Original sentence: " This thesis flatly contradicts basic Egyptological, Sumerian, Semitic, Indo-European, and Mesoamerican scholarship.Lakarra calculates that 85% of Arnaiz-Villena's alleged Basque words are faulty or even non-existent.Phoenician, Akkadian/Babylonian, Ugaritic, and Eblaite, for example, are clearly Semitic languages, whereas Arnaiz-Villena excludes the living Semitic languages from his family; Egyptian along with Berber and Semitic have been demonstrated to be Afro-Asiatic, and generations of linguists have been unable to find a connection with Basque; and Hittite is widely acclaimed as a key in the reconstruction of proto-Indo-European, which Arnaiz-Villena acknowledges is completely unrelated to Basque.They posit that these are all part of a "Usko-Mediterranean" branch of the speculative Dene-Caucasian language family, which they extend to include the Berber languages of North Africa, and advertises that Basque can even be used to translate the Indus script of Pakistan, Rongorongo of Easter Island, and the Mayan glyphs of Mesoamerica, showing that "Usko-Mediterannean technology and religion diffused across the planet
Edited sentence: Lakarra calculates that 85% of Arnaiz-Villena's Basque words are faulty or even non-existent.Phoenician, Akkadian/Babylonian, Ugaritic, and Eblaite, for example, are clearly Semitic languages, whereas Arnaiz-Villena excludes the living Semitic languages from his family; Egyptian along with Berber and Semitic have been demonstrated to be Afro-Asiatic, and generations of linguists have been unable to find a connection with Basque; and Hittite is widely acclaimed as a key in the reconstruction of proto-Indo-European.They posit that these are all part of a "Usko-Mediterranean" branch of the speculative Dene-Caucasian language family, which they extend to include the Berber languages of North Africa,.This thesis flatly contradicts basic Egyptological, Sumerian, Semitic, Indo-European, and Mesoamerican scholarship