Every human language evolved from 'single prehistoric African mother tongue

reply to post by IAMIAM


Wow not the type of tat I'd expect to see from someone who always signs off with,

With love

Your brother.

cool tat anyways

With love

Your Brother

Mayabong.

reply to post by IAMIAM


I sometimes believe I am half sasquatch because I am soo hairy I wasn't picking on you brother, It was something that I just noticed and in my opinion was a double standard of sorts, for that to be posted and not called upon granted if it were the other way around (race wise) than we all know what would be thrown out by some of our fellow posters
. BTW, I always enjoy reading what you have to post. I do respect your point of views though I may not agree with every single one. And the way you go about presenting yourself through your posts, keeping yourself soo calm, I respect highly. I think a lot of people can take and borrow a page from your book.

Your brother from another mother

Jason.

reply to post by Rekrul



but alas, what happens when you are conscious of your breath?

sound was used for communication in africa , it was the way used to communicate before language.

sound = hitting sticks together to form rhythm

please, please think about stuff...before..... and after

I was watching something on television a while back, I'm not sure specifically what the show was about but it went on to say that the most complicated spoken language is in Africa. The language itself consist of a lot of vocalization in the form of clicks, grunts and so forth. Now, if you think about it, before our ancestors were able to enunciate "words" don't you think that's the way the our ancestors may have communicated or "spoken" to one another? If so than I think there maybe some substance in the theory that the first spoken language came from an African tongue. Just my thoughts.

Originally posted by kimish
I sometimes believe I am half sasquatch because I am soo hairy

I wasn't picking on you brother, It was something that I just noticed and in my opinion was a double standard of sorts. BTW, I always enjoy reading what you have to post. I do respect your point of views and the way you go about presenting yourself through your posts.

It's all good my friend. I don't usually catch racist innuendos. I was inducted to the KKK at the age of 5 (according to my mother) and was raised in a very racist household. I had my share of race wars as a youth. The gang I formed in highschool was the only interracial gang in Baltimore at the time. We were united by Heavy Metal. I left racism behind in middle school and never looked back.

Having travelled to Africa, been initiated into African mystery traditions, had friends who are both skin heads and Black Panthers, I just don't catch the stuff any more. I fit in with every circle. Those that hate can hate. I am welcomed among them because I do not judge even the haters.

Everyone has an Ism. Everyone has something that offends them. It is an amazing world to look at it when you do not even hate the haters.

I am straying a bit off topic, so here...

The Ism that is us...

With Love,

Your Brother

There are a lot of languages that are isolate.
Basque, Minoan, Harrapan, Sumerian just of the top of my head.
So are they just basing this off of the out of Africa movement.
I mean with a dead language how do you connect the dot?

Originally posted by Misterlondon

Originally posted by Sounds_of_Silence
Why hasn't there way of life evolved? The people that live in Africa, have they always been there or? Why haven't the progressed in way of technology...please explain.

there are many reasons for this... alot has to do with the lack of natural resources in africa that were available in europe and other parts of the world at the time. as i said before there are many reasons, if you do a little research and look at the history of our and many other civilizations you will understand why...
anyway the indiginous people of the world are the ones who live as nature intended, they live of the land and respect the earth and nature.. not like us that destroy everything in our path...

and to the op... of course we would have had a master language, thats pretty obvious. if the theory of evoloution is to be believed, then early humans would have had to communicate with each other, before they started spreading across the planet.. this probably changed to dialects as they progressed further evolving into to completely separate languages as we moved futher away..

edit on 16/4/11 by Misterlondon because: (no reason given)

Read the book titled "Guns, Germs and Steel." It covers loads of reasons why people in certain parts of the globe thrived and became industrialized while others did not. Great read, interesting topic.

I haven't read through the whole thread yet but has anyone mentioned... and I might get castigated for it... but has anyone mentioned the Tower of Babel story from the Bible? I mean it kind of ties into to a mother language and all. Even if some believe the Bible is myth, all myths originate with truths.

language has gone through thousands of years of evolution even writing, i would be surprised if texting language become the new universal way of writing

reply to post by RADHESYAM


Well you clearly don't know much about mtDNA. Good luck with whatever India-centric propoganda you're feeding on though!

reply to post by Itop1


The White Colonizers are gonna be pissed.

This is not absolute, nothing is absolute in science except maths. Maths don't get anything wrong, people simply do their maths wrong.

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.

I think that with everything has to be, to the best extent, put into contexte and refuted to be able to keep an open mind. Ancient sanskrit contain stories taking place in the timeframe of the last ice age. They also had blueprints for aircraft and described powerful weapons ( but that's another topic) So I'm also calling for bull#

This article is a load of feces. The article contains the word "evidence" three times indicating that speech evolved 70,000 to 100,000 years ago. First, why such a huge disparity - I mean its only 30% or 30,000 years - is that the new definition of a fact? Second, what is the evidence? They studied 500+ known languages and come the conclusion that was reached even in the Dark Ages -- that we all had one language in the past. Does it take a scientist to tell us this or did evolutionists think that perhaps man "evolved" from multiple points on Earth and evolved various languages (I wouldn't be surprised).

Let me guess - some tax payers paid for this study. What a life...

Originally posted by dontreally
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.

You have to remember that to the black nationalist's and white apologetic's the "out of Africa" theory is akin to Hitlers dogma of a "perfect race". The most you can do is out-compete them with reason. Since they are inherently irrational, it would fall on deaf ears so no point wasting time on them.

reply to post by korathin


Very very well put. That is the most intelligent and correct thing I've heard in a very long time.
Just goes to show you the hypocrisy nowadays.

reply to post by RADHESYAM


I know I do not come from monkeys. I have rh negative blood. Only 15 percent of the worlds population has rh neg. The rh factor comes from the reyese (sorry about spelling) monkey. The other 85 percent has the gene for the monkey. I do not have that gene, and I am not suppose to breed with those who have the monkey gene. Rh negative does not have orgins anywhere on earth

since no one corrected me i looked into it myself. indeed the basque language is an isolate. not having any demonstrable ancestor language.

language isolate

so...not every language originated in africa.

reply to post by 1truthseeker50


i don't know how many times this has to be said, but we did not "come from monkeys". we share a common distant ancestor with apes. it's not that difficult to understand.

reply to post by optimus primal


I do not have a common anything with chimps or apes. I do not have the monkey gene.

reply to post by optimus primal

They also have the largest RH- populations

its hard to trust anything like this. the spinx in egypt was dated by weather erosion techniques (quite precise), and it came back much older than previously expected. while all the experts agreed it was that old, they ignored it because it didn't fit with what they had come up with. i know a family of archeologists that told me dinosaur depictions on gravestones were being suppressed because that species (according to evolution) went extinct tens of millions of years prior to the gravesite being created.

this could be true, or it could be the same line of supression. although i'm not suprised language has been around much longer than assumed. humans have been here for quite awhile.