Linguistic Makeup of the Latinized Name SULFOLOBUS SOLFATARICUS by Polat Kaya

In a previous paper entitled “Revealing the secret make up of the Latinized terms “PROKARYOTIC” and “EUKARYOTIC” – and more”,http://www.polatkaya.net/Prokaryotic_and_Eukaryotic.htm, where I had pointed out the linguistic make up of the scientific terms “PROKARYOTIC” and “EUKARYOTIC” that described single cell organisms, In this exercise, I dwell on the linguistic make up of theLatinized name Sulfolobus solfataricus describing another single celled micro-organism and also some other related terms.

 “One of the best characterized members of the Crenarcheota is Sulfolobus solfataricus. This organism was originally isolated from geothermally-heated sulfuric springs in Italy, and grows at 80 °C and pH of 2-4.[9] Since its initial characterization by Wolfram Zillig, a pioneer in thermophile and archaean research, similar species in the same genus have been found around the world. Unlike the vast majority of cultured thermophilesSulfolobus grows aerobically and chemoorganotrophically (gaining its energy from organic sources such as sugars). These factors allow a much easier growth under laboratory conditions than anaerobic organisms and have led to Sulfolobus becoming a model organism for the study of hyperthermophiles and a large group of diverse viruses that replicate within them.”http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crenarchaeota.  See also  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfolobus .

“An archaeon Sulfolobus solfataricus lives in volcanic pools near Mount Vesuvius in Italy. It produces cellulase. Researchers are looking at ways of genetically modifying this microbe to see if they can get it to improve its performance and produce more cellulase. In the future S.solfataricus may be used to produce biofuel.

Another common wood digester is the fungus Trichoderma reesei. It is found in nearly all soils and secretes huge quantities of cellulase. The fungus was originally discovered by the United States army during the Second World War. It was responsible for breaking down the cellulose in the soldiers’ canvas tents and uniforms which meant they became very holey. It was known as ‘jungle rot’.” http://www.microbiologyonline.org.uk/about-microbiology/microbes-and-climate-change/microbes-and-biofuels

 The name Sulfolobus solfataricus is the name of one of the species. When the definition for Sulfolobus by itself or solfataricus by itself is searched, both appear together in definitions. It gives me the impression that both words were madeup together – from a longer descriptive source (most likely Turkish) describing the harsh environment that such microorganisms like to live in.  For that reason, I decided to decipher them together – not separately.  This microorganism was initially thought to be sulfur dependent. With this hypothesis, when I rearrange the letters of the Latinized term Sulfolobus solfataricus as “OTLU-SOLFORLO-SU-SABACIFS”, I found that this Latinized term is really an altered and restructured form of the Turkish expression “ODLU SÜLFÜRLÜ SU SEVİCİYİZ” (SICAK KÜKÜRTLÜ SU SEVİCİYİZ) meaning “we are those that like hot water with sulfur”.  This definition in Turkish clearly describes these Sulfolobus solfataricus organisms and their harsh environment.  Thus, we find that this so-called Latin scientific term Sulfolobus solfataricus is actually a rearrangement of a long Turkish sentence describing these single celled organisms called “CRENARCHEOTA” and the environment that they live in.  But the Turkish source sentence“ODLU SÜLFÜRLÜ SU SEVİCİYİZ” has been altered, restructured and broken into two “Latinized” terms  Sulfolobus and  solfataricus. Thus the two words are not only used as the scientific name of the organism – but are used together as a complementary pair where the termSulfolobus makes up the “Genus” name. We must also note that the Latin name GENUS is also the altered form of the Turkish word “CİNSİ”meaning “its type, kind, sort”.

Turkish word OD means “fire, heat”, ODLU means “with fire, with heat” (thus, HOT – which is from Turkish OD), SÜLFÜR is an imported word into Turkish, SÜLFÜRLÜ means  “with sulfur”, SU means “water” and SEVİCİYİZ means “we are that which like”.  Turkish wordKÜKÜRT means “sulfur” which we will see below.

The micro-organisms called Sulfolobus solfataricus are also known by the name CRENARCHEOTA as noted in the above first reference. When the term CRENARCHEOTA is deciphered by rearranging its letters as “COCERT-HERAN”, we find that this Latinized termCRENARCHEOTA is an altered and restructured form of the Turkish expression “KÜKÜRT YERLER” meaning “they eat sulfur”.  The suffix AN is also an ancient plurality suffix of Turkish equivalent to Turkish plurality suffix LER, LAR. Again from the description of these micro organisms given above, we are told that they like to live and multiply in hot volcanic waters with sulfur.  In this decipherment, we find the use of the Turkish word KÜKÜRT meaning “sulfur”.  This verifies the first decipherment above.

