MiG
Amicus
Republika
Posts: 4,793
|
Post by MiG on Mar 26, 2010 15:54:59 GMT -5
^ Not really all that credible, if its from a blogger. I could start a blog indicating that the People's Republic of China is the greatest nation on the face of this earth, and make graphs about it. Even still, it wouldn't make it all that credible.
Us Slavs are all similar to each other. Religion and influences is what divide us, and will divide us for the next 200-300 years, and maybe even longer.
Anyway, to dwell on Novi Pazar's answer and rebuttal.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but all us Slavs are one group of people, degraded down to several different branches. It's like an organizational group.
Fair enough. Ever hear of Lech, Ceh, and Rus?
Slovenian, as a language, is a mix of Serbo-Croatian and Czech/Slovak. Ever hear them speak, or even see their way of wording or even some words.
Why do you think Tito himself knew actual Czech? It was easy for him, because he grew up being half Slovene and half Croat.
Slavic, as a language started as one.. and branched off into different dialects, which became different languages.
I fully agree on the argument with you there, but to say that Bulgarian is one of the latest branches of Slavic is wrong to say. Why? That then would be the same case for Russian.
Which is what I did say in my last post. Correct? It is a mix, yes, but foreigners who documented that, even outsider Slavs (Russians, Poles, Czechs, and Ukrainians) classified it as a branch of Bulgarian. I never trust the local sources, since they're always biased to fit one sides wishes/agendas. However, the outsider sources had no biases. Why? They didn't care about who should be what, but about statistics.
It's not mistake that it was recorded as a branch of Bulgarian. Correct? Because if it was, then the same would have been done and said that it was a Branch of Serbian.
Concerning what? For how long? How far back are you suggesting?
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Mar 26, 2010 16:41:12 GMT -5
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Mar 26, 2010 23:41:09 GMT -5
Mig, i thing every balkan nation after 1900 got his history/language/minority policy through a major overhaul. The truth lies before 1900. Also i fully disagree with what you say about the foreign sources being more reliable. It is just that local sources maybe indeed serving (small) agendas, while it is 100% sure that foreign sources serve BIG agendas. And if what you say is true (foreign sources being unbiased and reliable because they dont really care about the outcome, etc...) let me tell you that foreign sources, if they indeed didn't care they would not be involved in the first place! As a croat and an ex-Yugoslav that you are, and as a greek that i am (and close to the region), You and I know very well that the 99% of foreign propaganda during ex-YU wars, even conducted by non-bloggers and (foreigners as well) were less reliable than this particular blog about genetics i linked to(which used to be a normal site some time back). This guy (a Greek guy) seems to know very well what he is talking about. So, a) blogs apriori are by no means less reliable than Wikipedia (which seems to be liked by so many people here) b) foreign sources by nature are LESS reliable than local, for b1) the obvious political reasons b2) the fact that usually they dont know what they are talking about
Example, the slav populations in Peloponese (south Greece). The French/English will claim that Peloponese is AncientGreek/Byzantine/<put some other fanfare here>, etc... The germans will claim that there is not a drop of Greek blood in there. The truth as spoken by the locals (if they are allowed to talk) will tell a very different story from both the English and the German version. 1000s of examples like these can be found from the YU-wars..... Do you consider "foreign" sources about the Kosovo war more reliable than local? of course not.
|
|
MiG
Amicus
Republika
Posts: 4,793
|
Post by MiG on Mar 27, 2010 1:53:55 GMT -5
Fair enough. Let's go with what you say. Your statements contradict themselves there though.
How can a foreign source be less reliable, if you say that every nation after 1900 got its history and etc. through a major overhaul. Wouldn't it that make it a Hegemony-Oriented Agenda, hence being unreliable?
Just sayin'.
How so. If you have the French and Russians saying what I posted about the Macedonians, how is that possible that they're feeding the Bulgarian Agenda, where in fact they were the largest Serb allies? And in the early 1900's, Macedonia was under the Serbian Flag.
That's not actually entirely true. How could someone who legitimately just wants to know certain states, or certain regions, and their stats, be made out to serve someones political agenda. Isn't that just serving their own personal interests, and the interests of their Scholarly Community.
