scotland wins hands down as the most ancient archaeological site. Well one can't grudge Riddley Scott for suggesting it!

But what one again sees is that in a Proto-Indo-European focused movie, even there India is blended out. No suggestion is made that India is also an old civilization. I would call this India-Blindness! India is blended out because we are either not an ancient civilization and even if we were, we are still not a museum civilization!

3) Then comes a time when the Cyborg David talks to the Alien. He uses PIE to talk to him.

David, the Cyborg wrote:The line that David speaks to the Engineer (which is from a longer sequence that didn’t make the final edit) is as follows:

/ida hmanəm aɪ kja namṛtuh zdɛ:taha/…/ghʷɪvah-pjorn-ɪttham sas da:tṛ kredah/

A serviceable translation into English is:
‘This man is here because he does not want to die. He believes you can give him more life’.

Of course, the movie is going to give a fillip to PIE. The geek world is abuzz! People are going to start asking more questions about PIE and showing more interest! And that what was only known in academic circles and those looking at etymology dictionaries is now going to seep further into the popular imagination!

Also the next movie Prometheus 2 probably coming out in 2014 plays out on the planet of the Engineers of Mankind alien race, so there would still be plenty of PIE to be spoken, next time too! So now PIE becomes a spoken language!

I would say a big win for PIE-Charlatans and AIT-Nazis! We can be satisfied that some bloke got to wear the Nehru suit in the movie!

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Aug 2012 16:03

Looks like Talageri's Rig Veda book used to be online on Geocities
http://www.geocities.com/dipalsarvesh/r ... igHist.htm

I found it via a Geocities mirror (oocities) and got what used to be there (250 plus pages) via the wayback machine archive. Needless to say - I saved all I could get. (Missed some tables)

http://web.archive.org/web/200910271003 ... igHist.htm

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 15 Aug 2012 16:09

Acharya wrote:
Arjun wrote:
But the word Sanskrit appears only once in these 21 pages - only to say why the language is not Sanskrit but "Indo-Aryan" These guys are fukking with us and we have swallowed all this like morons.

wtf? Due to "certain linguistic developments" - which are not mentioned, a date is applied to say that "indo-Aryan" (wtf is that?) separated from Sanskrit. This is bullshitting of the highest order. These guys bluff using the language we are accustomed to learning from. So they are taken seriously

Obvious references from Sanskrit are coolly passed off as 'Indo-Aryan' - WTF !! Needs to be widely circulated as an example of how low these Nazis can stoop to.
Need to aware of the reason for this deep malicious plan.
And this is 2009 publication!
It is not about explaining their own language, history and antiquity.

The plan it remove the sanskrit and India out of the entire contribution to civilization and Indian civilization is reduced to a derivative civilization. They want to make it like mesopotamia which is only in the museum or academic world.

Extraordinary use of foreign culture to explain their own language and ancient history

The efforts are already in place in multiple directions.

There are open attempts to Christianize Hindu scriptures including Vedas and upanishads. Interpretations and English versions of Bhashyas are written replacing Vedic cosmology with Christian cosmology.

Read the latest effort on "aryavratta chronicles - govinda". MB is presented in reflection of recent fiction work - deamons and angles.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Aug 2012 16:11

This page is a useful archive of documents in Sanskrit. Possibly audio files as well but I could not get them
http://sanskritdocuments.org/doc_1_index.html

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 15 Aug 2012 16:11

shiv saar,

Talageri's book - "Rigveda - A Historical Analysis" book is freely available from voiceofdharma. It is also its most stable location.

The full reference to the book in this thread is here.

I found chapters 6 and 7 very enlightening!

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 15 Aug 2012 17:40

ravi_g wrote:Nilesh ji, The cremation is something I am interested in understanding. Can you provide some resources. And about Greek and Indic similarities also. Another thing I would like to understand is how did the Native Americans treated their dead. Uptill now everything suggests that cremation is something that came after burials and some people who used burial changed their customs (well most of it) in favour of cremation. But I would like to understand through what lineage and with what reasoning cremation came about.

