Indo-European Hypothesis as the major Pseudo-Scientific Theory in the past 150 years

I have read the study 'Ancient Migrations and the Origin of Indo-European Peoples' by Leo Klein, 2007.

From this study I now understand that the so called 'Indo-European' ('Indo-Germanist') theory which dominates the scholastic literature and science (as M.Naddeo concluded: de facto not a science, but a religion: ) is based PURELY on the hypothetic linguistic tree established in the late 19th Century!

The theory was re-named from 'Indo-Germanic' to 'Indo-European' after WWII. According to Leo Klein, the 'Indo-European' theory does not determine peoples on any GENETIC basis any more, but purely based on the known WRITTEN languages, their hypothetic migrations, and from the reconstruction of the hypothetic 'pre-' and 'proto-' words (like the hypothetic 'proto-Germanic', 'proto-Slavic', 'proto-Indo-European', or 'PIE', etc.).

According to Leo Klein, anyone whose native language is classified as 'Indo-European', belongs to 'Indo-European' peoples (even most of the Indians of Americas who now speak Spanish, Portuguese or English from birth, having forgotten their aboriginal languages after the Conquista, are 'Indo-European' peoples, according to Leo Klein's definition).

Furthermore, it appears that the allocation of the ancient archeological cultures to linguistically determined hypothetic 'peoples' is made fully arbitrarily by the 'Indo-Europeists'. Notably, Leo Klein also admits many times in his study that same ancient archeological cultures could as well belong to non-'I.E.' peoples.

According to Leo Klein's study, 'Indo-Europeists' also experience a difficulty in allocation of the 'motherland' of their hypothetic 'Proto-Indo-European people', and have differing hypothesis with thousands and thousands of kilometers in distance.

Contrary to Leo Klein's initial statements that anthropological migrations have little to do with languages migrations, now that there are DNA-haplogroup movements determined, 'Indo-Europeists' attempt to make them support their 19th century linguistic 'Indo-European' theory as well, and make allocations of DNA-haplogroup movements, again arbitrarily, to what they consider as initial 'Indo-European' 'peoples' based on the 19th century linguistics (same way as they try to make archaeology to work ONLY to support their 'Indo-European' hypothesis).

From their initial comparisons, 'Indo-Europeists' have fully excluded African, Arabic, Finno-Ugric, Turkic, Tungusic, Chinese, Polynesian, American Indian and other languages which were not considered by them as 'Indo-European' ('Indo-Germanic'), regardless that these languages have thousands and thousands of basic words that have same or close meaning and same phonetics with words in languages classified as 'Indo-European'.

'Indo-Europeists' also fail to admit that the major difference between the 'language families' determined by them, is observed mainly on the grammar level, and that grammars could have been set artificially by monks, in the processes of introduction of new religions, and in the unification of nations.

As the matter of fact, there was a political agenda for the separation of the so called 'Indo-Germanic' languages (and thus, 'peoples') from others, in the 19th Century: the excluded languages and peoples speaking them, were considered by 'Indo-Germanist' adepts as merely inferior, primitive 'net borrowers', belonging to some inferior 'races'.

Notably, initially the 'Indo-Germanist' hypothesis was developed in line with Darwin's hypothesis of 'evolution' (in which the non-white races were considered as an interim stage between a monkey and a human), and no wonder the followers of these hypothesis exhibited the representatives of non-'Indo-Germanic' peoples (including even the Saami!), in special zoos in the European and the US large cities, from mid 1800's through 1958.

Human zoos, also called ethnological expositions, were 19th- and 20th-century public exhibitions of humans, usually in a so-called natural or primitive state. The displays often emphasized the cultural differences between Europeans of Western civilization and non-European peoples or with other Europeans who practiced a lifestyle deemed more primitive. Some of them placed indigenous populations in a continuum somewhere between the great apes and Europeans. Ethnological expositions have been extensively criticized and ascertained as highly degrading and racist.

This is from where the 'Indo-European' hypothesis evolved, and the blunt end at which it stays nowadays. It is very strange that scholars continue to stick to it. Probably, the 19th Century political agenda is still there.



...Как вам понравится такая басенка, точнее, такой нравоучительный рассказик в девять строк?

Стриженая овца увидела лошадей, везущих тяжело груженный воз,
И сказала: "Сердце сжимается, когда я вижу
Людей, погоняющих лошадь!" Но лошади ответили:
"Сердце сжимается, когда видишь, что люди
Сделали теплую одежду из шерсти овец,
А овцы ходят остриженными!
Овцам приходится труднее, чем лошадям".
Услышав это, овца отправилась в поле...

