I am not familiar with that or its quality or reception in the field.

You should ask someone actually in the field of Indo-European historical linguistics.

Thanks for replying. In this aspect, what do you of Angela Marcantonio’s research over the years? One of her books is ‘The Uralic Language Family: Facts, Myths and Statistics’.

But but but what if they get to the bottom of Oxyrhyncus before Thermonuclear War ‘Game’?
😉

P.S. I took historical linguistics courses in grad school (ancient Greek linguistics, which operated on a foundation of proto-Indo-European linguistics). But I find most of what people think the field says isn’t true. There’s a lot of crankery and mythology circulating that people mistake as actually still the status of the real science.

It’s a real science. There is some pseudoscience that tries to steal its glory. But once you treat it like an actual science (only accepting conclusions that maintain consensus status on a foundation of multiple independent corroboration) the other stuff dissolves (which is often old stuff long since refuted and abandoned, or failed theories of the past no longer held in the field, or speculative proposals not yet proved).

Thank you. That’s helpful to hear.

Thank you. I was aware. Cooke (and Lindsay, same issue) don’t say anything new. I already refuted all this when they published essentially all the same arguments a year ago:

See That Phenomenally Stupid Article by Bill Cooke.

Note the Update at the bottom there, which covers the issue you are talking about.

Also, general advice: it’s worth bookmarking my article List of Responses to Defenders of the Historicity of Jesus because I update that continually. You’ll notice there is an entry for Cooke there (and Lindsay, though they point to the same place because theirs was a tag-team propaganda move).