--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "S.Kalyanaraman" <kalyan97@...>
wrote:
>
> I will be happy to provide specific points, if they are
> considered relevant to this list since we may have to cross
> into points related to writing systems. More updates have
> been posted at the website URL referred to by David.
I asked Anthony to provide points, since he seemed to think
he was posting something newsworthy. I found that difficult
to understand, given his time on the lists which we share.
> A debate is ongoing at:
>
> IE linguistic scholars are welcome to participate in the ongoing
> debate at: http://sulekha.com/expressions/articledesc.asp?
> cid=307017 Code of Sarasvati hieroglyphs cracked.
What debate? The majority of the follow up comments are
your own, and most of the rest debate you in no other way
than to critique your formatting. Though the one true
criticism posted I think hits the nail right on the head.
I'm referring to that of "bombay_wallah" who wrote
"A perfect example of a writing that makes "defnitely an
interesting subject"... into a dull & literally meaningless
treatise in "I, me and the achievements of Dr.Kalyanraman".
In any case, why would I or anybody else be interested in
debating with non-linguists? Their opinions on the matter
are worthless. Of course, you've never demonstrated even
the most basic understanding of linguistics yourself, so I
guess it should come as no surprise that you're under the
misapprehension you've deciphered something. Not to mention
your many other misapprehensions, like that about Indian
language families, the original sense of "Arya", that soma
was electrum, etc. As far as linguistics goes, my friend,
your only legitimate role is one of humble student, not the
professor you pretend to be.
David