The Saharan page (was: Basque article)

I've just read the page with the article about Basque, and I can tell
you that it has received the title of "most stupid webpage I ever read!"
(and I read stupid ones, believe me -at least those ones didn't claim
they were serious at all-). With all the respect I have of Basque (and I
have much, considering it as one of the most beautiful language I ever
saw and heard), Nothing in this page can resist the analysis, even an
analysis coming from me, an amateur linguist who nearly never read any
linguistics book. This page must be a joke, I can't see another
explanation.

        This man claims to use historical evidence to prove his theory, but
expect for the Bible (which is a very good place to find historical
facts, every one knows that ;( ), everything he says is contrary to any
historical evidence.

        Moreover, the conclusion that English is one of the best language
created by those "linguists" (Benedictine monks being linguists, can you
believe that?) because it is one of the less "distorted" (I was really
angry when I read his explanation for the 'to' used with verbs at the
infinitive) shows a total lack of linguistic sense. The analysis of
Basque words breaking them down into parts that would come from other
words is just ridiculous. It reminds me of this book where it was
claimed that if you put the letters of the Bible written in Hebrew in a
table and looked at the columns and rows, you could prove that the
murder of Itzak (sp?) Rabin had been predicted millenia ago. That means
nothing. This page is full of emptiness. I can't find any scientific
approach there, whatever he claims. Everything is: "I want to prove my
theory and I will distort the facts as long as they doesn't fit."

        Sorry for such a post, but that page was too much to accept, I had to
share my feelings about it. If everything had been a game (the splitting
of Basque words, etc...), it would have been interesting, even funny,
but using such kinds of false evidence (evidence of what? it means
nothing) just upsets me. I don't like when people insult my intelligence
like that. How can he believe in what he says? Which sect does he belong
to?

        Well, now I feel better. I hope I didn't bother anybody. To be more
conlang-related (at least at the end of the post :) ), has anybody ever
used this mechanism to create new words (taking first syllable or
syllables of some words and putting them together), and does this
mechanism exist in natlangs (it would be an interesting kind of
compounding)?

        Well, thank you for reading everything till here, and thank you for
your patience (I shouldn't have read this page, it has been stupid, but
it didn't think this page would be so stupid).

--
        Christophe Grandsire

        Philips Research Laboratories --  Building WB 145
        Prof. Holstlaan 4
        5656 AA Eindhoven
        The Netherlands

        Phone:  +31-40-27-45006
        E-mail: grandsir@natlab.research.philips.com