The History by Herodotus would be a good start. Good review of practices before Christianity and Islam (granted, the book is been translated by people with christian background, so some bias may show up).

In Indian context., Cremation seems to be the norm in Mahabharata.

In Ramayana, it appears 'different methods' coexisted side by side. Dasharatha, Vali, Ravana went the route of cremation, while Kabandha (Rama killed him) and few others were buried.

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 15 Aug 2012 18:17

River Sarasvati
ravi_g, ji,

Since you are working on Saravati, its waters, glacier fed and/or monsoon fed aspects of Sarasvati, I assume you have copy of 'The Lost River' by Michel Danino.

I speed read it at my friend's place few months ago. This is my impression,

The book is well written, well argued. Michel presents evidence in support of his position and also in criticism of positions of others (e.g. Frankfort) that are contrary to Michel's thesis.

In spite of this, the impression I left with is that Michel (Danino) was 'justifying' a specific thesis for 'Sarasvati' time period rather than 'researching - exploring- finding out' time period of Sarasvati. My $0.02 for what it is worth.

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 15 Aug 2012 19:17

Nilesh ji I am interested but not actively researching on Saraswati, at present. Uptill now I was interested in Saraswati only as part of the larger understanding of percipitation in the subcontinent. A big river flowing for 'n' number of years drying up is something that cannot be taken lightly. This year I am told Gomukha has dwindled down too. These are portends in my view, that should be taken seriously.

About the Book I am afraid I do not have it with me. But I think I should have it now. Advocacy forces one to examine a lot of angles, though at the cost at times of the truth.

Thanks for the lead though.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 15 Aug 2012 20:05

Nilesh Oak ji,

A general comment about pro-Indian books. Often they sound defensive, trying to justify our right to be left alone from the aggressive but unjustified views and propaganda of the West.

There is a psychological angle to all this. Readers usually subconsciously identify themselves with the winning team. They may consciously be in agreement with the writer, but their subconsciousness would rebel against this stance, and often they would not come out in open support. Defensiveness is considered by the mind as a losing proposition. One's whole life experience subconsciously keeps on saying, 'one would lose'!

The "Islam khatre me hai" differs from this theory because regardless of such rhetoric, it is still an aggressive stance because each Muslim understands that the base stance is one of conquering the other. In Dharmic thinking, however 'Defense' is the default attitude, and not aggression or even retribution. However to feel the strength in the defense at the subconscious level, one has to be immersed truly in the Dharmic thought. That is not that often the case.

So when reading, the mind often identifies itself with the aggressor, especially the stubborn aggressor. Defense as a strategy is considered by the mind as something for the losers!

The style of writing of Western writers is different. It is, I feel, much more aggressive. They may use lies upon lies, but they present those lies nicely giving the reader strong wings for his imagination. They want to take their readers on a journey of conquest and it doesn't really matter if the wings are of lies. The pro-India writers want to keep their reader in one place, making him hold up his view and defend something which to the reader's mind looks indefensible. The reader makes no journey!

OIT, I believe, is about turning this around. But we are still in the defensive mode! We are still in the outraged mode! Sure it is important to strengthen our flanks! But one has to wonder whether a few horse bones alone would suffice for that?

This defensive attitude is however not always the case. Sometimes we in fact become quite aggressive, and start making big claims - the claims about Pushpak Vimana and Nuclear Wars! That too doesn't really work out, because that sounds like lashing out, a move of desperation. There is an important element that lacks in it.

The whole issue is one of domination of the narrative - whose narrative dominates! The aggressor pushes his theories about the other and pooh-poohs the claims of the other about himself. The aggressor builds up his case through intensive cultural impregnation of the public, almost blending out all other narratives from reaching its own tribe. Today in the Internet age, this cannot be done through normal channels of blocking and censorship, so it is done by overwhelming the own tribe with all forms of cultural input. The aggressor also tries to buy into the cultural media of the other, so that the other's media instead of blocking out foreign influence, in fact boosts it.

