Tamil - Revision history

Raj at 17:25, 20 December 2018

2018-12-20T17:25:47Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:25, 20 December 2018
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[Category:Rajkumar]] [[Category:மெய்ப்பொருள்]] [[Category:Third_Eye]]		[[Category:Rajkumar]] [[Category:மெய்ப்பொருள்]] [[Category:Third_Eye]]

			Although it was about cows (well, bulls) I was very curious about the history of things, particularly Tamil few years back. I could not accept the "story" of this, "கல் தோன்றி, மண் தோன்றா.." stuff. Was the கல் & மண் spoke to each other in Tamil?

			Most wiki evidences say, of the 3 era of Tamil (old, mid and modern), the old was based on தொல்காப்பியம், which started at 5th century AD (5+2 = 2500 years back), hence language would have possibly "initiated" about 3 - 4000 years back.

			But all these written evidences (and carbon dating) were eaten-off, while in 2003, a baby skull identified in Vizhupuram Dt as Palaeolithic humans (in fact, at that time, only Homo erectus was existing), which dated 187,000 years - 200,000 yrs old. H. erectus were predecessors of H. sepians and they also should have "spoken a language" for communication.

			During 2000, an analysis of Tribes of Andamans (I was part of this analysis during 2001 in CCMB) using the mictochodrial DNA, revealed the two independent centers of origin of Humans, of which these Andamanese were proved to be the predecessors of even the African human origin. This basically supports the theory (or the belief) of "Kumari Kandam", because the predominant only way at that time, people could spread was by land.

			Current "belief" says there was an existence of a submerged land piece (Lemuria - earlier known as Kumari Kandam), which dated 50,000 BCE and had a well established civilization, and vanished around 16,000 BCE. When we say, "well established civilization"- people should be communicating with each other with a language and that can not be other than Tamil (may be in an ancient format).

			Therefore, my assumption was Tamil did not start at once. It could probably the first communicating language in the Palaeolithic period when Homo erectus/sepians and gradually evolved to various form and later might have been named as Tamil. All the existing modern languages might be one or the other forms of Tamil.

			- Just a thought.

Raj: Replaced content with "Category:Rajkumar Category:மெய்ப்பொருள் Category:Third_Eye"

2018-12-20T17:25:21Z

Replaced content with "Category:Rajkumar Category:மெய்ப்பொருள் Category:Third_Eye"

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:25, 20 December 2018
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[Category:Rajkumar]] [[Category:மெய்ப்பொருள்]] [[Category:Third_Eye]]		[[Category:Rajkumar]] [[Category:மெய்ப்பொருள்]] [[Category:Third_Eye]]

	~~I was very curious about this few years back, on How old is Tamil ?~~

	Most wiki evidences say, of the 3 era of Tamil (old, mid and modern), the old was based on தொல்காப்பியம், which started at 5th century AD (5+2 = 2500 years back), hence language would have possibly "initiated" about 3 - 4000 years back.

	But all these written evidences (and carbon dating) were swallon-off, while in 2003, a baby skull identified in Vizhupuram Dt as Palaeolithic humans (in fact, at that time, only Homo erectus was existing), which dated 187,000 years - 200,000 yrs old. H. erectus were predecessors of H. sepians and they also should have "spoken a language" for communication.


	During 2000, an analysis of Tribes of Andamans (I was part of this analysis during 2001 in CCMB) using the mictochodrial DNA, revealed the two independent centers of origin of Humans, of which these Andamanese were proved to be the predecessors of even the African human origin. This basically supports the theory of "Kumari Kandam", because the predominant only way at that time, people could spread was by land.


	Current "belief" says there was an existence of a submerged land piece (Lemuria - earlier known as Kumari Kandam), which dated 50,000 BCE and had a well established civilization, and vanished around 16,000 BCE. When we say, "well established civilization"- people should be communicating with each other with a language and that can not be other than Tamil (may be in an ancient format).

	Therefore, my assumption was Tamil did not start at once. It could probably the first communicating language in the Palaeolithic period when Homo erectus/sepians and gradually evolved to various form and later might have been named as Tamil. All the existing modern languages might be one or the other forms of Tamil.

Raj: Created page with "Category:Rajkumar Category:மெய்ப்பொருள் Category:Third_Eye I was very curious about this few years back, on How old is Tamil ? Most wiki..."

2018-12-17T06:24:03Z

Created page with "Category:Rajkumar Category:மெய்ப்பொருள் Category:Third_Eye I was very curious about this few years back, on How old is Tamil ? Most wiki..."

New page

[[Category:Rajkumar]] [[Category:மெய்ப்பொருள்]] [[Category:Third_Eye]]

I was very curious about this few years back, on How old is Tamil ?

Most wiki evidences say, of the 3 era of Tamil (old, mid and modern), the old was based on தொல்காப்பியம், which started at 5th century AD (5+2 = 2500 years back), hence language would have possibly "initiated" about 3 - 4000 years back.

But all these written evidences (and carbon dating) were swallon-off, while in 2003, a baby skull identified in Vizhupuram Dt as Palaeolithic humans (in fact, at that time, only Homo erectus was existing), which dated 187,000 years - 200,000 yrs old. H. erectus were predecessors of H. sepians and they also should have "spoken a language" for communication.

During 2000, an analysis of Tribes of Andamans (I was part of this analysis during 2001 in CCMB) using the mictochodrial DNA, revealed the two independent centers of origin of Humans, of which these Andamanese were proved to be the predecessors of even the African human origin. This basically supports the theory of "Kumari Kandam", because the predominant only way at that time, people could spread was by land.

Current "belief" says there was an existence of a submerged land piece (Lemuria - earlier known as Kumari Kandam), which dated 50,000 BCE and had a well established civilization, and vanished around 16,000 BCE. When we say, "well established civilization"- people should be communicating with each other with a language and that can not be other than Tamil (may be in an ancient format).

Therefore, my assumption was Tamil did not start at once. It could probably the first communicating language in the Palaeolithic period when Homo erectus/sepians and gradually evolved to various form and later might have been named as Tamil. All the existing modern languages might be one or the other forms of Tamil.