- Options
- Login
- Desktop Style
Options
Morten St George Theory
- Morten St George Theory
-
RE: Morten St George Theory
Morten St. George > 23-04-2019, 07:39 AM
(23-04-2019, 04:51 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.No, you compensate with imagination. It seems to work for you (at least in your own mind).
But your ideas do not knit together in a consistent and verifiable way.
This is not empiricism. This is storytelling.
In actual fact I have quite a scientific mentality and would usually only go astray when I was provided with erroneous or incomplete information, which was a frequent problem in the past but not so much these days as I have become adept at identifying and eliminating most of the nonsense.
My area of expertise, acquired from decades of personal study, lies in the interpretation of occult writings from the medieval and Renaissance periods. It is here that I learned things of which you are ignorant, such as the fact that parts of the VMS were already decoded (and published) in the 16th century and that the decoders, in extraneous cryptic writings, have supplied us with information on the history of the VMS and their decoding efforts.
From the viewpoint of contemporary mentality, storytelling would only be applicable to the decoders’ theory (for which I remain open-minded) that the VMS prophecies were of alien authorship. -
RE: Morten St George Theory
-JKP- > 23-04-2019, 07:50 AM
Morten, you haven't shown us a single thing that can be verified and if you count all the people together on this forum, there is a HUGE braintrust of intelligence and expertise. You can't tell me that they don't understand it because they don't have the background or the intelligence because, collectively, they do.
Plus you seem to think it's okay to make up stuff for areas you haven't researched. You claim you compensate with "common sense", but making up things to fill in the holes is not common sense, it's imagination. Imagination is fine for creative pursuits, but you continually mistake it for research.
Every time I read your posts, I think to myself, this guy should be writing novels. -
RE: Morten St George Theory
Morten St. George > 23-04-2019, 08:34 AM
(23-04-2019, 07:50 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Morten, you haven't shown us a single thing that can be verified and if you count all the people together on this forum, there is a HUGE braintrust of intelligence and expertise. You can't tell me that they don't understand it because they don't have the background or the intelligence because, collectively, they do.
Plus you seem to think it's okay to make up stuff for areas you haven't researched. You claim you compensate with "common sense", but making up things to fill in the holes is not common sense, it's imagination. Imagination is fine for creative pursuits, but you continually mistake it for research.
Every time I read your posts, I think to myself, this guy should be writing novels.
JP, You have provided us with no details at all on the whereabouts of the VMS during the 15th and 16th centuries, so I can't imagine on what grounds you are rejecting my contention of a decoding and publication of part of the VMS claiming it is only imagination or storytelling because surely you have no alternative history to relate.
As evidence for my contention, I have provided you with a lengthy essay (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.) detailing how the marginalia establishes the VMS as the source of some of the Nostradamus prophecies. If you want to be critical of this, you should search for flaws in my analysis and post your counterarguments for everyone to evaluate. Otherwise, you yourself become nothing more than a storyteller. -
RE: Morten St George Theory
-JKP- > 23-04-2019, 02:09 PM
Morten, you can't even READ the marginalia. You have repeatedly shown that you are not familiar with the shapes of 15th-century letters.
In other words, your whole idea is built on a foundation of sand. -
RE: Morten St George Theory
davidjackson > 24-04-2019, 08:11 PM
OK, this conversation is becoming ridiculous. Morten, please keep your discussion on topic (about your theory) or else I will lock it. -
RE: Morten St George Theory
Morten St. George > 25-04-2019, 05:24 AM
(23-04-2019, 02:09 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Morten, you can't even READ the marginalia. You have repeatedly shown that you are not familiar with the shapes of 15th-century letters.
JP, David has inspired me to respond to your last post which I was going to ignore.
True, I am not a palaeographer nor have I ever pretended to be one. Nonetheless, I resent your efforts to convince others to ignore my essay by insinuating that my transcription of the marginalia is riddled with errors. That is not true. For the vast majority of words that I analyze in my essay, including "oladabas", "portas", "maria", "ubren", and "mich", there is no discrepancy at all between how I transcribe them and how they were transcribed by the great palaeographers of yesteryear, as cited by d'Imperio in her book.
There is only debate in places where d'Imperio's experts don't offer an opinion, such as,
![[Image: img-vms-pox.jpg]](http://manuscrit-de-voynich.com/img-vms-pox.jpg)
I think the dark x could be overwriting another letter, such as an r, giving a word meaning by or through, but you say the author held his quill in the ink well too long and therefore he really wanted to write pox which, I see, refers to a skin disease of sheep and goats.