Ну, какова басня? "Она ничем не примечательна!" - скажете вы. И ошибетесь. Басню эту написал в 1868 году знаменитый лингвист Август Шлейхер; написал на индоевропейском праязыке, на языке, которого никогда не слышал никто, от которого до нас не дошло ни единого звука, на языке, которого, очень может быть, вообще никогда не было. Потому что никто не может сказать: таким ли он был, каким его "восстановил" Шлейхер и его единомышленники.

Так вот. Допуская некоторое преувеличение, я бы, пожалуй, мог заявить, что только что прочитанная вами басня и есть единственный вещественный результат труда нескольких поколений языковедов, посвятивших свои силы восстановлению праязыка.

Лев Успенский. Слово о словах. Лениздат, 1974
by M. Naddeo

...The Aryans left no genetic, archaeological, or cultural trace of their existence before their acculturation in Europe. The Europeans should be aware that the only legacy that they received from the Aryans is their Indo-European language and the gene that controls testosterone overproduction – linked to libido and aggressiveness. Apart from that, the Europeans are still genetically, ethnically, and culturally Old Europeans, today more than ever. The Europeans are the Paladins of Democracy and Egalitarianism; The Europeans are the defenders of human rights and of women dignity; the Europeans are the promoters of the abolition of slavery, death penalty, and wars. All these values are in the cultural DNA of the Europeans, a legacy, which we have inherited from pre-Indo-European populations that respectfully lived in harmony with nature, that were democratic, egalitarian, matriarchal, and peace loving far before the Indo-Europeans showed up. If you too believe in these values… you may be an Indo-European speaker, but you are culturally Old European!

Edited at 2019-02-01 10:10 am (UTC)
FB Group: Followers of M. Naddeo, A. Pääbo, S. Parpola, F. Vinci, S. Wettenhovi-Aspa

"The last two centuries have seen the best resources in terms of historical, archaeological and linguistic research devoted to emphasising the Indo-European identity of the old world. However, Europe was not uninhabited before the Indo-Europeans came, as has even been suggested! What have we inherited from the first, indigenous, populations of Europe? Who were they? How did they live? Who did they worship? What language did they speak? What was their society, art and culture like?

The aim is to restore to the collective European conscience the heritage that has come from our earliest ancestors, so that we may all be equally and with good reason proud of the common Finno-Ugrian <...> origins of our civilisation." - Michelangelo Naddeo

Edited at 2019-02-07 10:36 am (UTC)
Ernest Rennan, his yearly history speech (Journal Asiatic, Congress of History, 29 July 1873, page 41)

- “How can be that all these wanderfull artfull artifacts you find may belong to the Turks, Fins, Hungarians who doesnt know anything else beside destroying? But sometimes reality doesnt look like reality. But if dont speak in order just to speak, but you put all related proofs from the very early begining until nowdays (from eve and adam?) and prove concretly that all these pre-semitic, pre-aryan civilisations belong to the Turks, Fins, Hungarians, we may accept. But THESE PROVES MUST BE AS STRONG AS THE HORRİBLE RESULTS CREATED"

Translation: “ Come on guys, we were pretending that the "Superior White Aryan Race" should be angaged in helpin (invading, sucking the bouties, killing, destroying) these primitive races, but you say the contrary. How can our plans will be applied now? The result will be HORRİBLE”.

What does mean pro european? İts a race as I understand good. I dont accept races. It is pure racism. A race respect women and the other does not? Pls read what is Pandora, what is the value of Greek women. İf european culture is based on Greek culture, how come an European will respect a women. Which one is true? You have to choose one of them. Seems it will be difficult as European mother lands that I have counted untill now numbered from poles to poles, all continents except Africa, but not decided where yet.

Lets see what they said European themselves before Nazistic racism;
Cahun: Revue İnternational Americain: All languages of Europe before the arrivals of Aryans are of turanian origin

(Why arabic and European languages sentences have the same systems, masculin, feminin, flexible words, prepositions al-al-il-le-les-the-der-die-das that tpuranian languages doesnt match? I really believe Aryan languages are of African origin, spread by black african dynasties of Egyptian Empire through İbers, non jewish Semites/Canaanites such as Phoenicians, Cartagians, most probably Bantu origin languages altered turanian languages of Egypt and Mesopotamia and created Semitic languages, as well as semitised latin and greek languages changed the original touranian languages of original european “””RACES”””” (..!...Just joke, hate race word) mostly by latin and greek bibles. Related links are abundant)

All european cities names, topographic places names “near the rivers or waters” end by “AK” which is turanian water. Pre Aryans were all turanians.

Rasmus Kristian Rask
(1787-1832) confirms Cahun and Rasmussen a century before mentioning non altered languages of old europe (saved beeing in corners or at very North) such as Etruscans, Lapps, Estonians, Fins, Hungarians, Basques, Permian, Syranian, Votyaks, Mordwins, Tcheremish, Ugors, Bulgars, Chuvash, Albanian (said to be a mystery by racists) etc…

Edward Augustus Freeman
Etymological book. Pls read.

