Turkish anti-scientific masterpieces

Submitted by Ianus (Poland), May 6, 2009 at 17:07

berk akk wrote :

"The place was well known to the Greeks from time immemorial. Have you ever heard of Jason and the Argo?..............

> Our discussion is going to vain point.<

Why ? With the Argonauts it becomes really colourful...I see as a Moslem you have to detest Greek mythology. A Moslem must hate what his Allah dislikes and venerate what his Allah approves of...

>I did not claim first founder of istanbul was turks <

You implicitly did as I know the Turkish historical 'theory'. Turks founded all civiliazation and are so heir to it all, aren't they ? It's what you Turks are taught at school after all, aren't you , and it what makes you feel so happy, doesn't it ?

> but that city had been used for many known ,unknown inhabitants.<

There was no city there before Byzas. A few huts and a herd of sheep erring around don't make a city. If it did, Turkey would be the most urbanized country in the world. The place was largely uninhabited as the Greeks used to avoid conflicts with the barbarians at the beginning by occupyig their strongholds and settlements and driving them out while they were settling down. They were too weak to fend them off and it's not a wise policy to create implacable enemies from the very start. Besides, all barbarian settlements were no match to a Greek polis(city) with its highly advanced division of labour, architecture , intricate institution and an intellectual genius behind it. With few exceptions in south Italy the Greek colonies had good relations with the hinterland due to economic benefits connected to having a Greek city market in its vicinity.

> .if that argument based on byzas founder going to claim a land from the current owners and judge the Turkis people on a supreme court it is totaly dream.<

Before th Russians appeared in the Caucasus the Turks thought Georgia would be annexed and Turkified for ever just as Eastern Anatolia had been...Before 1821 the Turks thought that Greek independence was a dream. And yet the dream came true ...

>Anyway i have no property in istanbul.<

It's expensive, I know. But don't despair! When the 'secularists' in Allah's name liquidate the Ecumenical Patriarchate or organize a repetition of the 1955 pogrom maybe you'll get a share of the fat booty too.

> I think i will be acquictted.ı also have a special historical family story about istanbul and if u like i can write.<

I am ready to listen to it , however, don't instert too many moral points in favour of your family as I know many Constantinople stories as well where most moral points are distributed in a different way.

"And of course the Turkish archaelogists have already found Turkish DNA there which brilliantly 'supports' state-sponsored theory of Turkish origin of everything, what " But again the Turkish archaelogists' only task is to find (or invent if they don't find what they are told to to do) evidence supporting the Turkish theory".

> On the contrary,there are many of them who are working blindness affectantly for the goals of ermenians,greeks.I think some of them think to get bravo from them foolisly.<

They understand the simple fact, to force the earth to lie is impossible. All this Kemalist doctrine of Turkic supercivilization is, of course, a gross and ignominious joke, the most anti-scientific political myth which no serious archaelogist can even consider as a conjecture. One can deceive a few ignoramuses and plenty of semi-litterate fanatics with it , but an expert in the field sees all its vacuity and uselessness at onc ethrough and rebels from the very first moment.

You call them "foolish". I'd call them courageous as they do something for which under the despotic Kemalist regime their very life and jobs may be in danger. Truth is a deficit commodity under all despotisms. And archaelogy has become a highly politicized science.

> Your generalisation infact a small minority.<

Small but privileged and state-supported. They say what their political bosses tell them they want to hear and on doing so are promoted and paid. It's how Turkic archaelogy, historiography and liguistics produce their anti-scientific masterpieces.

"Exterminated" ? How well you know what happened "hundreds of years ago"! ... Anyway, if they had been exterminated, then the Turks could not descend from them and ATATURK WOULD HAVE BEEN WRONG which he NEVER was !!! It would be an insult to Turkishness to say so!"

> I wisited historical ruins of hittites and friges.There are many monuments araound as well.<

How about Hellenic monuments ? Did you happen to come across any? Have the Islamo-Kemalists managed to hide , steal and sell them all as 'Turkish antiquities' as they have done in Northern Cyprus ?