All this cultural media output in the West is harnessed to fill in the blanks of its own outrageous claims. A movie like Prometheus would decrease the resistance of the viewer to many ideas promoted in it - creationism, Indo-European supremacy within mankind say over Africans or Arabs or Chinese, Anglo-German ownership of Indo-Europeanism, etc. All these ideas are presented with such a complete experience of an engrossing story line, visuals and special effects, that the viewer comes out of the movie thinking it is possible.

In the West, science and myth are at the same time kept apart and at the same time interwoven into each other very artfully. "Science-fiction" is used to fill in the blanks between their myths and claims and a viewer's credulity providing the viewer with a bridge to accept a lie.

When Hindus make claims of reality of Pushpak Vimanas and Nuclear War in Ancient Times, we don't really have the glue to make it stick to the consciousness of reality of a person. There is a lot of cartilage missing. Mind you, I am not saying that that was all not true. It may have been true but the claim is still outrageous because those who make such a claim have not done their homework in preparing the public of 21st century to believe in it, much less any work to show scientifically that it happened.

The critical Indian has become suspicious of his own heritage because the guardians of this heritage have very much failed to make it easier for him to believe in this world where science rules.

In fact even if science speaks for something, it still is not sufficient if one does not how to tell a good story!

That is why it is all the laudable what the Westerners have really been able to accomplish - they have built a whole fictitious history for themselves with a fictitious language all on a lie and by stealing India's ancient history and Sanskrit! Wow! They have put so much cartilage around the narrative that everybody thinks it has a skeleton underneath!

If this sounds like a rant, then I am probably guilty of it!

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Aug 2012 20:09

Here is a post I had made earlier and in that post was a promise that I would point it out how fakeology of a reconstructed language is used to "prove" (or in this case disprove) a connection.

shiv wrote:
ManishH wrote: To establish the relationships between languages, it is not necessary to reconstruct every bit of the phonetics .
There is a huge difference between between establishing a connection and cooking up words. The connection is known. The words are guessed as is the phonology. Making up words and phonology and then using those made up words and phonology as "proof" is fakeology. As time passes, on this thread, I will pick up examples of this fakeology of how PIE is used as an existing known language to "demonstrate" its parenthood of a modern or dead language.

It tickles me no end to dig up and list the arguments made to show how the creators of Sanskrit came to India on dates suitable to the linguists of the world. Since I am convinced that their dates for Sanskrit are wrong, I believe it is important form me to dig up every data point the AIT Nazis have made to counter it or trash it.

The reason for this particular post is that I have just discovered how linguists "proved" that an "indo-Aryan" language split off from Indo European in the Pontic steppe (North of Caspian sea) in 1800 BC before it moved to Iran to create Avestan and Old Persian and then moved off to India to become Sanskrit.

It is about a group of languages called "Finno Ugric" languages. Finno Ugric languages are Hungarian, Finnish and a few others. Some linguists in the past have argued for the inclusion of Fino Ugric and other "Uralic" languages in the family of Indo-European languages. In fact a man called Sweet argued that if Uralic could not be considered Indo-European then all linguistic relationships are all fake (the exact quote is on Wiki linked below)

Funnily enough I can myself make out similarities between Finno Urgric and Indian languages, although there are some words that seem to be similar to Dravidian languages. But the AIT Nazis have ruled out Finno Ugric as Indo-European, overruling objections.. They say "Naah. Finno Ugric has borrowed words from IE. It is a step child. Not a true blue blood Indo European."

Why? You might ask. Well its because Finno Ugric languages have the word "Sata" for one hundred. And as we all know the PIE word (earlier cooked up by us for one hundred is "*kemtom"

(The "*" in *kemtom means "I am cooked up"). You see, European words for 100 all starts with "Ka" or "cha". It is the Indian words that start with "sa". Having a "sa" in the middle of Europe is highly inconvenient. Solution? Kick out Finno Ugric from Indo-European and claim that it merely borrowed the word for 100. When and where was this word "borrowed"

Ta daaaaaaaaa! Finno Ugric people travelled 1000 km down to Pontic steppe and picked up the word "sata" for 100 before returning to their land. And that word was picked up soon after the PIE speaking Pontic steppians (Central Asians) who used to say "*kemtom" for 100 split up into their Indian branch and started saying "sata" for 100. the Finno Ugrics picked up 100 from those proto Aryans who were cooking horses for future Rig Veda graves. Since linguists have already decided that "PIE" was spoken in Pontic Steppe and they have already decidd that they used to say *kemtom and not Sata and they have already decided that these people would move to India after 300 years, the whole thing becomes very very simple.