The Wikipedia link at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremophile gives the information saying that: “initially, the Crenarchaeota were thought to be sulfur-dependent extremophiles. An extremophile (from Latin extremus meaning “extreme” and Greek philiā (φιλία) meaning “love”) is an organism that thrives in physically or geochemically extreme conditions that are detrimental to most life on Earth.”

In the Latin term EXTREMUS, the symbol X is a bogus letter which can take the place of any of the letter combinations of KS, EKS, KES, KIS, KAS, KUS.  Thus it is a deceitful symbol designed to disguise the Turkish source used in fabricating the so-called “Latin” words. In this case, the Latin term EXTREMUS can be rewritten as EKISTREMUS.  When the term EKISTREMUS is deciphered by rearranging its letters as “US-KISEMTER”, we find that the term EXTREMUS is the altered and disguised form of the Turkish saying “UC KISIMDIR” meaning “it is the end point” (it is the extreme). Turkish word UC means “the end point” (the extreme conditions)KISIM (KESIM, BÖLGE) means the “the part, location, the place”.

Some may question the above by saying that the term SÜLFÜR is not Turkish but KÜKÜRT is.  My response to such a question is the following: ”originally, not even the word “Sulfuric” was Latin or English.  This we see when I decipher the term “SULFURIC” by rearranging its letters as “CUSURFLI”.  In this form, the C is a replacement for the letter K.  Similarly the letter S is really a C – which is also a replacement for letter K. The letter F in this decipherment is Caesar shifted up from a D.  Thus the resulting term becomes “CUCURDLI”  – which is an altered form of Turkish word “KÜKÜRTLİ” meaning “with sulfur”.  This also verifies my above decipherments.

Thermophiles, a type of extremophile, produce some of the bright colors  of Grand Prismatic Spring, Yellowstone National Park  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremophile)

Thermophiles, a type of extremophile, produce some of the bright colors
of Grand Prismatic Spring, Yellowstone National Park
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremophile)

Related to this concept, we have the term THERMOPHILES meaning “heat loving”. When the Hellenized term THERMOPHILES is deciphered by rearranging its letters as “OTLH-SEPHERIM”, we find that even this supposedly Hellenic term THERMOPHILES is really an altered form of the Turkish expression “ODLU SEVERİM” meaning “I love it hot”.  It is no wonder that these organisms live in geothermally-heated sulfuric springs at 80 °C and with a pH of 2-4.  This is another verification of my above decipherments.

Some of such micro organisms are used in producing bio fuels. One of the most common bio fuels, ethanol, is produced from plants.  The plant material used is the edible part of the plant such as sugar cane (Brazil) and sugar beet (France) or corn kernels (USA) because it can easily be broken down to sugar (glucose). The sugar can then be fermented (broken down) to ethanol by microbes such as the yeast Saccharomycescerevisiae.

This Latinized term Saccharomyces cerevisiae is also an eye opener! It is in the same category as Sulfolobus solfataricus that I discussed above.  In other words, the two words Saccharomyces cerevisiae are usually paired together and must have been manufactured from a longer descriptive sentence and then chopped into two words.  When I rearrange the letters of the Latinized term SACCHAROMYCES CEREVISIAEas “SECCER-SEVICI-MAYA-HOCRASE”, I find that the term Saccharomyces cerevisiae is really an altered and restructured form of the Turkish expression “ŞEKER SEVİCİ MAYA HÜCRESU” meaning “the yeast cell that likes sugar”.  This definition in Turkish is a perfect description of this particular sugar-eating yeast single cell organism!

Turkish word ŞEKER means “sugar”, SEVİCİ means “that which likes”MAYA means “yeast”, HÜCRE means “cell”, and HÜCRESÜ (HÜCRESİ) means “the cell”.

In Chemistry, the term HYDROLYSIS is defined as “the chemical breakdown of a compound due to reaction with water.”  When the termHYDROLYSIS is deciphered by rearranging its letters as “SY-İL-HORYSD”, I find that the term HYDROLYSIS is the altered and disguised form of the Turkish expression “SU İLE KARUŞDU” (SU İLE KARIŞDI) meaning “mixed with water”.  Thus even this termHYDROLYSIS is not Latin or Greek at all but rather a usurpation from Turkish!

