Well, I'm sure that Sanskrit and its descendants are awesome languages, but your claim that "sanskrit alphabets encompasses almost every possible consonant and vowel sounds that a human can generate" is just bollocks. (Many Koreans make the same claim about Hangul, which is equally stupid.)
In fact, if any writing system could write every possible sounds that appear in a human language, it won't be a great system. It will be a terrible system for any single language. Why would an English speaker want to learn symbols for nasals, clicks, ejectives, implosives, laryngeals and tones?
It's even worse. For example, English alphabet doesn't distinguish aspiration, which is actually very convenient because the "p" in "pin" or "spin" are perceived as the same sound (even though only "pin" has aspiration). To English speakers, a writing system that distinguishes aspiration is actually worse, not better.
In fact, if any writing system could write every possible sounds that appear in a human language, it won't be a great system. It will be a terrible system for any single language. Why would an English speaker want to learn symbols for nasals, clicks, ejectives, implosives, laryngeals and tones?
It's even worse. For example, English alphabet doesn't distinguish aspiration, which is actually very convenient because the "p" in "pin" or "spin" are perceived as the same sound (even though only "pin" has aspiration). To English speakers, a writing system that distinguishes aspiration is actually worse, not better.