+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: Theories & Solutions (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-58.html)
+--- Thread: No text, but a visual code (/thread-2384.html)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
RE: No text, but a visual code - Jorge_Stolfi - 28-05-2026
(28-05-2026, 02:24 PM)nablator Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Writing was obviously careless too (unreadable or very ambiguous) a few times per page on average. So by the same logic the text was written by scribes who didn't understand its meaning.
Indeed! As I see it, it is almost certain that the Scribe was trained by the Author to write the alphabet, but had no idea of what the text meant. Many word variations seem to be cases where the Scribe misread the Author's handwriting on the draft.
Although that also applies to the BEEPs.
All the best, --stolfi
RE: No text, but a visual code - Antonio García Jiménez - 28-05-2026
You've already started repeating your theory in this thread. Please, you already have your own.
RE: No text, but a visual code - Jorge_Stolfi - 29-05-2026
RE: No text, but a visual code - Jorge_Stolfi - 29-05-2026
(28-05-2026, 11:23 PM)Antonio García Jiménez Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.You've already started repeating your theory in this thread. Please, you already have your own.
Why do you bother posting your theory, f you don't accept any reply that disagrees with it?
Many of your claims assume that the colors are original. Evidence that the colors are not original is evidence against those claims. Prohibiting any mention of such evidence on this thread is prohibiting criticism of your claims...
All the best, regardless -- stolfi
RE: No text, but a visual code - ReneZ - 29-05-2026
(28-05-2026, 02:24 PM)nablator Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.So by the same logic the text was written by scribes who didn't understand its meaning.
The 'ignorant scribe' theory is about as old as the concept of Voynich discussion groups.
It has some attractive aspects, but mainly to be able to sweep some things we don't understand under the carpet...
RE: No text, but a visual code - Antonio García Jiménez - 29-05-2026
Indeed! As I see it, it is almost certain that the Scribe was trained by the Author to write the alphabet, but had no idea of what the text meant. Many word variations seem to be cases where the Scribe misread the Author's handwriting on the draft.
Stolfi, you wrote that paragraph before I told you not to discuss your theory in this thread. I didn't object earlier when you shared your opinion about the colors in the codex.
You have the uncanny ability to slip your ideas into any kind of discussion, something other forum members have probably noticed. I consider that a bad practice.
RE: No text, but a visual code - Antonio García Jiménez - 29-05-2026
ReneZ, I find it sad that you come into the thread to talk about the ignorant scribe theory, but don't make any allusion to the color blue when I made an observation that contradicts what you think.
I find it sad mostly because you are someone I care about and from whom I did not expect inappropriate behavior.
RE: No text, but a visual code - Linda - 29-05-2026
(28-05-2026, 10:07 PM)Antonio García Jiménez Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The colors we see in the Voynich images were applied by the authors themselves.I tend to agree with you here. We might not agree exactly on why but I do believe there is meaning to the use of blue and green in quire 13.
Quote:One unusual feature we see in plants is the large majority of blue flowers, something that doesn't align with what we observe in nature. This is due to a symbolic logic employed by the authors to connect the flowers with astronomical, cosmological, and zodiacal sections—in other words, with the blue sky.
Do you mean the night sky or a day sky? Because the blue used is often darker than a day sky colour. Sometimes I think it is just used to add colour to the drawing, where the flower might otherwise be white or colorless.
Quote:In Quire 13 I already said that the colors lend themselves to confusion, but in my opinion they obey the same symbolic logic and that is why we always see the color blue on top.
In You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. we have blue at the top but then also green, then green with blue in tubes that seem to be higher than the green, but also blue at the bottom? You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. does this too. On You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. the blue is lower within the green. On You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. blue is lower than the green too, but in a different way within the arches. How do you explain these cases where the logic of blue on top does not seem to hold?
Quote: As I already said, there are four pages in which the female figures are not within the blue color but above it, as if they were floating. Therefore, when we see the group of female figures inside blue pools, we cannot think that they are in water, as they appear to be in the green pools. They are simply floating in space.I don't think I can see that, even if you tell me it is so, as it looks like water to me in all cases. As you, say the legs are drawn as missing, this does not happen visually when one is floating or falling in air.
RE: No text, but a visual code - Antonio García Jiménez - 29-05-2026
Linda, I'm not sure if we're seeing the same thing. I repeat that there are four pages (f76v, f79r, f80r, and f82v) where the female figures are on a blue surface, and their legs and feet are clearly visible. This doesn't happen when the surface is green, which suggests that green represents water, but blue doesn't.
I know there are some extremely ambiguous places, like the page with the green pool with blue arches, but this does not invalidate the general conception of the color blue in Quire 13, where we almost always see it at the top. And that's because what it represents is the blue of the sky. And it's consistent with the fact that the female figures appear to be descending from those celled, tent-roof structures that represent the sphere of fixed stars in the medieval universe.
I would like everyone to abandon their preconceptions and look carefully at page f75v. What we see here is a blue fluid flowing down from that structure and connecting to the heads of ten female figures. I suppose no one would think that those figures were positioned like that so that a trickle of water would fall on them.
Those figures are in a green pool, but the fluid then flows down to a blue pool. Finding logic in this doesn't seem possible, so I believe it's all symbolism, and the colors could represent the blue of the air and the green of the water in the spheres surrounding the Earth in medieval cosmology. Although the colors aren't necessary to explain Quire 13