It's a language thing...

paranormal.about.com...


Evidence of a worldwide language predating all others and existing on at least 4 continents has been discovered....it's not even a guess, it's a fact, and yet scientists/arcaeologists/ and scholars offer no theories...
Hmmm...

-Sincerely
-Shai

File this one under stuff most archaeologists won't touch because they'd have to find new jobs if they did. It's a really amazing find though and like most finds that would force a total revision in how we think of human history it will never see the mainstream.

Originally posted by Shai

Evidence of a worldwide language predating all others and existing on at least 4 continents has been discovered....it's not even a guess, it's a fact, and yet scientists/arcaeologists/ and scholars offer no theories...
i

Great find Shai. Thanks.

...I'm really interested in this, but have little time to read the documentation and so I'm left with lots of questions. ...Are you able to write a synopsis? Can you find some examples of the translations?


Good work.

Great find. I know this will support the late Terrence McKenna's theory of a 'cosmic language' that was long forgotten as well as the Tower of Babel held some extremely devote Christian historians.

Originally posted by Shai


Evidence of a worldwide language predating all others and existing on at least 4 continents has been discovered....

-Sincerely
-Shai

thats a nice link page...
for a long while now, in certain circles, an ancient language was known of...
call it 'Green Language', or call it 'Language of the Birds'....
see this site also: users.gloryroad.net...

thanks for the heads-up

+

Maybe its a UFO language taught to the ancient people by visitors all over the world.

Curious how most of these writings are almost biblical in nature, maybe this was before the time where it is said god seperated the people and gave them different languages.

Originally posted by Shai
paranormal.about.com...


Evidence of a worldwide language predating all others and existing on at least 4 continents has been discovered....it's not even a guess, it's a fact, and yet scientists/arcaeologists/ and scholars offer no theories...
Hmmm...

-Sincerely
-Shai

The site you cite DOES make it sound like something's been discovered and we (archaeologists and anthropologists) are sticking our fingers in our ears and yelling "la la la la la la... I can't HEAR you!!!"

Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact my archaeological focus is on rock art and I'm going to present a paper on a site to the Texas Archaeological Society this fall. We're hardly ignoring rock art.

What we ARE ignoring is badly put-together ideas.

Here's da scoop:

* Yes, we do in fact believe that there was one "proto-language." But the theorist makes a number of mistakes that tosses his theory out pretty quickly. And we are "reconstructing" some of these most-ancient languages (about 200,000 years in the past, though some linguists don't think this is nearly old enough and put the original Mother-Tongue at an even earlier date):
faculty.ed.umuc.edu...

* The rock art on that site is being taken out of context... and rather badly, at that. The pieces are of varying ages and he has to hunt around and select a very few sections of a very few sites to "prove" his claim. If it was a true alphabet, the writings would be everywhere.

Take a look at the images on this site: www.slonet.org...

Or google for "rock art" and hold up his "alphabet" to art from around the world and you'll see how fast his "theory" falls apart.

Curious how most of these writings are almost biblical in nature, maybe this was before the time where it is said god seperated the people and gave them different languages.

Actually, that's because the guy who said it was a "language" gave the symbols a Biblical interpretation. Heck, you could make graffiti into Biblical inspirational messages with that kind of spin-doctoring.

Why hasn't the author been able to get published in any archaeological or linguistic journals?

Why are they trying to translate it into hebrew? It is the early form of hebrew that the caananites use.

Originally posted by Nygdan
Why hasn't the author been able to get published in any archaeological or linguistic journals?

Because the people whose ancestors made the rock art have already given us THEIR interpretations (and those get published in anthropological journals and other places.)

...and because Hebrew and its variants are hardly the oldest language. They're sort of a middle-aged language; not as old as Proto-Indo-European, but not as new as (say) Esperanto.

First i thank you for what is a top-notch reply..considered, informative and with attending/supporting link.
I will concede you may be right in your notion that any squiggles can be interpreted as symbolic and possessing meaning..that is what our brains do with images ,we give them meaning. [Think of ink-blots, right?]

But, even taking your point on board my question to you is..what meaning, if any would you ascribe to those symbols in the rock-art and on the other cited evidence from the negev?
Surely they were put there [by the artists/scribes] for a reason?

