The Voynich Ninja

Could everyone who reads our posts please answer the simple question we asked on this page (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.)? Does anyone want to answer and also specify the rationale behind their answer?

The question is simple. There are pages where we read plant names. The way these names are written is the same as today. Our question is whether the plant drawings on the pages where these names are written resemble these plants. We asked some linguists and botanists, and those said they thought the overlaps we showed were complete overlaps. However, none of those who said this follow this Voynich Ninja page. I am curious about the thoughts of the hundreds of people who read our comments on this page. Even if there are hundreds of different readers, can we say that there is a tendency not to even answer simple questions we ask? If so, it would be interesting for me to know the reason for such an attitude. Is it so difficult to answer a simple question?

Or could it be considered an appropriate communication method to put forward the-question unconnected/unrelated issues in response to a question? I wonder what you think. Instead of circular or deflective answers, could providing the answer to the simple question we posed about the outcome of our research be seen as a more constructive way forward?

Thank you.

[I have not had a lot of luck identifying plants. The only plant that I recognize is the waterlily on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. .]
[/quote]

Dear pjburkshire,

Would you like to try to interpret what the plants whose names we wrote look like by simply watching the photos/images of these plants on Google? Also, I wonder what it means to you that the author wrote these plant names with their current phonetic value. Of course, I would like other people who read these comments to answer this question.

Thanks,

(15-04-2024, 09:41 PM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Also on this page (67v2) the word "ay'ı" (the moon) is read as being at the 16 o'clock position of this circular drawing.

I'm sorry but I am not able to follow these instructions. I do not understand which word you are talking about. I don't know if you are talking about the words on the stalk with the sun or the word in the far lower right.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

In the broadest sense, the plants are similar. Somehow a red apple also looks like a tomato.
You take the banana. No idea why. Do the leaves really look like that? Have you ever seen a perennial where several stems grow from the root?

[attachment=8429]
And the other plant is classic. There's even a law that says it should be cultivated.

As I understand it, none of these plants resemble the ones you are showing.

(15-04-2024, 11:12 PM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Dear pjburkshire,



Would you like to try to interpret what the plants whose names we wrote look like by simply watching the photos/images of these plants on Google? Also, I wonder what it means to you that the author wrote these plant names with their current phonetic value. Of course, I would like other people who read these comments to answer this question.

I don't understand what you are asking. Are you offering to send a Google link? Or is there already some Google link in a previous post that I should know about?




I see a lot of plants in post #443 from April 10th. I have no knowledge of any of the plants in post #443.




You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(15-04-2024, 10:33 PM)Ahmet Ardıç Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The author wrote some plant names just like today.

Dear Ahmet,

It would be more convincing to see them written as they were in the 15th century.

Quote:Do the drawings on these pages resemble the plants mentioned or not? That's the question. Could you please have the courtesy to answer?

I am not qualified to identify plants in manuscripts (or anywhere else).

Quote:Also on this page (67v2) the word "ay'ı" (the moon) is read as being at the 16 o'clock position of this circular drawing.

In addition, the words "sarı ışıklı" (meaning "yellow lighted") are written as "sarı çlapax" (towards 1 o'clock direction).

This is f67v1 you are looking at: v2 comes before v1. I see your "sarı çlapax" (or close enough, the space isn't there and two letters are a bit unclear). Your "ay'i" again is very optimistic, or it doesn't exist. Shouldn't it be at or ati as a distinct word?

[attachment=8433]

Dear friends,
Dear pjburkshire,
Dear Rene,
Dear Tentaculus,
Dear Nablator,
Dear R. Sale,
Dear Koen,
Dear Ruby Novacna,

Do you think that the fact that the author wrote the name of a plant 600 years ago as it is written in modern Turkish today (1/1 in the same format) is an important finding in terms of VM studies? Moreover, since we have detected words expressed with hundreds in the same situation, does this have any value in terms of VM-reading studies? I'm curious about your answers to these questions and your answer to the question below. I would be very happy if you could answer these.

To simplify the topic and the question, I'm selecting a single example from the plant drawings and plant names in the VM content. The word "SAZAK," written by the author approximately 600 years ago, is still written as "SAZAK" today. We can see that the author drew the plant on the page where this word is written. 
[attachment=8431]
We have read the content, and the author mentions the fruits of the plant in the content. Let's focus solely on the word "SAZAK" in the content for a moment. You can see the meaning of the word "SAZAK" in Turkish dictionaries. Many of them gives the synonym of "SAZAK" as "myrtle tree." See Turkey Turkish Dialects Dictionary for example, or "sozce" online dictionary here > SAZAK > You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
[attachment=8430]
In the selected photo, you can see the colors and shapes of the fruits of the SAZAK plant. It seems that when the author made this drawing 600 years ago, they tried to use the same colors and draw the fruit contours in the same way. Do you think this could be a drawing/word overlap? If not, what could be the reason?

If you think that there are other plants as similar to the plant drawing on the page where the word "SAZAK" was written in VM. In this case, can you show a single example where the author wrote the names of the plants you mentioned exactly as they are written today in modern times?

Is the fact that the author wrote it as SAZAK in its current form (and the large number of similar examples) a sign that our alphabet transcription is realistic?

I don't know of any plant that grows on land but has no leaves. Yet, the author has depicted this plant without leaves. When we read the text, we understand that the author is referring to the fruit of this plant. However, they do not mention the leaves of this plant themselves. Let's say we are mistaken. Do you think, for someone drawing these leafless images, you would also consider that they are drawing the desired part of the plants? Or do you think that the author does not have such a preference regarding the drawings, and that the 112 instances of drawing/word overlaps and this writing style of SAZAK are coincidences, and that over 1000 read words and some complete page translations are also coincidences or could be imagined as anagrams?

Could I kindly learn your thoughts on these matters? 

Let's forget about the 112 drawing word matches for now; Doesn't reading the word SAZAK have even a small value as a linguistic finding in terms of the information it can give to researchers?

Thanks,

[quote="Aga Tentakulus" pid='58900' dateline='1713221496']
[In the broadest sense, the plants are similar. Somehow a red apple also looks like a tomato.]


Dear Aga Tentakulus,

As you mentioned, it is indeed possible to find similarities between some parts of certain plants and the drawings made by the VM author, as you also pointed out. However, shouldn't those who make such comparisons also demonstrate that the names of the plants they likened are written on the same pages? This is precisely what we did. Moreover, we have done so with a clear finding that some names have undergone no change in their writing style in about 600 years.

Can you see the gap between the example you provided and the similarty we demonstrated? To identify a drawing-text correspondence, wouldn't it be necessary to show not only a drawing with another drawing but rather that a word-term/name coincides with a drawing on the same page?

Unfortunately, I can't tell you anything about the names. But it's also difficult, as the same plant has many names.
But here's another one. Have you checked the words to see if they also appear elsewhere? Especially with other plants.
You can definitely throw away the banana. Maybe "Banane" is also called "bana ne" 

(16-04-2024, 09:17 AM)Aga Tentakulus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Have you checked the words to see if they also appear elsewhere?

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.