Stefan Georg and Alexander Vovin, who, unlike many of their colleagues, do not stipulate "a priori" that attempts to find ancient relationships are bound to fail, examined Greenberg's claims in detail. They state that Greenberg's morphological arguments are the correct approach to determining families, but doubt his conclusions. They write "72 morphemes look like massive evidence in favour of Eurasiatic at first glance. If valid, few linguists would have the right to doubt that a point has been made  [... However, closer inspection  [...] shows too many misinterpretations, errors and wrong analyses  [...] these allow no other judgement than that [Greenberg's] attempt to demonstrate the validity of his Eurasiatic has failed."