Sorry if this story is not clear to you. But the more I read - the greater the number of little bluffs an "sleights of hand" I find which linguists have resorted to to keep their outrageous fakeological Indo European language theories afloat.

Relevant links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Uralic_languages
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finno-Ugric_languages
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix: ... _languages

In linguistics, unrelated (foreign/non cognate) words become "substrates" if that is convenient. If that is not convenient they become "superstrates" or else they are "adstrates". In some cases they are simply "borrowed". It all depends on where you want the language to fit into a language tree whose relations and dates have already been decided.

Om Witzelaya namah. Om Anthonye namah. Om hopeihaven'tleftanyAITnames namah.

member_22872 · Post by **member_22872** » 15 Aug 2012 20:53

The "*" in *kemtom means "I am cooked up"

Shiv garu, I must tell you, one thing is I learn a lot from your posts, second thing is your posts are real fun to read, like the above.

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 15 Aug 2012 20:59

RajeshA wrote:If this sounds like a rant, then I am probably guilty of it!

If this sounds like a rant, then I am ~~probably~~ guilty of it![/

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 15 Aug 2012 21:03

venug wrote:
The "*" in *kemtom means "I am cooked up"
Shiv garu, I must tell you, one thing is I learn a lot from your posts, second thing is your posts are real fun to read, like the above.

I second it. Time to take next step. Shiv Garu, don't leave it restricted to forum readership.

Nope, I am not suggesting 'pir' reviewed journals. Your stuff will not meet the high standards of the contents of fancy waste paper basket.

member_22872 · Post by **member_22872** » 15 Aug 2012 21:07

sound laws have no exceptions

As you all know, in mathematics, to disprove a theorem, all you need is one example which disproves the theorem. But it appears in linguistics, if you find one example to disprove the above, all you do is sidestep it or by inventing a category like substrate or superstrate or whatever...very neat.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 15 Aug 2012 21:07

shiv saar,

good work on looking up Finno-Ugric. So now the challenge becomes

Looking up words in Sanskrit which can be shown to derive from various Prakrits in India, and are also present in other Indo-European languages. This is the case where the etymology of the words is better explained in the Prakrits including Tamil. Perhaps some "one-way" phonological change axioms may also help showing an evolution from Prakrits to Sanskrit, e.g. Tamil -> Sanskrit.
Looking up words in Finno-Ugric which are closer cognates of Sanskrit or Indian Prakrits, than to other European languages. Some collaboration here between Indians and Finns/Hungarians may help!

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 15 Aug 2012 21:11

shiv wrote:
Why? You might ask. Well its because Finno Ugric languages have the word "Sata" for one hundred. And as we all know the PIE word (earlier cooked up by us for one hundred is "*kemtom" (The "*" in *kemtom means "I am cooked up"). You see, European words for 100 all starts with "Ka" or "cha". It is the Indian words that start with "sa". Having a "sa" in the middle of Europe is highly inconvenient. Solution? Kick out Finno Ugric from Indo-European and claim that it merely borrowed the word for 100. When and where was this word "borrowed"

Latin (daughter of Sanskrit) and its derivative -Roman's languages.. Italian, french, spanish (and in English via french I suppose) has 'Cento', 'Cien' and 'Century" etc. (said with 'sa' sound). Just saying....

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 15 Aug 2012 21:13

RajeshA wrote:Nilesh Oak ji,

A general comment about pro-Indian books. Often they sound defensive, trying to justify our right to be left alone from the aggressive but unjustified views and propaganda of the West.

There is a psychological angle to all this. Readers usually subconsciously identify themselves with the winning team. They may consciously be in agreement with the writer, but their subconsciousness would rebel against this stance, and often they would not come out in open support. Defensiveness is considered by the mind as a losing proposition. One's whole life experience subconsciously keeps on saying, 'one would lose'!