Also..have you noticed in your studies/travels the similarity in words used by widely disparate tribes and cultures who could not possibly have been in contact with each other [according to the standard theories of pre-historic or pre-columbian times]...
For example: The hawaiians called their priestly royals 'kahunas', the Hopis called theirs Kuchinas..the Celts had their Kahanes..the jews their Cohens and the Summerians their Khans..strong evidence that they received a language as opposed to each having made one up locally which just coincidentally resembles every other ancient tongue on every other continent...don't you think?
The examples are so numerous in fact that several of your colleagues have been granted their doctorates because of their theses citing very much the same thing.. [examples on request..]
But since I do have your attention, would you be so kind as to review this link:

www.anomalies-unlimited.com...

and tell me what you think?

I'd be honored.

-Sincerely
-Shai

Originally posted by Shai
But, even taking your point on board my question to you is..what meaning, if any would you ascribe to those symbols in the rock-art and on the other cited evidence from the negev?
Surely they were put there [by the artists/scribes] for a reason?

That depends on the group of people who put them there. So the first thing you have to do is find out what the people of the region are called, then look for similar drawings elsewhere, and interpret by looking at things in context and asking the native people of that area (and those who have similar art) what they know of these symbols.

A good example... a "cord" with "knots" symbol may mean "fox pelt" (Egypt) or "datura plant" (Chumash, California.)

As to why they are there, there's a number of reasons, including "clan markings" (various), "record of journeys" (Hawaiian islands, elsewhere), sacred stories (various places), and shamanic dreams (various places.) There's also some slight evidence that they were used to record significant events. Different cultures, different processes...

Also..have you noticed in your studies/travels the similarity in words used by widely disparate tribes and cultures who could not possibly have been in contact with each other [according to the standard theories of pre-historic or pre-columbian times]...
For example: The hawaiians called their priestly royals 'kahunas', the Hopis called theirs Kuchinas..the Celts had their Kahanes..the jews their Cohens and the Summerians their Khans..strong evidence that they received a language as opposed to each having made one up locally which just coincidentally resembles every other ancient tongue on every other continent...don't you think?

I don't know that much about linguistics, truthfully, but what I do know is that the human mouth can only make so many sounds. We do know that there were very ancient languages and at one time (perhaps as early as homo erectus) that people lived in very small groups and close together and used the same sounds ("words.")

But I'm not sure that we can prove a single "great language" that all the roving bands of hunters would have spoken, and given how quickly language can change, I'm not sure that we could ever identify a single "mother tongue."

But since I do have your attention, would you be so kind as to review this link:
www.anomalies-unlimited.com...

Most intriguing! Problem is, I don't know where those artifacts came from (they're shown without context... are they in a museum or what? How do we know they are Incan?)

We're pretty sure that Khipu (knots on strings) is one of their forms of writing and scholars are working on that: pikespeak.uccs.edu...
www.ee.ryerson.ca:8080...

But without further information, it's hard to say WHAT that is. Can't seem to find other references to it on a quick search... do you have any other links to the items? I'm curious.

Heres a site on rock art interpretation
mc2.vicnet.net.au...

First I thank you for taking the time to write back and providing your insights.
I am also glad you liked the link i sent you.
Before I go into this let me tell you that my chosen field was applied behavioral science with a side in cultural and forensic anthropology..in my private studies I have domne a lot of research into comparative religion and mythology.
In the course of those studies I have come across hundreds of what i would agree are anomalies which defy accepted theory..thus we find ourselves discussing rock art and the possibility of a world-wide, "delivered" pre-historic common language.

So, you know a little more about me and any bias I may bring to the argument.