Moving on, in Biochemistry, the term ENZYME is defined as “a substance produced by a living organism that acts as a catalyst to bring about a specific biochemical reaction.”  Most enzymes are proteins with large complex molecules whose action depends on their particular molecular shape. Some enzymes control reactions within cells and some, such as the enzymes involved in digestion, outside them.  The termENZYME has derivatives of “enzymaticenzymatically, enzymic and enzymically. ORIGIN late 19th cent.: coined in German from modernGreek enzumos ‘leavened,’ from en- ‘within’ + Greek zumē ‘leaven.’

The “Greek” based etymology given above is a lie!  The term ENZYMATICALLY  tells us a different story:  When the termENZYMATICALLY  is deciphered by rearranging its letters as “MAYA-CTILNZYLE” or alternatively as “NY-CATILMAZYLE”, I find that the term ENZYMATICALLY is actually an altered, restructured and disguised form of the Turkish expression “MAYA KATILMASIYLA”meaning “by mixing with yeast” or “by adding yeast to the mixture”.

We must note that one of the M’s in the Turkish source text “MAYA KATILMASIYLA” has been changed into N and also two of the A’s have been dropped in fabricating the term ENZYMATICALLY in order to disguise the Turkish source from being noticed.  The term ENZYME is just a cut off front end of the fabricated term ENZYMATICALLY.  ENZYME is then assigned the meaning of Turkish “MAYA” meaning “yeast“.

Turkish word MAYA means “yeast”, KATILMASI means “addition” and KATILMASIYLE means “with the addition of”.   The term MAYAis probably one of the most ancient Turkish words that has been used since the time that leavened bread – (nan, ekmek), cheese – (peynir),yogurt and wine – (şarap), were invented thousands of years ago.

Since an ENZYME, that is, the “YEAST” – (MAYA in Turkish) is used as a CATALYST, we should also have a good definition of this term. Oxford English Dictionary defines it as “a substance that increases the rate of a chemical reaction without itself undergoing any permanent chemical change”.  The definition should have been “a substance that, when added to a chemical mixture, increases the rate of a chemical reaction without itself undergoing any permanent chemical change”. With this change in the definition, we note again the Turkish source text “MAYA KATILMASIYLA” used for the make up of the term ENZYMATICALLY.  From this, we clearly see the term CATALYST in the Turkish word KATILMASYLA.  Clearly, the term CATALYST is an Aryanized form of the Turkish saying “KATILIŞTI” meaning “it is the addition of, it is the participation of”.  The term CATALYST has everything to do with “being mixed in to a mixture” rather than the other parts of the “definition” given above by the dictionary.  So even this term “catalyst” is a usurpation from Turkish!

Finally since some of these microscopic cells are “filament” like, we should also define the term “FILAMENT”.

Flament is defined as a slender thread like object or fiber, esp. one found in animal or plant structures : a filament of cellulose.  The term FILAMENT is said to be from the Latin term “FILAMENTUM” from Latin term FILUM.

But the so called Latin Term FILIUM is nothing but the altered and restructured form of the Turkish word “LİFUM” (LİFEM, LİFİM, İPLİĞİM) meaning “I am LİFI am threadI am fiber”.  Similarly, the so called Latin term FILAMENTUM is the altered and rearranged form of the Turkish expression “MEN ATUM LİF” (MENİM ADIM LİF) meaning “my name is thread”.  Thus again we find that these so called “Latin” terms are totally made up from Turkish – contrary to all kinds of verbose sophistry and lies that we have been subjected to!

So we can see, and say confidently, that every definition in Turkish has been stolen and converted into some kind of word formats in artificially fabricated “Aryan” languages, that is, so-called Indo-European languages.

We must note that, the mathematical probability of these supposedly Aryan-language terms – having so many Turkish words and expressions embedded in them – is micro miniscule. The only logical and correct explanation for finding so many relevant Turkish words embedded in these Latinized and Hellenized Aryan terms is that they stole from the Turkish language, and fabricated many concocted languages. In the process of fabricating these Latinized and/or Hellenized terms from Turkish words and expressions, they deliberately ignored to tell the world that the linguistic source material for these so-called “scientific Latin terms” was actually from the Turkish language.  Instead, they chose to lie about it and point to bogus Greek or Latin sources.  With such deliberate and ill-intentioned fraud, they lied to the world and deceived the public that in the ancient times before 1000 A.D., there were no Turks, no Turkish language, no Turkish civilization, and no Turkish culture, but rather – everything was Greek, Latin, Aryan and Indo-European and of course also – Semitic. This falsehood at the very foundation of “European science” is very disturbing and troubling.  How can we trust them any more?  Only they themselves would know how many other frauds have been perpetrated upon the ancient Turanians and the world public!

With best wishes to all,

Polat Kaya

November 18, 2012