What I said was equivalent to the comment that the argument relating "yir" to "earth" is
not even wrong, so berdnf interpreted it correctly.
You are missing a point here. What I am trying to do is not "relating yir to earth". If I do what it is done here (borrowing/loaning from this language, etc), it is better to say "earth" is related to "yir". Root is closer to simple "yir". Anyway, I am not saying "earth" comes from "yir" or "yir comes from earth" that's how people here are saying. What I am saying is "there is a relation between yir and earth and which comes from which is unknown." However, if you know, just say. Even by entertaining, can you make any ANY comment on "yir" ? I do NOT think so...
As for your words about "similarities" , "pseude-theories", etc.. Wait a minute. Languages that are studied academically are not produced academically, often produced by totally illiterate people. So, what we are doing here is learning illiterate people productions. I for one who also lived among those totally illiterate people and also lived in high level science field by researching similarities/symmetries/invariants/etc in a complex field like chaos from pure theoretical math to experimental/practical can say this the language here we are talking is written language, for me, a symbolic mathematics, a small subgroup of general language group which is spoken language which is done by people whose majority is not academic at all. So, using academic arguments such as "similarity/pseudo/etc" does not work for me if you are subjective.
Having said these also, now, please, entertain with "yir"... a simple word. Ok, you can make just a simple comment if you gave up entertainment.
(if you don't know anything about "yir", your claim "there is no relation between yir and earth" is nonsense... logic tells this.)