Several points you mentioned I find difficult to swallow..especially the one about the human mouth only being able to make certain sounds...
Two problems with that [IMO]
First...even if I did agree with that..it doesn't explain how those sounds ended up having similar, almost identical meaning in so many diverse and geologically distant cultures. What are the odds of that occurring naturally would you guess/
Now, I know Noam Chomsky believes we are born with the innate language skills needed to adopt any mother tongue and that in that preset of parameters the conditions are ripe for certain sounds to have implict meaning even before you understand them conciously or in context..but still..Kuchina, Kahuna, Khan, Kahane, Cohen all describing high-priestly functionaries is remarkable and it is just one example of several hundred 'identical'words shared by ancient and not so ancient tongues.
Second, and perhaps the best rebuttal is your comment about the limitations of sound making by human mouths.. You say you are not a linguist so I cannot fault you for not being aware of the Xhosa tribe..one oif about a dozen aboriginal peoples who speak quite differently than we do..with clicking sounds as vowels

www.languages-on-the-web.com...

I provide this link which will take you to sound samples of Xhosa tribesmen speaking,..along with other sound samples from across the world..gaelic, arabic,chinese...
Perhaps after a listen you might revise your view about lingual limitations being the cause of the overlap ...

I will leave you with these links to peruse while I find you some more material about the inca tablet, and other curios and hope you find them provocative enough for further comment.

www.100megsfree4.com...

And one of the more academic which I am sure will be most intriguing:

www.earthmatrix.com...

I have seen a site somewhere with side-by-side comparisons of more than 300 words and symbols from around the world and was truly astonished..but as yet no one willing to just come out and admit that all of this can only make sense if humans were 'taught' a language as opposed to having invented one. like the Xhosa did...

Thanks again for the time and thought
-Sincerely
-Shai

Hi Shai
The thread that I added above should have come with a bit more information
I am in contact with the Author of that site Robert Bednarik and he is flying in to see me in March he is also mentioned in the site you presented.
I am interested in this field but am confronted with a few basic dilemas thanx to his way of thinking
The idea of an ancient global language is plausible and could be as old as sapiens themselves
A question for you to ponder is
due to geometric symbols being the simplest way to draw representation and easiest to carve in rock, how can it be determined that a circle with a line through it has the same meaning no matter where you find it on the planet
Does a handprint in a cave in Australia mean the same as a handprint in a cave in france.
How can this be falsifiably tested.
Thanx for the thread

Originally posted by Dan West
Hi Shai
The thread that I added above should have come with a bit more information
I am in contact with the Author of that site Robert Bednarik and he is flying in to see me in March he is also mentioned in the site you presented.
I am interested in this field but am confronted with a few basic dilemas thanx to his way of thinking
The idea of an ancient global language is plausible and could be as old as sapiens themselves
A question for you to ponder is
due to geometric symbols being the simplest way to draw representation and easiest to carve in rock, how can it be determined that a circle with a line through it has the same meaning no matter where you find it on the planet
Does a handprint in a cave in Australia mean the same as a handprint in a cave in france.
How can this be falsifiably tested.
Thanx for the thread


Dear Dan,

Thanks for your post and your questions.
Let me start with the hand question and work backwards..
there are examples of neanderthal and stone-aged cro-magnon tribes leaving rock art, either deliberate or coincidental from across the globe and some speculate that these markings were made in rituals where initiates communed with earth or their ancestors. The most common way of making these impressions was to lay ones bare hands against a bare patch of cave and spit red ochre until a stencil of a hand was left on the rock wall.
You will find extensive examples of this particular process from across africa but also in the N.Americas and in France as you say.
To my mind that is an entirely different sort of 'symbolism'than is being represented by the Inca tablet and the 'alleged'' common language symbols in the link I posted above.

To my mind it would be virtually impossible to convey a foreign or alien language without providing an alphabet of sorts as a companion guide.
I have entertained sevral notions as to how one would go about that..and these two are my pet theories:
Theory One: The commonality of certain shared words describing qulaities or characteristics of 'the gods', including personal names for deities sharing the same powers tells me that our ancestors across the planet had a shared experience of this superior civilization..be it of earthly or uneartly origins..and that these symbols devolve from an alphabet used by said civilization.
If both a Hopi and a Sumerian were told that an alien 'priest-god-king' was a Kaohine it would easily explain why both cultures adopted the word and its meaning pretty much unchanged.
Theory Two:
The symbols represented are there to teach humans in which form their mouths/tongues must be shaped to create certain sounds in that language.
When you ask if a circle with a line through it is always the same..I agree that without a context or third reference point..some indication of its use in an other setting...one is left to ponder the certainties of interpretation.
But what if that same symbol means hold your mouth open like so, with your tongue mid-way between the bottom of your mouth and the roof?

