5 ms·
What new evidence. The guy's post said it was checked by linguists and found inadequate to support your claim. Not that your claim is wrong, just unsupportable
by _a_a_a_ 4y ago
What new evidence.
The guy's post said it was checked by linguists and found inadequate to support your claim. Not that your claim is wrong, just unsupportable by that checking.
- moloch-hai 4y agoAre you aware of the article your post is attached to?
- _a_a_a_ 4y agoYes. Iust can't see the word 'semitic' or 'carthage' there, am I missing something?
- moloch-hai 4y agoIt is new evidence. Previous conclusions formed in its absence are obsolete. The new conclusion might be the same, or not, but not without checking first.
- _a_a_a_ 4y agoWhat explicitly is the link. What is the new evidence. Please be specific.
- moloch-hai 4y agoIt is right there at the top of the window you are looking at right now. They call it TFA around here.