The Origins Of Modern English!

Language, something most of us take for granted, it comes so easily when you're a child. Children are able to learn any language if introduced to it at a very early age. But there are so many languages in the modern world, so surely anyone who is bilingual would have a distinct advantage in the job market you would think. I've noticed as a UK national, that most other countries are way ahead of us when it comes to learning other languages. I've been abroad a few times and I've noticed that not only do a surprising amount of people talk in English as their second language, they do so surprisingly well.

So, where did this language of ours come from? Most of us will have heard that English is derived from Proto-Indo-European, but what does that mean? It's sugeested that a race of white people from the Caucus Mountains area (hence Caucasians) expanded out and reached the Indus Valley where they formed the Vedic culture. They then brought back that language to Europe.

The Celtic language was borne from Proto-Indo-European in 2 forms P-Celtic and Q-Celtic, as was Old English which was brought to the UK by Germanic tribes (Angles, Saxons and Jutes). As the Kings of England spoke English that language became widespread although probably intermingled with Celtic. The Viking incursions into Britain added many other words to our vocabulary, as did the Norman invasion. You'd be surprised at how many English words have a French origin. The final contributor was Latin, writers like Shakespeare and Marlowe found the English language prohibitive in scope so introduced many Latin words into their writing, which we still use to this day.

So modern English is really a hotch-potch of languages, but all from a common ancestor: Proto-Indo-European! The odd thing is, that English is changing. There are so many regional accents in England, that the traditional well-spoken English is becoming a rarity, with slang words continually polluting the word pool. Strangely enough, the best spoken English in the UK is in Inverness, up here in the North of Scotland, and Doric (the dialect I grew up with) is considered to be the closest thing to Old English still in existence. We use words like "nicht" and "brither", which are pronounced pretty much the same way as the Anglo-Saxons said them, betraying their Germanic origins. It's a funny old thing, language!

Vitirfied Forts - Testimony to Ancient Air-Power !

The photograph above shows an aerial view of the ancient fort found at Tap o'Noth, near Rhynie, in North East Scotland. OK, the fort was destroyed a long time ago, as is clearly evident from the image. Consider this though, the rock that formed the fort has been vitrified, that is to say it has melted and become fused together, so that it is a solid lump. They say that there are over 100 such forts scattered across Europe, but more than half are found in Scotland, particularly Northern Scotland (where I'm conveniently situated!).

Scientific tests have demonstrated that in order to achieve the effect of vitrification on the rock, temperatures of over 1,100 *C are required. You think that it's possible that a conventional fire caused that? Unlikely, no, impossible. So many theories have been postulated for why the process of vitrifation occured, many assuming it was intended by the fort builders. That's plainly idiotic. The evidence clearly suggests that the vitrified forts were subjected to some form of incendiary assault, most likely of the airborne variety. That's impossible though isn't it? Ancient peoples never possessed the ability to fly, did they?

And., so we arrive at the crux of it. If you subject ancient texts and archeological finds to scrutiny, there is a great deal to suggest that at least several ancient races possessed flying machines, and yes, weaponry to go with them. I'm thinking specifically with regards to the Vedic culture of India, the Mahabharata, and their Vimanas! Dammit, they even have manuals for constructing flying machines and how to operate them. But clearly, since anything that appears in historical texts, which we find ourselves unable to believe, then gets calssified as mythology, and is perpetuated as such.

I on the other hand, suspect that most myths handed down to us, spring from historical reality, and that modern society is so blinkered, it refuses to believe that mankind might have reached a technological crest in ancient times. Take the Egyptian King Lists for example. It was long-believed that they were a largely fictional work, until corroboration was found inside an ancient tomb. The evidence proved that the kings from the first dynasty onwards, who appeared in the list, had really existed. But, the list also describes a 10,000 year period before those kings, in which Egypt was ruled by a series of Demi-gods, also preceded by the real Egyptian Gods, Osiris, Isis et al.

Historians, then decided that the pre-dynastic rulers on the list were mythological characters, because, obviously they couldn't have existed (but the dynastic rulers were now acceptable). That is the arrogance we possess in this age. We think that unimaginable things cannot have been. Well, what if those lists are in fact 100% accurate? What if the Egyptians never embraced the modern trend of making stuff up, or exaggerating?

And what if some evidence turns up to prove that the Egyptian Gods were real, phyiscal beings?

They'll cover it up, that's what! In fact, it might be happening already. The Egyptian aracheologists under Zahi Hawass were certainly keen to get foreign archaeologists out of the country recently, when various alternative suggestions for Egyptian history were being postulated. They like their history the way it is thank you, and no-one is going to get the opportunity to find evidence which might suggest an alternative hypothesis!