I'm not an academic and I haven't studied other researchers' work because I needed to start from scratch with no assumptions - only what the book showed me. Nobody had come close to solving it - I mean who even came close, which researcher? - and to be honest they were/are all following a language route and how can it be a language with eeee or iiii or oooooooo, it's impossible so there was nobody to follow.
Plants and their parts, people in water, males/females (dressed/naked), sun/moon, zodiac - these were the core visual elements I started with, then I began counting the glyphs.
The EVA transcription is really bad and totally missed 'nous'. I knew I should have started with the manuscript directly, but the symbols scared me at first. I'd understood the EVA was very accurate, but my code revealed the issues in it and forced me to deal with the book itself and I'm so glad I did, now I see the symbols and what their shapes mean, this helps me when I find a weird glyph, for example f3r, that little upside down v, I now think this is the position the man should be in to remove the phlegm from his chest, makes total sense between sunrises but it's in query at the moment, I won't force my assumptions onto the book.
I've tested my code everywhere in the manuscript, but it's the paperwork and documentation that's now taking my time. In my previous papers I published a folio from each section. The core decode still holds from then, but I now understand what the images are showing and therefore I have to update everything. I decided to respect the order of the book and go in sequence.
If others plant identifications differ from mine, it's because they're working from different foundational assumptions about what the manuscript is. I'm working from what the visual and textual evidence shows me directly.
I'm not interested in the fame of solving this book. Really. I won't be going anywhere away from my farm - my goal was fencing for the animal rescue and a car with door handles, nothing else. Maybe that's why it opened up to me.
Plants and their parts, people in water, males/females (dressed/naked), sun/moon, zodiac - these were the core visual elements I started with, then I began counting the glyphs.
The EVA transcription is really bad and totally missed 'nous'. I knew I should have started with the manuscript directly, but the symbols scared me at first. I'd understood the EVA was very accurate, but my code revealed the issues in it and forced me to deal with the book itself and I'm so glad I did, now I see the symbols and what their shapes mean, this helps me when I find a weird glyph, for example f3r, that little upside down v, I now think this is the position the man should be in to remove the phlegm from his chest, makes total sense between sunrises but it's in query at the moment, I won't force my assumptions onto the book.
I've tested my code everywhere in the manuscript, but it's the paperwork and documentation that's now taking my time. In my previous papers I published a folio from each section. The core decode still holds from then, but I now understand what the images are showing and therefore I have to update everything. I decided to respect the order of the book and go in sequence.
If others plant identifications differ from mine, it's because they're working from different foundational assumptions about what the manuscript is. I'm working from what the visual and textual evidence shows me directly.
I'm not interested in the fame of solving this book. Really. I won't be going anywhere away from my farm - my goal was fencing for the animal rescue and a car with door handles, nothing else. Maybe that's why it opened up to me.