> They dissapeared almost suddenly.<

Don't mix up things. Hittites are Phrygians were two distinct and hostile cultures. Around B.C. 1200 all the Eastern Mediterranean underwent a protracted period of invasions and devastations from tribes and populations known from Egyptian sources as "the Peoples of the Sea". In Asia Minor Homer's Troy(VII a) and Hattusha fell victims to their attacks. They invaded Greece as Doric invaders and moved further across the Meditterenean Sea to attack Syria and Egypt. They settled down as Philistines on the coast e.g. near Gaza and were repelled from Egypt proper with utmost difficulty. Now the tribes who invaded Asia Minor were Thraco-Phrygians who originally formed a sort of confederation and spoke the same or very similar Indoeuropean language. The Phrygians most probably conquered teh Hittites and settled down among teh ruins of Hittites. But they don't seem to have exterminated the latter. Among the Hittites the royal name Mursilis was popular. This name comes back in Greek story of Phrygian 'Marsyas'. The Phrygians under Midas developed as a powerful state in 8th century when they expanded into Urartur and even across the Taurus into Syria. The invasions of the Cymmerians around B.C. 690 ended or weakened their rule and finally the Lydians conquered these parts.

> Some of them said to move other parts of region.There is no theory of direct ancestral relation.<

No? But Kemal said the Hittites are ancestors of the Turks and it's what Turkish children are taught at school.

>I never insult not only turkishness but any other nation.<

By not insulting Turkishness you insult plenty of nations and a large portion of known history. After 500 years of Turkish humiliations and slavery every free Balkan nations curses you Turks and all you stand for. By exterminating millenia-old nations of Asia Minor and denying the crime you are a shame and curse to humanity.

"If "unproven", then it's no 'evidence', I'd presume. But if it is, then I'll rather call "a fairy tale" "an unproven history". Conjectures are quite legitimate unless they so grossly offend common sense as Turkish pseudo-historical fantasies do."

> Evidence: Imagine a court.attorney generalship put forward Some evidences against a criminal.

unproven evidence:some evidence can be proven ,but there may be evidences that can not be proven on court and they could ask more evidences to support the unproven one.<

I'd call the latter 'indications' rather than 'unproven evidence.' But still what indictations exist for all the dreams of alleged Turkish civilizatory genius? The Turks contributed nothing to world civilization.

> do u think all human history enlightened? <

Well, reading Lev Gumilov's works I found it very illuminating as far as Turkic history was concerned. Now reading about Kemal's historical delirium I saw that to impose and justify it and save it from universal derision and contempt much extenisve work of darkening and distorting known history must be done. And Turks are excellent obscurantists.

> Present knowledge of Beyond 4000 is almost a myth...<

Not really. It's prehistory - or history without written documents. Myths flourish under litterate nations as well , or even better as there are strong forces that can't afford to enlightened people by objective historical evidence. Take e.g. "modern" Turkish history. It's one big myth that stands and falls with political despotism now prevailing in Turkey. But abolish article 301, jail anyone who will dare silence or threaten physically or verbally a scientist or a journalist exposing Kemal's crimes, his ignorance and errors and you'll see that the truth will gradually prevail against the forces of darkness that support the present day intellectual enslavement among the Turks...

> But beyond date it is full of secrets that can only be explained in terms of theories. <

Theories are welcome, provided they are made by professional archaeologists and historians and not ignoramuses like Ghazi Kemal or imam Erdogan and his academic bootlickers.

> Any theory is based on some evidences not need to be agreed provement.<

Theories are no fairy tales and if they are to be of any value something verifiabe and predictable must follow from them. Islam e.g. is nonsensical because nothing verifiable follows from its ravings whatever you might do about it. It's self-explanatory rubbish.

> Such as darvins exposition evidences of evolution.For example ,say 10000 years ago,.Scientificaly one can talk about footprints of present nations.<

Yes, if by "present" you exclude totally Turks. The oldest evidence of Turkic are the Orkhon and Yenissey runes . They date back to c. A.D. 600.

> But bofore 20.000 years,i think we cant talk about any nation exist today... There are lingually and mystical similiarities between far parts of world.It could be pseudo-historical fantasies for you but there are similiarities between old turkish gods and greek gods and in roots of words.<

Your conclusion of parallel civilizations is wrong. Turks belonged to the most backward tribes that appear late on historical horizon. They came in touch with Eastern Iranian populations from whom they borrowed many civilizatory words e.g. for domestic animals (by borrowing or rather robbing them, if one reads what Avesta says about these barbarains) , domestic utensils and insitutions and mythological concepts. There is many studies in Russian on that. E.g. to take just two Turkic words "dana" -calf or "dorak" -cheese , sour milk' have Iranian etymologies . The number could be easily extended.

