11-03-2017, 04:22 AM
Stellar, you also sold books about your previous methods, which you now completely abandoned. If anything you should feel sorry for the people who unknowingly payed for something even the author finds nonsense.
Also JKP is right, it's a one way cipher. The reason why you are finding more and more "translations" is that your method will let you do whatever you want. Used modern English and people tell you that's impossible for a medieval work? No problem, it also works in Middle English. And it would also work in Inuit and Klingon. Used modern star names instead of appropriate ones? No problem. Messed up the location of consellations? Nothing that can't be helped.
If the text remained the same but all images were replaced by cat pictures, you could make it be about cats. No problem. Or pies or shoes or Donald Trump or yourself. Whatever you want.
Since your method allows for so many different solutions, it can't be used to prove or disprove anything, including the auto-copying hypothesis. It is basically a word game that does not advance our understanding of the manuscript one bit.
Now don't take this personal, this is about methodology, not about you. You're a decent guy. But if people's methods are flawed, it is our job as a community to point out those flaws.
Also JKP is right, it's a one way cipher. The reason why you are finding more and more "translations" is that your method will let you do whatever you want. Used modern English and people tell you that's impossible for a medieval work? No problem, it also works in Middle English. And it would also work in Inuit and Klingon. Used modern star names instead of appropriate ones? No problem. Messed up the location of consellations? Nothing that can't be helped.
If the text remained the same but all images were replaced by cat pictures, you could make it be about cats. No problem. Or pies or shoes or Donald Trump or yourself. Whatever you want.
Since your method allows for so many different solutions, it can't be used to prove or disprove anything, including the auto-copying hypothesis. It is basically a word game that does not advance our understanding of the manuscript one bit.
Now don't take this personal, this is about methodology, not about you. You're a decent guy. But if people's methods are flawed, it is our job as a community to point out those flaws.