However what you say is definitely true. I will not argue on the point that other nations through propaganda do manipulate the situation. But back in the mid-1800's, Information Warfare was not undertaken, as the simple folk were not interested in such teachings and/or statistics.
That is true. Those that wanted to break up the Federation, did it systematically. Information Warfare was an excellent means to start this, and it was successful. They played on nationalism. Certain people believe one side, where others believed another.
Fair enough. He does. Even still, you can't be accurate with a certain number of samples from a particular people. To be correct in Genealogy, an entire population must be counted in. Guesstimates only take us as far as the next study and hypothesis, correct?
I have looked it over, and read some of the stuff. He does seem to display a certain amount of experience in that field.
Yes. But Wikipedia is public, and can be edited by those that can provide the correct sources for the material they provide.
How is that so. The sources I provided up top, and the books that were written 130 years ago or just a little less than that, all point to one general direction.
Independent sources, which were not government funded, but rather taken on by road scholars, in my opinion, should be valued. The years and even decades of research and actual sampling that was done by the authors should show for itself that they've spent enough time in that region to document their findings.
How recent is this? World War Two, or older? If I'm not mistaken, Greeks are the equivalent of Slavs. You have your own subdivisions amongst yourselves, but its not nearly to the same degree as Slavs.
I don't find anything on Kosovo credible anymore. Propaganda, and Fact, have mixed themselves in so far, that I don't know what to believe anymore. So as long as this limbo status continues down there, I'm in limbo on an opinion myself.
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Mar 27, 2010 2:57:39 GMT -5
Gyrro, you contradict yourself on every other word you post.
Dear friend, if you actually took the time to read up on the subject, and actually looked at sources from the region you will find that Ottoman and Greek sources support the fact that Macedonians identified as Bulgarians. Even Serbian sources, mainly those that were published prior to the 1900’s, also support the fact that Macedonians identified as Bulgarians. Serbia changed its views only after it became evident that the Serb lands in Bosnia and Herzegovina were lost due to the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
Hmmm, I wonder what kind of agenda did they all have. Is this yet another world conspiracy against Serbia? I’m asking because these sources with their big agendas come from the US, France, Britain, Russia, Germany, and Italy. These were political rivals, these countries were not all friendly with each other, and yet, somehow their big agenda was one and the same.. lying about their findings in Macedonia. As MiG already mentioned, some of these countries were very fond of Serbia on the political stage, yet their findings all agreed with the Bulgarian perspective.
WOW, bringing religion into this again, huh? We are all Christian brothers, and some of us are even Orthodox Brothers.. yet our “brothers” slaughtered just as much Bulgarians as did the Muslim Turks. I’m not one to generalize an entire people.. at least not without sufficient evidence, but this is a rather typical Greek trait I think. Gyrro can’t reason with logic so he brings religion into the discussion as if the fact that he shares a common religion will persuade other Christians to agree with his ignorant ill minded views. I can only imagine that in reality Gyrro is some feeble minded racist with no backbone whatsoever.
I’ll assume that this statement in this context applies to our immediate discussions on Macedonia, to which I have to say.. isn’t the point of any propaganda to reach some sort of desired end point. Why is the desired end point shared by practically all Western and Balkan sources? Why is this supposed propaganda of rival nations, world powers even, all in support of the Bulgarian identity of Macedonia while at the same time some of them were friends of Serbia?
Like MiG said, the sample space is variable, and unless you use the whole population of a country you can’t expect accurate results. Thing is, we don’t even need genetic studies to see the physical resemblance between Macedonians and Bulgarians as opposed to that between Macedonians and Serbians or Bulgarians and Serbians. Ljubotan’s comments on his visit to a Bulgarian Church in Detroit(or was it another city?) are a more or less accurate depiction of the situation.
The great thing is that Wikipedia’s articles are the result of a whole bunch of different viewpoints amalgamated into one, with references of course. It provides a fairly bias-free perspective in the end.
Heh, and I think MiG’s last post just made Gyrro’s head explode.. you see, Gyrro’s brain is not built to handle logic, the main purpose of his one brain cell is to keep reminding him “inhale” .. “exhale” .. “inhale” .. “exhale” and so on and so forth.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Mar 27, 2010 4:17:42 GMT -5
Mig, we agree on most aspects.
