Dear Nostraticists:
 
Bomhard's response to my critique of his work appeared recently on the other Nostratic list. It was:
 
" My reaction to Pat Ryan's alleged critique of my Nostratic dictionary is that it simply contains too many factual errors, misrepresentations, and misunderstandings to merit a detailed rebuttal."
 
I thgink this is proof positive that even Bomhard knows by now that his entire work is so hopelessly flawed that it cannot be rationally defended.
 
Whatever the value of my critique, it is a critique! And Bomhard's used of "alleged" show the coarse insensitivity that he has consistently demonstrated in sorting through the semantics of the Nostratic roots of his dictionary.
 
Bomhard has never studied any language formally, I believe, and this shows --- painfully!
 

PATRICK C. RYAN | PROTO-LANGUAGE@...
(501) 227-9947 * 9115 W. 34th St. Little Rock, AR 72204-4441 USA
WEBPAGES: PROTO-LANGUAGE: http://www.geocities.com/proto-language/
and PROTO-RELIGION:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/2803/proto-religion/indexR.html

"Veit ec at ec hecc, vindgá meiði a netr allar nío,
geiri vndaþr . . . a þeim meiþi, er mangi veit,
hvers hann af rótom renn." (Hávamál 138)

PATRICK C. RYAN | PROTO-LANGUAGE@...
(501) 227-9947 * 9115 W. 34th St. Little Rock, AR 72204-4441 USA
WEBPAGES: PROTO-LANGUAGE: http://www.geocities.com/proto-language/
and PROTO-RELIGION:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/2803/proto-religion/indexR.html

"Veit ec at ec hecc, vindgá meiði a netr allar nío,
geiri vndaþr . . . a þeim meiþi, er mangi veit,
hvers hann af rótom renn." (Hávamál 138)