> The logic says that there must be a common ancestor not neceseraly be called turkish for all humans living in earth today.<

Logic doesn't say that at all. It's Turkish wishful thinking that jumps to that conclusion for ideological motives. Turks - due their civilizatory backwardness and barbarity - borrowed heavily from Chinese and Indoeuropeans and it is how common concepts and words are found here and there. To conclude that there was a Turkic source, let alone Turkic authroship of or contribution to higher civilization is supported by nothing.

> An approach for a explanation can not be related to a supperrace theory as distorted by others.

"Why? I start liking the modern Turkish fairy tales. I found their ancient ones very boring and disgustful instaed ...you know this zoophilia where Ashina impregnates a she-wolf at least ten times to produce the heads of the main turkic tribes "

> There exists similiar mytics among many nations.<

Romulus and Remus were brought up by a she-wolf, not born from a she-wolf.

>Boring is understandable but disgust against a myth belong to human comunity is not understandable.<

You have to see my expression in the context of constant Turkish attacks against the Greeks as 'homosexuals', although they have eagerly deny any continuity between today's Greeks and the ancient Greeks. Not even mentioning Ataturk's propensities in that direction, I confronted them with their own past. They turned and twisted the story just like you do to evade the slightest unpleasant thing about their Turkic "superrace". I was disgusted. Anyway, it's curious to observe the ancient Turk nomads claiming to descend from a she-wolf impregnated by a human and see how on becoming Moslems they treated dogs - descendants of wolves - as impure animals.

"But imagine that those Hittite-Turks back at home are dreaming now of returning and taking inheritance of another homeland of theirs - Turan!"

>This approach neither a public goal nor goverment goal.<

No ? Are you so sure what Public and government goals are?

> Making busines relations with central asia is not turanism.<

Business relations ? Turks engage everywhere in political and ideological propaganda of Pan-Turkism under this cloak. They found schools, recruit youth, issue books and journals to spread Pan-Turkism across Central Asia and Russian Turkic-speaking regions. They were kicked out of Uzbekistan for anti-state propaganda in favour of Turanism.

> Outer countries has more relations with them then turkey.Turkish people got lessons from its defenders and gave enough life for it. Presently There are deceived groups to work as tools of a bad propaganda.<

'Bad propaganda'? ...There is still the old dream that has been burning in Turkey's brain since 1991- a special ministry for Turkic-speaking countries was created, Turkic summits and cooperation were promoted, in Azerbaijan Bozkurtlar (Grey Wolves) were an official party in power under Elcebei...

"Before that the Turks believed in the miraculous flight of the porphet from Mecca to Jerusalem and his splitting the moon (aren't Turkish astronomers still looking for the evidence of it?). "

> This is a religious belief.I didnt know those astronemrs. Unfortunately i am not employed in turkish goverment.If i were ,my first duty would ask those astroners the result of their work.<

Now that imam Erdogan is in power wrong questions needn't be asked and looking for wonders may continue undisturbed.

"Waiting for more of your bedtime stories with impatience ...!"

> I kindly advice you to extend your historical aprroach beyond 4000 ,then make a thoery if u can ,so then we can compare the stories:) I realy want that.<

I have briefly done it. Prehistory knows no Turks. They emerge for the first time around B.C.300 as Hiung-Nu in Chinese documents. They stand on a very low level of civilizations. Due to internecine war , population pressures part of them migrates westwards and around A.D. 375 emerges as the Huns on the Volga. Around the Altai mountains the other primitive Turks undergo heavy influences from higher Iranian cultures from where they borrow most civilizatory vocabulary and their first Iranian alphabet which they use to write their oldes written monuments - the Orkhon and Yenissei inscriptions... Lev Gumilev is one of the most outstanding Turkologists. I'd suggest for every Turk to read him first before turning to the powerful ignoramus and obscurantist Kemal Pasha and inspecting his pseudo-historical forgeries and lullabies.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".