Asen the sodomized bulgarian whore, after the Kuber fiasco, i wander how you dare to spell the word "wiki" any longer. Also, in most political-oriented wiki pages the ones who press last the update button wins. (at this job the mongols are second to none). as for “inhale” .. “exhale” .. “inhale” , i dont know about the specific species of the mongols, but generally in humans this is done by an autonomous parasympathetic system independent of the brain. (btw you seem to have only this system completely lacking a main brain-unit ;D )
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Mar 27, 2010 7:30:44 GMT -5
the arvanite is quite hateful today. at least we understood that his mother village was just some miles away from mother albania .
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Mar 27, 2010 8:41:13 GMT -5
^^^ the bloody mongobot fell into an infiinite loop again ;D
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Mar 27, 2010 11:18:02 GMT -5
Gurac, that’s not how wiki works. If you post nonsense your comments will quickly be reverted.
Yeah, generally it’s independent of the brain.. but that’s clearly not the case with you.
|
|
ivo
Amicus
Posts: 2,712
|
Post by ivo on Mar 27, 2010 11:18:26 GMT -5
Don't forget to breathe
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Mar 27, 2010 13:57:08 GMT -5
i didnt know mongobots have the ability to multiply. (thank God, they lack the ability to think)
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Mar 27, 2010 20:22:47 GMT -5
"Slovenian, as a language, is a mix of Serbo-Croatian and Czech/Slovak. Ever hear them speak, or even see their way of wording or even some words.
Why do you think Tito himself knew actual Czech? It was easy for him, because he grew up being half Slovene and half Croat.
Slavic, as a language started as one.. and branched off into different dialects, which became different languages.
I fully agree on the argument with you there, but to say that Bulgarian is one of the latest branches of Slavic is wrong to say. Why? That then would be the same case for Russian."When the first Slavs arrived to the Balkans (the undifferentiated slavs) spoke a form of proto-slavic, even the later arrival of related slav tribes (Croats, Slovenes & Serbs) spoke the same form of proto-slavic. They were all basically linguistically exact up until the formation of Old Church Slavonic, that means Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, Bulgars, Vardarians (Fyromians), Bosnians, Montenegrins all spoke a similar alike language with a declension system up until the formation of OCS. Only later they began to differentiate according to regional pressures which meant modern Bulgarian and *most* Vardarian dialects lost its slavic declension system while all the other slavic groups retained its original slavic case systems. Take for example the Pirin Vardar region of Bulgaria, they say On/Ona and Oni for he she and they just like west Balkan Slavic (Serbo-Croat) whereas in Vardar (Fyrom) they say Toj/Ta and Toa like modern Bulgarian, so does it mean by most peoples logic that Vardarians = Bulgars and Pirin region of Bulgaria are Serbo-Croats?......NO....it means they evolved in a similar way. Take another example of the word *Crna*, as spelt by vardarians and other west balkan slavs, the Bulgars spell it as Cerna or even the word Bulgarian word Mlyako, the Vardarians (Fyromians) and other west balkan slavs say or spell it as Mleko. Even the vardarian (Fyromian) dialects have differences, take for example the word for hand, they can say it as roka, raka or ruka. The Vardarians from northern Greece say yogurt as Pokvash but the Vardarians from Vardar (Fyrom) say it as kiselo Mleko. You got to understand MiG the real reason (sorry Albs) why vardarian has been classified as Bulgarian, basically the Turkish backed Bulgarian Exarchate operated in Vardar (fyrom) for 42 years, the intent was interesting because the Turks saw it as a way to Bulgarianise the local population to become submissive Bulgars so that the Ottomans could have better control of them which would result in a longer domination for her in the south Balkans. The Russians supported this because she realised that a Greater Bulgaria would make her dominate the Meditterean and also would use Bulgaria to destroy Turkey in the future. While the exarchate was in operation in Vardar (fyrom), the local population in fear of their lives and disatisfaction for the Patriarchate joined the Exarchate. Travellers confused and ill-informed etc....classified these people simply as Bulgars on the grounds of wrong information (mainly from bulgarian propaganda) and also from the simplistic conclusion they thought that if one joins the Bulgarian Exarchate then they must be Bulgars MiG, as me and Pyrro have said here, you cannot draw a simplistic conclusion for Vardar, its actually somewhat very complex.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Mar 27, 2010 20:30:14 GMT -5
"Thesaloniki itself never got fully slavicized."