Also,
![[Image: img-vms-gas.jpg]](http://manuscrit-de-voynich.com/img-vms-gas.jpg)
I consider the possibility that the third letter could be a truncated el (l) and you say it is a normal ess (s), giving us gas, a word that means goose. But I will have you know that none of the palaeographic experts cited by d'Imperio thinks it is an ess. She cites "gaf" (that's an f, not an s) and one instance of "ga " (omitting the third letter as undecipherable).
You've threatened to withdraw from this thread on more than one occasion and I wouldn't mind if you do. Indeed, it might be best to let this thread fade away as it seems to be accomplishing little. The environment here is totally hostile to my theories and to most new ideas in general. Historically, interest in occult writings grows mainly in times of conflict or famine, not during times of euphoria like now when everyone is becoming super rich from a booming stock market.
But that situation could change quickly. I think nuclear war and tanking economies will likely result in renewed interest in those ancient prophecies and in the VMS as their vehicle of transmission. -
RE: Morten St George Theory
Morten St. George > 25-04-2019, 05:27 AM
(24-04-2019, 08:11 PM)davidjackson Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.OK, this conversation is becoming ridiculous. Morten, please keep your discussion on topic (about your theory) or else I will lock it.
David, You are right. This thread has become unproductive and I offer no objections to your closing it down. -
RE: Morten St George Theory
-JKP- > 25-04-2019, 07:04 AM
Quote:Morten wrote: "Nonetheless, I resent your efforts to convince others to ignore my essay by in..."
I would never do that. I am concerned about your unsupported arguments and erroneous assertions. I would never incite others against you. -
RE: Morten St George Theory
Morten St. George > 25-04-2019, 12:45 PM
(25-04-2019, 07:04 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Quote:Morten wrote: "Nonetheless, I resent your efforts to convince others to ignore my essay by in..."
I would never do that. I am concerned about your unsupported arguments and erroneous assertions. I would never incite others against you.
JP, Everyone knows that the Morten St. George theories are fringe theories. That's why VViews started this informal thread under Voynich Talks, to keep me from contaminating the ongoing discussions in other threads. It is therefore unrealistic to expect too much. Besides being critical where appropriate, readers of my posts should also be looking for ways that something I say could be expanding our knowledge of the VMS.
My theories are not unsupported. They in fact draw considerable direct support from the VMS marginalia, from the Nostradamus prophecies, from the two prose introductions to the Nostradamus prophecies, from English theatrical literature, from a herbal encyclopedia of the late 16th century, and from two novels of the early 17th century. They find additional, indirect support in medieval legends and cabalistic literature. You conclude that I'm unsupported only because you are probably unfamiliar with many of my sources.
Let me remind you that research into your sources (mainly other medieval manuscripts) has failed to resolve the mysteries of the VMS. Moreover, your sources provide little useful information on how to decode the VMS whereas my sources do indeed give us some ideas on that matter, and it is hardly surprising that my sources do that because, as you know, my primary theory is that parts of the VMS were already decoded and published back in the 16th century.
pox leber ubren quarix portas > per liber urbem quae portat > por libre urbe que porta > par cité franche qui porte
It's helpful to have a little imagination to figure that one out. -
RE: Morten St George Theory
Morten St. George > 25-04-2019, 06:58 PM
Quote:pox leber ubren quarix portas > per liber urbem quae portat > por libre urbe que porta > par cité franche qui porte
I forgot to specify that the last five words come from mich v-35, first published in 1588. The respective prophecy was taken as a prediction of (and as providing some combat strategy for) the defeat of the Spanish Armada by the English in 1588. It therefore makes a lot of sense that the English decoders of the VMS would choose this particular prophecy for the marginalia.
Like in modern times, the plus signs (+) in the marginalia are a sign of addition. Counting only the characters that resemble numbers, we get:
+c +c +ccc +ix +x +x +vi = 535, ie. prophecy v-35.
Let me remind everyone that the eight glyphs at the start of line 4 (f116v) repeat uniquely on f104r, where the star tails and the transition from full red to red dots allow us to pinpoint the four lines of glyphs that convert into the four lines of prophecy v-35.
I find it tragic that you guys are unable to follow my logic. Hopefully, there's a cryptographer in China or somewhere who knows how to count.
P.S.
JP, please note that the plus sign (+) for addition was invented during the middle of the 16th century and hence this marginalia is unlikely to date to the 15th century as you claim.