NomadatNet
19 Apr 2011
Language / Polish word "Dom" and its similarities in different languages [46]
Originally, it was a theory by a French scientist. Later, it was reconsidered by Ataturk when there was nationalist movements in Europe and in Ottoman lands.
Such ultimate theories can not be proved wrong or false. Science today (even physical sciences are biased, so, science history too is biased. When (if) we see China as superpower in next decade, whole world will learn everythings were invented by Chinese in the past. We have seen this since last century in the West. But, West deny, for example, they don't mention Albert Einstein was an Ashkenazi, at least, they try to hide such facts.
So, the theory that says Turks moved to Anatolia first time in 1000s is belong to the West. If Bush says twin-towers were attacked by El-Kaide, it will be written in written history and will stay so as long as USA or Bush-like people in USA stay as power and all other stories will remain as bla bla or conspiracies. Things about the history too are like that.
I will give another example that may show Turks living in Anatolia long time ago, even 7000-8000 years ago, neolithic age. Years ago, I had a hobby, collection in weavings, hand made carpets (knotted weavings) and kilims (flatwavings.) All collectors including experts whose professions were professors, etc etc too were agreeing that there are two kinds of motifs in weavings; geometric and floral. Geometric motifs were attributed to Turkics while florals were attributed to Persians. About two decades ago, a British archeolog found wall paintings in Catalhoyuk, a 8000 years old city (known oldest settled civilization place) in central Turkey. Those motifs were very similar to old Turkic kilim weavings. So, how come it was possible? Weavings, especially kilim weaving (flatwoven items) with geometrical motifs were almost always seen in Turkic cultures. This has been debated much among collectors, etc for 20 years. Here is one of them against this theory: marlamallett.com/chupdate.htm
So, with this and also with some other theories like Runic alphabet's similarity (found in Anatolia too) to Turkic Orhun alphabet divided classical Western teaching, so, world schoolars too.
While written sources aren't telling any true (logical) story about twin-towers, how can you say Turks were not there in Anatolia before 1000? Maybe, they came to Anatolia several times tousands of years ago too. Btw, even Italians accept they have a close relativeness with Turks. Late findings say Irish people were farmers in Anatolia before.
I didn't use any written source much or didn't take any written source as reference when I mentioned about the dom/dam. There are some words I know (I grew in rural life here) that even Turkish written sources don't know and Turks here don't know. I heard them from very old people years ago. Spoken language may be telling some more truths as written sources are usually political sources changing depending to the power of the day.
Wow the "Sun Language Theory" sure is some wacky version of science.
Originally, it was a theory by a French scientist. Later, it was reconsidered by Ataturk when there was nationalist movements in Europe and in Ottoman lands.
Such ultimate theories can not be proved wrong or false. Science today (even physical sciences are biased, so, science history too is biased. When (if) we see China as superpower in next decade, whole world will learn everythings were invented by Chinese in the past. We have seen this since last century in the West. But, West deny, for example, they don't mention Albert Einstein was an Ashkenazi, at least, they try to hide such facts.
So, the theory that says Turks moved to Anatolia first time in 1000s is belong to the West. If Bush says twin-towers were attacked by El-Kaide, it will be written in written history and will stay so as long as USA or Bush-like people in USA stay as power and all other stories will remain as bla bla or conspiracies. Things about the history too are like that.
I will give another example that may show Turks living in Anatolia long time ago, even 7000-8000 years ago, neolithic age. Years ago, I had a hobby, collection in weavings, hand made carpets (knotted weavings) and kilims (flatwavings.) All collectors including experts whose professions were professors, etc etc too were agreeing that there are two kinds of motifs in weavings; geometric and floral. Geometric motifs were attributed to Turkics while florals were attributed to Persians. About two decades ago, a British archeolog found wall paintings in Catalhoyuk, a 8000 years old city (known oldest settled civilization place) in central Turkey. Those motifs were very similar to old Turkic kilim weavings. So, how come it was possible? Weavings, especially kilim weaving (flatwoven items) with geometrical motifs were almost always seen in Turkic cultures. This has been debated much among collectors, etc for 20 years. Here is one of them against this theory: marlamallett.com/chupdate.htm
So, with this and also with some other theories like Runic alphabet's similarity (found in Anatolia too) to Turkic Orhun alphabet divided classical Western teaching, so, world schoolars too.
While written sources aren't telling any true (logical) story about twin-towers, how can you say Turks were not there in Anatolia before 1000? Maybe, they came to Anatolia several times tousands of years ago too. Btw, even Italians accept they have a close relativeness with Turks. Late findings say Irish people were farmers in Anatolia before.
I didn't use any written source much or didn't take any written source as reference when I mentioned about the dom/dam. There are some words I know (I grew in rural life here) that even Turkish written sources don't know and Turks here don't know. I heard them from very old people years ago. Spoken language may be telling some more truths as written sources are usually political sources changing depending to the power of the day.