Your absolutely right man, my point l was making was that Cyril and Methodius (two Great Greek men from Thessaloniki) developed OCS from some of the local slavs from the city or region of Thessaloniki. Its a reminder because l believe Bulgarian empires had never reached Thessaloniki.
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Mar 28, 2010 0:51:44 GMT -5
"Thesaloniki itself never got fully slavicized." Your absolutely right man, my point l was making was that Cyril and Methodius (two Great Greek men from Thessaloniki) developed OCS from some of the local slavs from the city or region of Thessaloniki. Its a reminder because l believe Bulgarian empires had never reached Thessaloniki. You are wrong. The Bulgarian kingdome reached and ruled many times the region of Thessaloniki. It even ruled the city in the time of Ioan-Assen II (Ivan-Assen II) by his son-in-law (a Greek), who Ioan personally put to rule the city.
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Mar 28, 2010 0:55:11 GMT -5
You got to understand MiG the real reason (sorry Albs) why vardarian has been classified as Bulgarian, basically the Turkish backed Bulgarian Exarchate operated in Vardar (fyrom) for 42 years, the intent was interesting because the Turks saw it as a way to Bulgarianise the local population to become submissive Bulgars so that the Ottomans could have better control of them which would result in a longer domination for her in the south Balkans. The Russians supported this because she realised that a Greater Bulgaria would make her dominate the Meditterean and also would use Bulgaria to destroy Turkey in the future. While the exarchate was in operation in Vardar (fyrom), the local population in fear of their lives and disatisfaction for the Patriarchate joined the Exarchate. Travellers confused and ill-informed etc....classified these people simply as Bulgars on the grounds of wrong information (mainly from bulgarian propaganda) and also from the simplistic conclusion they thought that if one joins the Bulgarian Exarchate then they must be Bulgars great, the same stupidity...from the Bulgarian. Lets try to believe the abovementioned insanity. It still doesnt justify why Germans, French, American, Italian, British and other people have all concluded one and the same thing: that Macedonians=Bulgarians.
|
|
Kralj Vatra
Amicus
Warning: Sometimes uses foul language & insults!!!
20%
Posts: 9,814
|
Post by Kralj Vatra on Mar 28, 2010 3:34:17 GMT -5
^^^^ even if the above is due solely to implementing certain policies, this could not make the makedonian slavs actually like you. You played correctly on the international arena (excharhate a representative example), failed miserably on the ground work (nobody likes you). So, why do we all have to suffer here, reading your old rotten rubish, with no impact on the actual reality? Oh, and one more thing...
KUBER!!!
HA HA HA HA HA
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Mar 28, 2010 4:51:53 GMT -5
^ People like Ioan rely on fairytales lmao
|
|
ioan
Amicus
Posts: 4,162
|
Post by ioan on Mar 28, 2010 5:32:16 GMT -5
^^^^ even if the above is due solely to implementing certain policies, this could not make the makedonian slavs actually like you. You played correctly on the international arena (excharhate a representative example), failed miserably on the ground work (nobody likes you). So, why do we all have to suffer here, reading your old rotten rubish, with no impact on the actual reality? Oh, and one more thing... KUBER!!! HA HA HA HA HA shut it your low life arvanite-turned greek for 3 seconds-turned serb for (insert here) + uncapable to master serbian. no one is interested in your "groundbreaking" researches via google, you are the laughing stock of the forum.
|
|
|
Post by Novi Pazar on Mar 28, 2010 5:48:52 GMT -5
^ Ioan, the laughing stock is forcing Bulgarian propaganda on others that is historically wrong.
|
|
|
Post by rusebg on Mar 28, 2010 5:49:00 GMT -5
Not really so. 'Hvala brate' is an achievement. Plus he knows 'mleko'. This makes him know 33% more Serbian than Novi.
|
|