The "Islam khatre me hai" differs from this theory because regardless of such rhetoric, it is still an aggressive stance because each Muslim understands that the base stance is one of conquering the other. In Dharmic thinking, however 'Defense' is the default attitude, and not aggression or even retribution. However to feel the strength in the defense at the subconscious level, one has to be immersed truly in the Dharmic thought. That is not that often the case.

So when reading, the mind often identifies itself with the aggressor, especially the stubborn aggressor. Defense as a strategy is considered by the mind as something for the losers!

The style of writing of Western writers is different. It is, I feel, much more aggressive. They may use lies upon lies, but they present those lies nicely giving the reader strong wings for his imagination. They want to take their readers on a journey of conquest and it doesn't really matter if the wings are of lies. The pro-India writers want to keep their reader in one place, making him hold up his view and defend something which to the reader's mind looks indefensible. The reader makes no journey!

OIT, I believe, is about turning this around. But we are still in the defensive mode! We are still in the outraged mode! Sure it is important to strengthen our flanks! But one has to wonder whether a few horse bones alone would suffice for that?

This defensive attitude is however not always the case. Sometimes we in fact become quite aggressive, and start making big claims - the claims about Pushpak Vimana and Nuclear Wars! That too doesn't really work out, because that sounds like lashing out, a move of desperation. There is an important element that lacks in it.

The whole issue is one of domination of the narrative - whose narrative dominates! The aggressor pushes his theories about the other and pooh-poohs the claims of the other about himself. The aggressor builds up his case through intensive cultural impregnation of the public, almost blending out all other narratives from reaching its own tribe. Today in the Internet age, this cannot be done through normal channels of blocking and censorship, so it is done by overwhelming the own tribe with all forms of cultural input. The aggressor also tries to buy into the cultural media of the other, so that the other's media instead of blocking out foreign influence, in fact boosts it.

All this cultural media output in the West is harnessed to fill in the blanks of its own outrageous claims. A movie like Prometheus would decrease the resistance of the viewer to many ideas promoted in it - creationism, Indo-European supremacy within mankind say over Africans or Arabs or Chinese, Anglo-German ownership of Indo-Europeanism, etc. All these ideas are presented with such a complete experience of an engrossing story line, visuals and special effects, that the viewer comes out of the movie thinking it is possible.

In the West, science and myth are at the same time kept apart and at the same time interwoven into each other very artfully. "Science-fiction" is used to fill in the blanks between their myths and claims and a viewer's credulity providing the viewer with a bridge to accept a lie.

When Hindus make claims of reality of Pushpak Vimanas and Nuclear War in Ancient Times, we don't really have the glue to make it stick to the consciousness of reality of a person. There is a lot of cartilage missing. Mind you, I am not saying that that was all not true. It may have been true but the claim is still outrageous because those who make such a claim have not done their homework in preparing the public of 21st century to believe in it, much less any work to show scientifically that it happened.

The critical Indian has become suspicious of his own heritage because the guardians of this heritage have very much failed to make it easier for him to believe in this world where science rules.

In fact even if science speaks for something, it still is not sufficient if one does not how to tell a good story!

That is why it is all the laudable what the Westerners have really been able to accomplish - they have built a whole fictitious history for themselves with a fictitious language all on a lie and by stealing India's ancient history and Sanskrit! Wow! They have put so much cartilage around the narrative that everybody thinks it has a skeleton underneath!

If this sounds like a rant, then I am probably guilty of it!

Can you develop this into a article. I will help promote this and also translate it into other Indian languages.

Nilesh Oak · Post by **Nilesh Oak** » 15 Aug 2012 21:17

venug wrote:
sound laws have no exceptions
As you all know, in mathematics, to disprove a theorem, all you need is one example which disproves the theorem. But it appears in linguistics, if you find one example to disprove the above, all you do is sidestep it or by inventing a category like substrate or superstrate or whatever...very neat.

Notwithstanding limitations of math shown by Godel, comparison of mathematics and linguistics is a joke.

