From: John Croft
I have just purchased for the Gaia Library William Ryan and Walter
Pitman's book "Noah's Flood: The New Scientific Discoveries about the
Event that Changed History".
It proposes (implicitly) that the Black Sea lake circa 5,600 BCE was
the Nostratic homeland, with everyone from the Egyptian Dynastic Race,
Semites, Karvellians, Indo-Europeans and Linear Bander Keramik (Battle
Axe) and Vinca peoples coming out of the Black Sea as survivors.
Whilst I tend to agree with the oceanography and geology, I am having
trouble with the linguistics and archaeology of their proposed
hypothesis. What do you others think.
I've had the book for nearly two years. Ryan and Pitman have impeccable
credentials as earth scientists, and whatever they say about
oceanography, hydrology, geology, and such associated sciences are to be
accepted as fact.
They are not competent to make judgments about historical linguistics
and the origin of PIE. Nor are they competent to make archaeological
judgments. Their book is addressed to a 'popular' audience, but the
title and their speculations greatly diminish the book's overall
acceptablity. The transgression of the Med into the Black Sea is way to
late to have had any effect on the breakup of 'Nostratic'. There are,
however, profound implications for the fallling-together of PIE, in that
5500 BCE is often said to be about the right date, and the north Pontic
region is often said to be right place.
Mark.
Gerry here: Perhaps what you say is correct about Ryan and Pitman being
oceanographers and geologists and not linguists thereby negating their
credibility to speak on the origins of languages. But what about
Cavali-Sforza, the geneticist, who speculates on languages spreading
throughout Eurasia. Is he taken as being "unbelievable" also? I don't
think so. Current scholarship fosters cross-overs.
Back to Ryan and Pitman. What title would have given their Med. and
Black Sea book more credibility? Furthermore, what gives a person
credibility? A degree from a prestigious University? Lots of
publications? The publication of one book? Being known by others in
the field thus receiving "peer" review? I think the above criteria were
important before college admissions was based on the notion of being
"politically correct; NOW everyone who has the appropriate "ethnic" tag
and money seems to be admitted over folks who only have the knowledge.
BTW Mark. On Cybalist you appear very knowledgable about linguistics
yet I have never come across your name. Is it perhaps a pseudonym?
Gerry
--
Gerald Reinhart
Independent Scholar
(650) 321-7378
waluk@...
http://www.alekseevmanuscript.com