I say that becuase we only have but a few source materials where these symbols are seen as writing...and even then not as we'd expect to see them, in poems and such, but rather as decorative or ornamentary.

That leads to my third specualtion which is, perhaps we are seeing symbols to express other than worldy concepts..perhaps they are symbols best interpreted as numerical or corresponding to certain stars in the heavens..maybe badges or rank even, known to be displayed by the visitors.

My personal view is that whatever theory we come up with will have to account for the overwhelming similarity of words describing hundreds of concepts between cultures distant in both geography and time..and that would mean a revamping from top to bottom of what we think we know about pre-historic trade links, technological capabilities, and migration patterns......and more than likely lead to a prima facie case for posting the existence of a superculture which was known to our ancestors.

-Sincerely
-Shai

Thanx for taking the time for the response Shai, It’s appreciated

In the link that you provided in the opening of this thread it states that “ The alphabet is now understood to be proto-Himyaritic, or Sabaean, and has successfully been translated using the port-Canaanite algorithm.” And that “The Colorado site, located near La Junta, has been dated to before 800 BC. In the Negev desert of Israel, the same alphabet has been meticulously dated to 1500 BC. In South Australia the alphabet is estimated to be over 5000 years old.”

The evidence put forward suggest that the language originated in Australia but is being interpreted by another culture and another language
How does this make sense?
Shouldn’t it have been interpreted in an indigenous Australian aboriginal Language of people from the region of where it has the oldest specimen is found?

If we are to assume that these symbols are a common global tool, rather than the easiest symbols to carve in rock.
If we assume these symbols have commonalties in meaning.
We must also assume that these rock carvings weren’t predated by ochre or color depictions originating somewhere in an entirely different region, which haven’t stood the test of time.
It would still be necessary for these Symbols to be interpreted using the language of the original peoples who used this language.
How could we be sure of who this was?

Also language is constantly evolving, as is the meaning of that language.
Look at the symbol “X”
It is currently used globally and is read or interpreted in may ways
There is “wrong”, “here”,” ex”, “ch”, “h” to mention but a few.

Then there are cupules, The oldest rock art we know about in every continent are linear grooves and cupules, especially the latter. It can date from Middle and even Lower Palaeolithic times in the three Old World three continents
These could be the oldest written language to survive
mc2.vicnet.net.au...

I find all very interesting but I err on the side of caution when trying to interpret meaning.
Exploring possibilities is fascinating.

A fork!

Now then, as for the alphabet...i don't believe what we are seeing on the Inca tablet is an example of symbols which are easiest to draw...nor do I believe grooves in rocks are the same thing as repetitive abstract symbols common to just about every indigenous culture...the idea that our ancestors were just into making nice squiggles because they looked like nice squiggles and were easy to make just doesn't appeal to my more analytical side...but I admit a prejudice of sorts.

What I will do..as I did for those checking into my 'skulls' thread, is go looking for more recent [and academic] examples of ancient [shared] languages, their symbolism...etc.

There are examples of some sort of graphic writing using characters very very similar, in fact identical, to what we see in Colorado, found on artifacts allegedly of other-than-earthly origin..and that, as I said before is my major fascination: anomalies and unexplained artifacts.

In the meantime..what did you make of that comparative language site I sent you between mayans, nahjual and egyptian?

Some sites suggest the Phoenicians had a much more extensive trade/navigation reach than first assumed and that they may have been conduits for things like tobacco and coc aine for the egyptian royalty..and may have brought the first setllers to the new world..would you like to read them?

Again thanks for the stiulating correspondence

-Sincerely
-Shai

Dear Dan,

You mentioned Australia and here's the first thing that sprang to mind...

www.viewzone.com...

And then there is this one about Swedish [nordic] runes and proto-Turkish;

www.antalyaonline.net...

But here is my favorite..afind and a text which, as far as I am aware, has not been refuted..it was brought to my attention while serving with the Israelis and I confess it is the reason I first took a serious interest in the subject.

unitedisrael.org...

I hope that this site alone is worth the read.

-S incerely
-Shai