Anyhew, the key point you made -i.e. anyone proposing a theory has to look for evidence that also contradicts the theory, not just evidence that corroborate it, here is that no nonsense philsopher - Karl Popper,

If we are uncritical we shall always find what we want: we shall look for, and find, confirmations, and we shall look away from, and not see, whatever might be dangerous to our pet theories.
- Karl Popper

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 15 Aug 2012 21:17

Nilesh Oak wrote:
RajeshA wrote:If this sounds like a rant, then I am probably guilty of it!
If this sounds like a rant, then I am ~~probably~~ guilty of it!

"Probably" signifies it is not just a rant and one needs a deeper view of the process of public consumption of some message!

Disclaimer: the post was not directed at your work or anything.

The point is to understand human psychology. What are the factors that play a role which enables a common man to accept one myth and to doubt another!

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 15 Aug 2012 21:20

Acharya wrote:Can you develop this into a article. I will help promote this and also translate it into other Indian languages.

Acharya garu,

thanks for your interest. I'll definitely try to flesh it out!

Gus · Post by **Gus** » 15 Aug 2012 21:20

I was always puzzled about the exclusion of Finnish in IE group of languages. They sure as hell are white enough for us to not pick them apart. Same with Basque.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Aug 2012 21:23

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finno-Ugric_languages
The word for "four" (number 4) in Uralic languages is like Tamil "Naaluh" and "Kannada "Naalakku"
Finnish Nelja, Estonian Neli etc
The word for 9 is structured like Hindi "unnees (20 minus one)

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix: ... _languages
The word for mother is vaguely akin to "amma" or "aayi" (Marathi)
ema" and "aiti" in different Uralic languages

Father is apa in Hungarian (Appa - Kannada/Tamil)

Ear - "Korva" in 2 languages is reminiscent of Kannada "kiwi"

Tongue - "nyelv" (Hungarian) and "nelam" in "Komi" language are like "Naalge" in Kannada

Hand - words like kez, kasi, kazi are reminscent of Kannada/Tamil "Kai"

Laugh "nagrua" in Finnish is like "nagu" (kannada)

To hold "pitaa", pidla" "paidama" are like "pidi"(Tamil)

To push: "Tol" in Hungarian is like "Tull" in (Kannada/Tamil)

White: Valkia, Valgie, valge are liek tamil "Vellai"

But many other words sound like "indo-European" and many like nothing else that i know.

I think some of these language theories are pure guesswork. No one knows exactly. Too many Uralic words like Dravidian languages.

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 15 Aug 2012 21:26

Did the Finno-Ugric languages produce any epic or literary masterpiece of note ? Probably not - hence the 'high priests' of the Indo-European civilization see no value in including them in their 'elite' and exclusive club.

On the other hand, Sanskrit's fate was sealed, the day the West got a handle on the treasures of this language - starting with William Jones' famous realization: "The Sanskrit language, whatever be its antiquity, is of a wonderful structure; more perfect than the Greek, more copious than the Latin, and more exquisitely refined than either...".

A perfectly executed heist by your followers, Mr Jones !

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Aug 2012 21:34

Nilesh Oak wrote:
Latin (daughter of Sanskrit) and its derivative -Roman's languages.. Italian, french, spanish (and in English via french I suppose) has 'Cento', 'Cien' and 'Century" etc. (said with 'sa' sound). Just saying....

Italians still say "chent-" for "cent-". In any case the European branch of "Indo European" have been called "Centum" languages because of the word for hundred which has "ka" in it more often that Indic languages that have "shata-" and are therefore called "Satem" languages.

But this linguistic Satem Centum business is like a blond white family with a curly haired black child. They will deny or discard. With European languages all being "Centum" the presence of Uralic Satem is inconvenient. And right next to India and Iran we have the dead Tocharian language which is Centum when it should be Satem according to the Witzel caste. And there is one language in India where they use a Centum word for hundred rather than the Sanskritic Satem

This Satem Centum classification may be fake along with the fakeological word "*kemtom* (100 in PIE). In Tamil nadu some people say "sore" for cooked rice and others say "chor". Satem and Centum Tamil? Or Sore-Chor Tamil. That should start a DMK sponsored riot I guess