I used to consider mr. Romalo as an old fashionned engineer, in the good sense of the word, whom I thought there were good reasons to respect. This is why I was very surprised to find myself attacked by him in a web page, with a triteness and contempt that I didn't judge him capable of. Even if I would have called him on the phone in the middle of the night (episode I don't remember, so I can't deny), if I had indeed asked my wife to return him his papers (which I don't consider an unpolite act) or even if I were drunk (which I couldn't be, provided that I neither like nor can drink), as he claimed in that page, it surely wasn't at all elegant from him to bring these mean issues as arguments into a scholarly debate, even if he found himself in inferiority, due to his poor knowledge of the matter.

He bans me and he combats me mighitly and methodically, concerning several matters, for daring to tresspass his technical domain and for having my own opinions, different than his, on how the tablets were made, showing that in fact the process of manufacturing was much easier than he considered. I am sorry only that, giving up my own principles, I publicly expressed a personal opinion out of my area of expertize.

But when it comes to combat my philological arguments, mr. Romalo loses all of a sudden his critical impetus, his polemic inspiration as well as his condescendent sarcasm. Instead of explaining how was it possible that a 2000 year old script is based on the modern Greek script, why does it contain letters invented by Cyrill and Methodius (still in use!), why the doubtful "Dacian" names of the plates do not fit at all the certain Dacian names from historical sources (such as inscriptions, many of them put by real Dacians themselves) – because the vague likeness can not take the place of the a positive concordance, as even miss Peţan must know) – etc. etc., mr. Romalo agrees to debate everything else that he could manage with his technical or general knowledge: psychic profiles, urban planes and buildings of Sarmizegethusa (which, if he knows as well as he says, he could share his unique knowledge with the archeologists who didn't yet discover this wonderful achievements of the Dacians), miss Peţan's new discoveries which wonderfully support his "translation" (and why on earth should I trust these oportunistic "discoveries", while neither the communication at the Academy, nor the few lines on the internet contain any serious argument to support either the authenticity of the tablets or the lady's professional probity and competence)? Avoiding to discuss in detail precisely my philological arguments, he shows that his theory is everything else but science. I don't recall who said this great saying: "When you are convinced that your theory is true, don't get disoriented by the facts!"

I think nevertheless that these so-called "dacologists" went much too far. Speculating the national feelings of the average Romanians, as widely spread as their poor knowledge of classical culture, languages and history, they not only lie about our past, but also make a circus out of it.

This is why I challange them now, inviting them to pass the following simple test. What I ask them is nothing complicate, but to tell me (and the world) – provided that they translated so many "Dacian" texts, from the 'Phaistos Disk' to these tablets – how did Dacians say (or, eventually, write) the following:

I go, you go, he goes etc.

I am, you are etc.I fought

"the king of the Dacians", "the army of the Scythians", "the comandants of the Romans"

snake – of the snake, horse – on horse, sword – by (the) sword, earth – in the earth

"our history", "their fatherland", "a big city", "high mountains"

That's all. I only chose words that should be on those tablets. It is very easy! I only want to see if, from the so many and aggresive keepers of the secret of the Dacian language is there out there at least one who really knows what is he talking about.

The email address for the answers is tablite@soltdm.com

What do you think? Will anyone accept this challenge? I think not!!