29-05-2017, 11:23 PM
(29-05-2017, 09:28 PM)Torsten wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(27-05-2017, 06:38 PM)Emma May Smith wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(26-05-2017, 05:22 PM)-JKP- wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Here is the statement:
"Cryptologists say the writing has all the characteristics of a real language."
Is that really true? Is that the general consensus among cryptologists? Is there a general consensus among cryptologists?
I'm very keen on the possibility that the Voynich text is ultimately a natural language or something very similar, and I wouldn't quite agree with this statement (not that I'm a cryptologist either).
This is what Cryptologists say about the Voynich manuscript:
Good word, I try to be humble about my own position and you give me chapter and verse! Maybe I should simply defend my research position unstintingly, fail to respond to genuine problems, and continue hammering on with the same beliefs year after year?