Aye there are quite a lot of those kind of ancient words in our vocabulary - rather ask Thule about ´em for he respectably knows better, but the stress was on the Wiikian speculation which is in a nutshell:  Kalevi Wiik makes the argument that most of Europe may have spoken a proto Finno-Ugric language before the appearance of Indo-European in the region. It's still controversial a few years after the paper was published (and likely always will be). - the so called language-swift theory. The waves weaken the further from the center, so to say. I have positive interest towards Kalevi Wiik's speculation. I don't believe that linguistics' current model of development of languages, the bush-model, is correct. It's better than older tree-model, but not correct.    I tend to think that development of languages is net-like rather than any of I mentioned above. So languages have many roots instead of one, not just loans from others, but roots. Some roots are stronger than others, but a single root cannot put a language to one class just because it's strongest, unless the strength of that root is overwhelming. I do challenge terms such as Indo-European and Finno-Ugric, since there are actually no sense with these and they practically are only legacy of 19th century science.