Re: Re[6]: [tied] Re: Renfrew's theory renamed as Vasco-Caucasian

----- Original Message -----

From: Brian M. Scott

To: fournet.arnaud

Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 8:38 AM

Subject: Re[6]: [tied] Re: Renfrew's theory renamed as Vasco-Caucasian

>> If you have any, it's an accident, and there's no way for
>> you to be sure or to demonstrate their cognacy: at a time
>> depth of ~50,000 years there is no way to distinguish
>> cognates that by some accident of history are still
>> phonetically similar from unrelated words of similar
>> meaning that accidentally happen to be phonetically
>> similar.

> Suppose I can explain 20% words of Chinese, English,
> Patagonian Tehuelce and Kalahari Bushmen with "unrelated
> words caused by accident of history"

=============
Bluntly, you can't, except perhaps to yourself.

Brian
=============
Dear Brian

I noticed that :

1. People often speak of themselves believing they speak about other people,

So, ok, "you can't" do the job. Never mind.

2. People often theorize their own personal level of incompetence, as a threshold for all mankind.

So, take it easy, heal your own narcissic wounds. If you cannot do it, somebody else will be able to do it : that is the rule with mankind. Man walked on moon, even though you won't achieve this (nor will I).

Next, Indo-European is Sleeping Beauty. Nothing happened since 1870, and about all was discovered and described between 1800 and 1870.

So, I suggest you do something new : look at data by yourself and think by yourself instead of warming up old worn-out half-truths.

As proposed in a previous mail, I suggest you look at Level 2 exercise : understand why North Eastern Caucasic is Indo-European.

This is a real new thing to look at. Worth a kiss to Sleeping Beauty.

Good Luck.

PS :

I have Level 3 exercise in store, in case you crack Level 2 too fast.