First of all the Dacians exist, see Traian's column and what you say is neither realistic or historical. Hungary and Poland have different language, the Hungarians have a Protestant religion and they have different cultures. They can be good friends but never a family
Maybe you're taking things too literally. Despite their differences they still consider themselves as "family" because of their long history together. It's not the literal "family" since both of them are from separate linguistic and genetic families but it's more of a formed by close friendship type like how most people these days consider their best friends as a part of their family. They even have a Hungarian-Polish Friendship Day to commemorate their historical brotherhood and camaraderie. So yes they are family to themselves but not the literal kind.
The evidence that support the Daco-Romanian continuity theory has no sense, really? Audiatur et altera pars, sine ira et studio, pal, do not blindly swallow only the theories that fuel your Greater Hungary wet dreams
Man in the 19 century were ,,swag'' to say who were youre ancestors . And just because romania is on the dacias teritory doesnt count . You need to have more the write need to be similar the speaking etc... And another one wikipedia say a lot of things and there not all is full thruth
What is not full of "thruth"? What are your NPOV sources to back your statements up? Have you even try to read that article or was it too hard for you to spell? Wikipedia is a collaborative encyclopedia with lots of good (and some bad) editors, but those articles are pretty neutral even this is a sensitive subject - and the statements there are backed up by reliable sources, not by what you heard at the local skinhead/Jobbik/Magyar Garda reunion over a bottle of palinka
What is the first picture supposed to depict? The fact that the Hungarians and the Polish had cavalry in the 1000's? Or that the Hungarians did not plunder and ravaged the Polish lands as they did with the East, Central and Western Europe in the 10th century and the beginning of the 11th?
Ok...ok... but say me a country what ,,plunder and ravaged'' europe because hungary mostly defended europe from turks and mongols. when romania were under control .what ended in the midle of 19 century
What does one have to do with the other? This is a ridiculous, fallacious argument ("Yeah, we plundered and ravaged Europe at first, but then we protected you from other pillagers") Funny Yes, Hungary defended Europe from the Turks (as also Wallachia and Moldavia did) until Mohács (1526). Then most of Hungary became the Pashaluk of Buda (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budin_Eyalet) and effectively occupied by the Ottomans for circa 140 years, while Wallachia and Moldavia were not occupied by the Turks, only under Ottoman suzerainty (they had to pay tribute and the princes were appointed by the Sultan). Quite a difference between being sodomized every night by the Turks and paying not to be sodomized