+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: Voynich Talk (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-6.html)
+--- Thread: [split] Rich SantaColoma's comments to Lisa Fagin Davis (/thread-3138.html)
RE: [split] Rich SantaColoma's comments to Lisa Fagin Davis - Koen G - 30-03-2020
I split this thread, didn't quite know what to call it...
RE: [split] Rich SantaColoma's comments to Lisa Fagin Davis - Aga Tentakulus - 30-03-2020
To bring it to a better understanding.
The blurred signature and wormholes.
The blurring is clearly visible, so are the traces of the worm before the blurring ( brown ) and after the blurring ( blue ). New traces of the worm's feeding are a little bit brighter, because the wiping water has not penetrated so deeply into the parchment.
Now it is like this, with today's cover the worm would not have a chance after opening the book.
But if Rene's hint is correct, and it had a wooden lid before. This is quite plausible, since the traces show that it was the same worm.
This also explains the question of binding
RE: [split] Rich SantaColoma's comments to Lisa Fagin Davis - LisaFaginDavis - 30-03-2020
I've studied the VMS and the Marci letter in person on several occasions, and I have identified forgeries in other contexts. I haven't seen anything that makes me suspect the VMS and the Marci letter aren't authentic. In the end you are welcome to believe what you believe, of course. But what is more likely? That Wilfrid Voynich found some old parchment, mixed inks and pigments according to medieval recipes, invented a writing system with identifiable patterns in two different "languages", established five different ways of writing that system (the five scribes, that is), faked wormholes, binding holes, evidence of rebinding, evidence of later annotations and use, and forged the Marci letter to go with it? Or that the manuscript was written in the early fifteenth century and bears the scars of six hundred years of history? I have to go with the latter.
RE: [split] Rich SantaColoma's comments to Lisa Fagin Davis - nickpelling - 30-03-2020
Ohhh dearrrr.
Here we go.
RE: [split] Rich SantaColoma's comments to Lisa Fagin Davis - bi3mw - 31-03-2020
The whole debate could be ended if there was a minimally invasive method to determine the age of the ink in the VMS ( protein ). As things stand, we will probably have to live with the very unlikely "fake theory" for the time being.
RE: [split] Rich SantaColoma's comments to Lisa Fagin Davis - ReneZ - 31-03-2020
(31-03-2020, 11:16 AM)bi3mw Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The whole debate could be ended if there was a minimally invasive method to determine the age of the ink in the VMS ( protein ).
I am not so optimistic :-)
If some people are not yet convinced in spite of the overwhelming evidence, how would more evidence change them?
The debate could have been ended when the Barschius letter was found, or when it was found that the parchment is from the 15th century, or when the clothing of the zodiac people was dated to the same time as the parchment, but it did not....
RE: [split] Rich SantaColoma's comments to Lisa Fagin Davis - Aga Tentakulus - 31-03-2020
The first time I read the term armadillo for the sketch, I was a bit confused.
It took me some time to understand how to look at it to come to this theory. Maybe it was the missing tail or the wrongly drawn scales.
I must admit, with a little imagination you can spot something like an armadillo.
Maybe I didn't recognize it immediately because I have seen something like that before.
Anyway.
The question, what does an armadillo do in a medical, pharmacological process
In my opinion, you have to look at the whole picture. And that includes the woman underneath.
That gives a whole different perspective.
RE: [split] Rich SantaColoma's comments to Lisa Fagin Davis - Aga Tentakulus - 31-03-2020
My assumption concerning the sketch ( armadillo ), it goes back historically to the year 1328. The first public autopsy in Bologna, authorized by the Pope. There were later some public autopsies in Italy.
Around 1400, public autopsies were also performed in universities north of the Alps.
There are few images on the web, but I think it is a brain.
Here on the right in the picture, a brain from an autopsy from about 1720. It looks more like a shrimp, but is still a brain.
There are some records from 1320 and others, but nothing really seems to represent the brain in this way. Cause still other sketches of innards shown at VM seem to show.
Some drawings between 1320 and 1400.
[font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]
[font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]That's what makes me think it's a brain. That the VM author may have been present at a public autopsy, and that it matches the other drawings.
[/font]
Also that it's floating above the woman, reflecting the spirit on a pillow.
[font=Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans-serif]And finally, he also made on page 116, even though it was a goat.[/font]
RE: [split] Rich SantaColoma's comments to Lisa Fagin Davis - R. Sale - 31-03-2020
So....
The dead man's brain sits on a pillow and leaks prions on the nice, naked lady who then turns into a... a... a zombie? Right?
RE: [split] Rich SantaColoma's comments to Lisa Fagin Davis - Aga Tentakulus - 31-03-2020
Yeah, or something like that.
But I think more symbolically.
That the mind over the body.
Ja, oder so ähnlich.
Aber ich denke eher Sinnbildlich.
Das der Geist über dem Körper steht.