Do you believe in Nostratics?

Do you think the theories and examples for the hypothetical Nostratic are sufficient in order to believe in the existence of such a language of the past?

As for me I am not VERY sure but though am I quite certain that Indo-European and Finno-Ugric languages must have had some conjunction.

Let's regard the word 'water'. The Proto-Indo-European word for it is 'wodr-' or 'wed-' and the Proto-Finno-Ugric root is 'vedt-' or 'vis-'. Then the word 'name'. I.E. root is 'nom-' and F.U. equivalent is 'nim-'.
Then the personal pronoun of 'I' or 'me'. I.E. probable proto-root is 'me' and Finno-Ugric is 'ma'.
And there are much more roots that are similar, if not in Nostratics, then in Indo-Uralic certainly.

So I actually tend to believe in the superfamily of Indo-Uralic which binds both all the Indo-European languages and all the Finno-Ugric languages (including so extreme languages as even Estonian and Hungarian).

one can believe very much but the so-called archaic-type of a language counts nothing. Although the Finno-Ugric languages are ancestral is it 100% certain that the Proto-Finno-Ugric was spoken in the region of Ural Mountains first, and then, thousends of years later, the people moved to the coast of Baltic Sea, to the area of today's Finland and Estonia. So the contact between Indo-European and Finno-Ugric (if at all) must have, assuredly, found place in Asia, for, by the time the Uralic people wandered to the shore of the Baltic Sea, the Indo-Europeans were already in Southern Europe, on the peninsula of Balcan, so, the today's European languages can by no means be influenced by Finno-Ugric DIRECTLY, but they can be connected distantly by the probable contacts in Asia, for instance by the Caspian Sea. It is wellknown that the origin of Indo-European is in the area of India and the origin of Finno-Ugric in the Ural Mountains.

>> Some linguists believe that Proto-Indo-European (the prehistoric ancestor of English) may have even started out as a dialect of Finnish. <<

lmao. No... the only linguistics believe that Proto-Indo-European started out as a dialect of Finnish, also believe that humans evolved from monkeys and chimps. They really believe that there may have been an ancient common ancestor for both of them. Saying that Proto-Indo-European evolved from a dialect of Finnish is like saying that Latin evolved from Ebonics. Finnish is a modern language. Nostratic may have been the parent language of: Indo-European, Uralic and Altaic languages. Many modern linguists express considerable skepticism of the data put forward to demonstrate interrelationships between the various language families under the Nostratic umbrella. The main criticism of Nostratic holds that the methodology used leads people to see patterns that actually result from coincidences. In reconstructing Nostratic, supporters do not use the techniques that linguists have established to prevent false positives, such as insisting on examining only regular sound shifts.

you took the text directly out of Wikipedia.org and what is more, out of the chapter 'Criticism'. read the topics which support the theories.

but there are some more secret evidents which show us that the F.U and I.E. are connected.
The Finnish and Estonian languages have their equivalents for 8 and 9 as follows: respectively 'kahdeksä' and 'yhdeksa', and 'kaheksa' and 'üheksa'. If we part the words 'kah + deksa' then we get two roots: 'kah' means 2 and out of the other word, the 'yh-' means 1. So probably, in Finno-Ugric languages 8 means 'two till ten' and 9 'one till ten'. And the root 'deksa-', if this former theory is right, must mean 10. Now, let's remember what is the Indo-European equivalent for 10? It is 'deka', of course. That is a very, very good evident of their being connected with each other.

And, I insist that there are MUCH MORE similarities, so they cannot be just coincidences.

Well, it certainly is possible. But can we really be all that sure how a language so many thousands of years before writing sounds like? Sure you can try to reconstruct words, but do you really think that is how people spoke back then? Those languages could very well be related, but to try to reconstruct such an ancient language seems rather far fetched.

>> There were Indo-European (or Aryan) invasions of India between 1500 and 1200 B.C. but these invasions appear to have originated from the steppes of Russia. <<

Where did the non-Aryan Indians originate from? Did the Indo-Europeans displace them or are there some still around in India?