If runes can be derived from italic or greek letterforms, they can also be derived from any others that could plausibly have reached there. (Thus, not Korean.) Carthaginians famously sailed far and wide. So it is a legitimate question to ask--what evidence is there?--for each, with no legitimate reason to exclude any plausible possibility from consideration. Refusing to include semitic alphabets among candidates (why?) is the crackpot position.

If you insist (why?) that semitic alphabets can have made no contribution, and you are correct, then the evidence will show that, and you have nothing to fear. So the only reason to object is that you fear the evidence will contradict your belief. But that is the best reason to check.

How could evidence show lack of contribution? You can’t prove a negative like that. You can’t prove lack of influence from Korean or ancient aliens either.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/sensational-runest...

You may say nobody can prove a negative, but cocksure deniers are fairly swarming out of the woodwork, here.

You seem to be very upset about something, but it is not really clear what.

“Deniers” is usually used about people who deny evidence, but this does not seem to be the case here.