cont Bernd 01/12/2019 (Sat) 12:06:38 No.22289 del
(315.95 KB 1138x1462 Atilla_fléau_de_dieu.jpg)
Maybe the most notable hypotheses is the Sumerian connection. Since the Sumer is an agglutinative language I think it was natural consequence that some people picked it as a forerunner of Hungarian. Most often than not these people emigrated to America at one point, usually after 1945. Some say they have qualifications but here the scientific community doesn't accept it and I highly suspect the wider,foriegn neither (but those might don't even know about them). The Sumer connection is just rejected as above: dreamy or pseudo-scientific. On the other hand no qualified linguist took the task and examined the question, not one. Which is interesting because of noone would measured - for example - the Sanskrit to German, we wouldn't know about the relations between them. So why can't someone approved go and check if is it possible or not that the Hungarian and Sumer have some connection? If there is then go on, start more research, if none they could say "we told you" and move on (and pull out the research anyone starts the argument again). But they did not and do not. If one tries to say something liek "we wuz Huns" then they say "here come the Sumers".
I haven't read so much ad-hominems anywhere else ever than in publications about the Hungarian prehistory. What the Academics say I mentioned above, but the "other side" (as this side call themselves now "national") also goes on and calls out the researchers, naming them commies, anti-Hungarians, Hungarophobes, Habsburg-hirelings (or Jew-hirelings, this never goes out of fashion) and many other.
I guess in the beginning for the Hungarian nobility the "fish-greased" relatives in the backwater northeast like the insignificant Finns or the even less important Samoyeds were less appealing than the proud Scythians or the world-conquering Attila. On the other hand I heard somewhere that by prestige relatives in Skandinavia were a step up compared to Mongols (especially if we think of such associations as mongrels or mongoloidism, and Attila is/was generally widely hated in the west, and up to this day sometimes cited as a symbol of barbarism) and were more desirable and European.
One more thought for comparing the Sumer and Hungarian together. I've read in the unofficial official website of Hungarian linguists ( the opinion that comparing two languages and finding similarities (so even if the find many common stuff both in grammatics and vocabulary between Sumer and Hungarian) doesn't matter, probability matters and it's impossible that the two language belongs to the same family. But by then - comes my interjection - Hungarian most probably Indo-European as one only can find those all around and those are which our language had the most interactions with in the past 1000 years.