Jules Oppert, Le peuple et la langue des Mèdes, 1879. Medes are turkic origin, not IE.

Why Darwin (higher races will eliminate primitif races such as turks... Since 2-3 centuries I am still here waiting to be eliminated), William Ewart Gladstone, Churchill etc... Reason of 180 degree turning from touranian to WHİTE ARYAN SUPERIOR RACE: having suitable arms after industry ages which is good enough to help, sorry to exploit so called primitif races' lands. See Syria, Venezuella, Sudan, Iraq, Lybia where democracy and human rıghts are brought by... But nowhere else where thetre is no oil, democracy is not given as such gift (!)
DNA: R1a1 is said ARYAN. See african R1a1 map.
Melon type head, dolycocephal. See negros and Berberians', Algerians, Bantus heads.

(ARYANS section:, late 1800s)
Page 151
They were not nobles, but very inferieur people compared to the Turano-Dravidians.
Page 152
Then also they start taking into their languages Dravidian words, which Max Füller finds in Sanscrit, resisting to all etymological analysis (Cosmopolis Review, Sept 1896, pp 630-637)

Edited at 2019-02-25 10:34 pm (UTC)

Thank you for commenting.

Just one thought:

All european cities names, topographic places names “near the rivers or waters” end by “AK” which is turanian water. Pre Aryans were all turanians.

All? Which ones?

And how much 'Turanian' (Turkic-Ugro-Finnic) is -AK- (AQUA) stem for water? Same stem word is also in the languages of Maya, Akkadian, Sumerian:

[uku, уку] (майя) - питье, напиток, пить; [ukah; уках] (майя) - жажда; [ukchahal] (майя) - иметь жажду; ukmal (майя) - проникать, расплываться (о жидкости); [uch] (майя) - пить; uch’ib (майя) - сосуд для питья - См. пример №168 ;
uukh, ugu, ū, уух, угу, уу (монг.) - пить; уух юм (монг.) - питьё; Ср. uhhaa [уха] (эст.) - уха;
[yok-. yokäṃ; йок-, йокям] (тохар.) - пить;
jook [йоок] (эст.) - сок, питьё <- joo(ma), juua [йоо(ма), юуйа] (эст.), jūo(dõ) [юууо(ды)] (ливон.), juoda [юода] (фин.), juvva [йувва] (водск., карел.), joovva [йоовва] (ижор.), ďuo(da) [дьюо(да)] (чудск.), jo(da) [йо(да)] (вепс.), juhkat [юхкат] (саам.), jüaš [йуаш] (мари), jui̮ni̮ [юыны] (удм.), juni̮ [юны] (коми), aj- [ай-] (манси), iszik [иссик] (венг.) - пить; jõgi, р.п. jõe [йыги, йые] (эст.), joki, р.п. joen [йоки, йоэн] (фин.), jogi [йоги] (карел., вепс.), jokkâ [йокка, йок, иок] (саам.), jæha [йэха] (ненецк.), juha, joka [юха, йока] (в реконструируемом муромском), йог, ега, юк, йуг (в реконструируемом мерянском), йогын (мари) – река; jooksma, joosta [йоокс(ма), йооста] (эст.), jūokšõ [ююокшы] (ливон.), johsa [йохса] (водск.), juosta [юоста] (фин.), joossa [йоосса] (ижор.), juosta [юоста] (карел.), joksta [йокста] (вепс.), ďuosta [дьюоста] (чуд.), joksat [йоксат] (саам.) - бежать, течь;
juice [джюс] (англ.), jus [йус] (шв.) - сок;
jugr [йугр] (арх. сканд.) - вымя;
yogurt, yoghurt; йогурт (тюрк.) - молочный напиток; yogun [йогун] (тюрк.) - насыщенный; yogush [йогуш] (тюрк.) - насыщать влагой;
[egu-; эгу-] (хетт.), [ahu-; аху-] (палайск.), [u-; у-] (лувийск.) - пить;
aug [ауг] (тагальск) - поток;
aga [ага] (маньчж.) - дождь;
ағуы (каз.) - протечка;
[âgû; агу] (аккад.) - прилив, наводнение, течение;
[; а-ги] (шумер.) - наводнение;
aqua [аква] (лат.), acqua [аква] (ит.) - вода;
eau [оо] (фр.), ea [эа] (арх. англ.), ahua [ахуа] (гот.) - река, воды; Ср. Ægir, Эгир - в германо-скандинавской мифологии йотун мирового моря, Бог Моря;
[ea] (шумер.) - тот, чей дом есть вода; [a] (шумер.) - вода;
ou [оу] (фиджи) - облако, пятно.

Edited at 2019-02-26 06:59 am (UTC)