Re: open letter to the Google company, on the value of the scientific groups

Franz Gnaedinger wrote:
On Sep 21, 8:33 pm, António Marques<m...@xxxxxxx> wrote:

One of the mobbing techniques consists in asking so many
questions at once that nobody can answer them in one
single message, and already has he lost. Concentrate
yourself on a single point.

I've asked you exactly 2 questions, which are but the two sides of the same coin. You can't answer.

Don't evade the question. What is it that you would consider evidence in
favour of the accepted IE etymology?

Halfway accepted IE etymology, en lieu of a better one.
And didn't I tell you how it could be disproved? I did,
but you don't read. So I must say it in a different way.
Peter told me a couple of years ago that archaeology
got nothing to do with (paleo-)linguistics. It was the time
when everybody in here believed in sound laws that
allow linguistic reconstructions in a quasi-algebraic way
so that no other disciplines are needed. But sound laws
are just rules with many exceptions, a quasi-algebraic
manner of reconstructing early words ain't possible,
we have to use a multi-dimensional approach to
early language. And a disproof of my reconstructions
must be delivered in the same way, as a multi-
dimensional effort, a web of evidence coming from
all sides.

I'm sorry, but not a single clause in the paragraph above is an answer to 'what is it that you would consider evidence in favour of the accepted IE etymology?'.

What is it that you would consider evidence in favour of the accepted IE etymology?

So you also missed the point that it's completely irrelevant whether it
was Leonardo, Donatello, Michelangelo or Raphael.

It is relevant, what I say holds for Leonardo and partly
for Rapheal, but not for Michelangelo.

Why not? (This one is merely a side question, feel free to leave it for another time.)

And you've missed the part where I said any trace of the original had
been lost. How dumb can you get? You THINK you can recover something
that IS NO LONGER there?

Yes, via a good copy, I worked for years on one such
case and recovered an original every trace of which
is lost.

How can you know the copy is a copy of that original, if the original is no longer there so you can know what original is it?

By this I mean every molecule of the original.

Good grief.

Wonderful! Can it help you understand south american cave paintings?

I don't know South American cave art, but test me,
give me a link to a painting and I might tell you what
I see and recognize.

When I get the patience, it's promised.

And then pose me one single question in your next reply!

Lest what?
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: open letter to the Google company, on the value of the scientific groups
    ... and already has he lost. ... And a disproof of my reconstructions ... but not a single clause in the paragraph above is an answer to 'what is it that you would consider evidence in favour of the accepted IE etymology?'. ... You THINK you can recover something ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: open letter to the Google company, on the value of the scientific groups
    ... and already has he lost. ... And a disproof of my reconstructions ... was Leonardo, Donatello, Michelangelo or Raphael. ... You THINK you can recover something ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Any cows farting on Mars?
    ... the time or that we fully understand all of it's workings. ... over the fact he won the popular vote and only lost due to serious ... idiocy of the current administration, it's divisiveness, and how much ... Being impervious to reason, blind to evidence, and unable to answer ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Federer - More Opportunist Than Best Ever?
    ... Henman 6-1 first 7 meetings with Fed. ... Lost to Ancic at Wimbledon, ... there is ample evidence that Federer ...
    (rec.sport.tennis)
  • Re: Federer - More Opportunist Than Best Ever?
    ... Henman 6-1 first 7 meetings with Fed. ... Lost to Ancic at Wimbledon, ... is ample evidence that Federer ... Does Sampras being pushed to 5 sets the rd before v Cowan give us a hint at Sampras' form at that time? ...
    (rec.sport.tennis)