"amateur crank claiming"
I don't know why you want to stoop to name calling which violates the guidelines and the spirit of this site.
"without any critical review" is also seemingly untrue: the post says Rutgers and Cambridge are reviewing it
I don't know why you want to stoop to name calling which violates the guidelines and the spirit of this site.
"without any critical review" is also seemingly untrue: the post says Rutgers and Cambridge are reviewing it
My following searches turn out no announcements by either Rutgers or Cambridge:
"rutgers linguists evaluate deciphering of linear a by tom di mino"
https://www.google.com/search?q=rutgers+linguists+evaluate+d...
https://www.google.com/search?q=cambridge+linguists+evaluate...
i am sorry but "crank" is the correct term for the many amateurs who routinely email mathematicians, physicists, and apparently linguists with their special theories without having any academic experience in the field. for every anecdote where it panned out there are thousands of cases where it did not.