:A few red flags here. First, you claim that those who disagrees with you are part of a conspiracy. This is the first defense of a crackpot, so I immediately assume that what you have to say is nonsense. 
 :Second, Granberg *starts* with the claim that Bulgar and Hunnic are the same language, when that is what she should be demonstrating. That makes me wonder is this is because she *can't* show they're the same. 
 :Granberg also says apparently stupid things such as Bulgar can't be related to Sino-Tibetan because it isn't monosyllabic. But Sino-Tibetan isn't monosyllabic either. Her comparisons with Turkic and Mongolian also strike me as superficial and trivial. This is not my area, but it's suspicious.  
 :Finally, WP relies primarily on secondary sources, especially for controversial claims. There is no secondary evaluation of how Granberg has been received by the academic community.  
 :A problem specifically with your edits is that they violate WP:COPYVIO. 
 :I've asked at WP:LANG for comment on this thesis. —