bi3mw > 25-09-2022, 05:56 PM
(25-09-2022, 05:00 PM)RobGea Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.So the above still stands.
ReneZ > 25-09-2022, 07:31 PM
(25-09-2022, 05:56 PM)bi3mw Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I would assume that the reasons to buy a manuscript in the late Middle Ages were different than in the 20th century.
Koen G > 25-09-2022, 08:03 PM
(25-09-2022, 07:31 PM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I was just about to write much the same. Quite generally, it is dangerous to project situations between different centuries.
Hermes777 > 25-09-2022, 09:32 PM
Torsten > 26-09-2022, 01:04 AM
(24-09-2022, 11:58 AM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The argument of "no corrections" is obviously also flawed. We can't read the script and we don't know which variations in glyph shape are meaningful. Who knows how many times one shape has been turned into another. Or maybe mistakes are simply left in, or maybe they swiftly copied from a prepared example. As long as we don't understand the text, I don't think a perceived lack of mistakes can be used as an argument.
(24-09-2022, 11:58 AM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The best argument he used in favor of medieval hoax is probably that the text's statistics point away from simple substitution. If the text is encoded, they must have used a method unknown to medieval times. And still unknown to us. This is definitely something to keep in mind. But there is a flaw in that argument as well: if the text was generated, this was done by an equally unknown method!
(24-09-2022, 11:58 AM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.So why would we assume that the VM makers could come up with a novel and highly efficient method of pseudo-text generation, and not a novel encoding method?
(25-09-2022, 08:03 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I'll just add for clarity that this is exactly the point I was trying to make. Comparing the original makers' situation to the Rudolf sale makes as much sense as comparing it to Voynich and Kraus' situation.
(25-09-2022, 08:03 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It's simply a very weak argument. As well-researched and well-presented the video is, the arguments are all flawed or easily countered.
Koen G > 26-09-2022, 07:15 AM
Aga Tentakulus > 26-09-2022, 08:55 AM
bi3mw > 26-09-2022, 09:19 AM
(26-09-2022, 07:15 AM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.We don't know if an unreadable manuscript would have had value in medieval times, or if that value would have been worth the investment of materials. Maybe a copy of the bible would have fetched way more. We simply don't know.
nablator > 26-09-2022, 01:44 PM
(26-09-2022, 09:19 AM)bi3mw Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.A manuscript that cannot be read is practically useless and therefore, from the perspective of a potential customer in the Middle Ages, uninteresting.Even worse, the absence of respect for any recognizable tradition (other than the Zodiac) does not inspire confidence in the authors' knowledge about the purported subjects. On the other hand, there was a huge thirst for *new* knowledge in the late middle ages, pushing the translation of Arabic and Greek works, also leading to the fabrication of many fakes (readable books attributed to authorities of the past: Hermes, Merlin, Albertus Magnus, etc.) so maybe the VMs was sold (with a good story, as something exotic, but not too exotic to be understood in some part of Europe) to someone who hoped that it could be deciphered by simple substitution, as many Voynichologists still believe nowadays, and reveal some amazing secrets. Books of secrets were all the rage, and what is more secret that an unreadable tome?
Antonio García Jiménez > 26-09-2022, 02:46 PM