15-03-2017, 01:17 PM
Thank you for your interest Marco.
After analysis of several items (word compositions, letters in words, word-order, letter-word-order, n-gram order, edit distances etc.etc.)
it became clear to me that when I merge all these statistical outcomes, there can be seen patterns. And there are clear patterns on which I based several words and letters in words as "anomaly". For example, if there are on a count of 1000 identical records, only 2 that deviate, those are visually examined. A simple example would be if the expected characters would be da and it's written do. Somewhere I published several items here; no reactions. The interest on ninja is mainly in the herbals and in the drawings and that's ok, but many things discussed here have been examined and published in books by professionals in length, so only very rarely it does add value for me.
If ninja wants to publish a position on which "we" can agree on, I must make the point that I do not agree on the words "evidence of the corrections".
If you want to make a statement as ninja group on evidence, you first have to decide what you call evidence and how you accept or deny such.
In my opinion, there is no procedure or foundation for acceptance of evidence here, so, you can not make such a statement as a group that holds: "we feel that there is evidence of the corrections" if you do have not made clear what the evidence is.
After analysis of several items (word compositions, letters in words, word-order, letter-word-order, n-gram order, edit distances etc.etc.)
it became clear to me that when I merge all these statistical outcomes, there can be seen patterns. And there are clear patterns on which I based several words and letters in words as "anomaly". For example, if there are on a count of 1000 identical records, only 2 that deviate, those are visually examined. A simple example would be if the expected characters would be da and it's written do. Somewhere I published several items here; no reactions. The interest on ninja is mainly in the herbals and in the drawings and that's ok, but many things discussed here have been examined and published in books by professionals in length, so only very rarely it does add value for me.
If ninja wants to publish a position on which "we" can agree on, I must make the point that I do not agree on the words "evidence of the corrections".
If you want to make a statement as ninja group on evidence, you first have to decide what you call evidence and how you accept or deny such.
In my opinion, there is no procedure or foundation for acceptance of evidence here, so, you can not make such a statement as a group that holds: "we feel that there is evidence of the corrections" if you do have not made clear what the evidence is.