It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Your opinion on the Voynich Manuscript (help a book club)

page: 2
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 10:42 AM
link   
Hi all,

My take on the manuscript is that it is full of pertinent information regarding a variety of topics and covering various periods of time, and thus includes more than only 15th century information, likely from a variety of sources. I don't know about the text, but I do not see the diagrams as being rushed, in fact, I find them very particular and every line of pigment that appears out of place I believe to be intentional. I think the information is displayed in layers, that is, once you identify something, the minute details of the diagram will point to more information related to that identification. In many cases a single diagram will cover various areas but will still follow some sort of theme, or lead consecutively from one to the other. It's genius and I would love to figure out who was involved in putting this together, I have some thoughts on that too.

I have been working on papers regarding the rosettes and the bathing pages, only one on the latter is posted so far. Both of these sections of the manuscript appear to me to be about various places in the world. In some places I see hydrographic information, this detail isn't outlined in the first paper other than the locations I believe are portrayed, working on the detail now. I think there are other philosophical and historical topics portrayed as well and will outline them in future.

Please have a look at my paper regarding the locations identified in the bathing pages from the bodies of water portrayed. So far, if I am correct insofar as my nymph interpretations, they are proving to not only support my original identifications of the water bodies, they also provide detailed hydrographic information specific to each of the localities. I'm hoping to have a second installment ready within the next month or so regarding the portrayal of the nymphs.

figshare.com...

Regards,

Linda




posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 10:47 AM
link   
posted this in another thread already. but, there is a women out there, Edit Sherwood Ph.D who has done a WEALTH of research.

The book wasn't just an elaborate forgery of random gibberish. It was an extremely early work of Da Vinci and there are clues to that effect all over the folios.

Edith Sherwood Ph.D The Voynich Manuscript 's Script & Code

The research takes a while to ingest because of the sheer volume of it. It's VERY convincing.

A few pictures taken from the site showing his name all over the manuscript.


















Using this basic alphabet I have identified a number of plants, herbs and vegetables from the herbal pages. I was not able to decipher all the words, due no doubt to the fact that many of the plants around 500-plus years ago probably had common names that have since fallen into disuse. In addition modification in the spelling of some words may have occurred making it difficult for someone like myself, who does not read or speak Italian, to decipher these words.

edit on 6-4-2015 by CallmeRaskolnikov because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 12:03 PM
link   
a reply to: CraftBuilder

Well. As I interpret it in the manuscript - taking Einstein's Theory of Relativity as fact (it's what modern science is based on anyways), making the Multiverse fact (energy and matter are transferable thus making infinite potential universes fact) - suggesting - implying - this isn't how the female form was regarded /observed at all.

It's actually what created the female form in a loopback based system in a holographic universe construct.

What I am saying is - this appears, to me at least as proactive - not reactive - science, based on a cosmic/evolutionary mechanism which something or someone quite literally created a counterpart to the human male.

I'm a programmer and have been involved in Information Technology since level 13, and have have been for 32 levels.

I suspect I would would recognize a programming language anywhere now.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: CraftBuilder

As far as its writing goes, I think that it is either a linguistic display of a language that is known to be only spoken or a language we have no knowledge or record of either due to its destruction or an origin differing from our planet. The latter of the two's first reason is equally as plausible as the former when you think of it like this: we don't know how many species of plants have been eradicated from our planet over the centuries (citing the Rain Forest as a for instance) and this may well be a journal from an explorer of some region or another in which that happened.

As for the extraterrestrial (in the sense of not from the planet Terra) explanation, who is to say in the past someone was not abducted for a period of time, learned the language, spent time cataloging the flora and astronomy (considering the star charts are hard to recognize) and returned here with the book.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 12:53 PM
link   
a reply to: CraftBuilder

A possibility is on a page in the back of the book there is a depiction of what could be nine worlds, similar to the Yggdrasil and its nine worlds from Nordic Folklore.


edit on 6-4-2015 by Jekka because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 01:13 PM
link   
a reply to: CraftBuilder

The archive.org copy is pretty good, but I think the full scans of each page are available directly from the Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library at Yale University.

brbl-dl.library.yale.edu...



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 01:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Rosinitiate

It looks like he wrote the book the same week he tried '___' for the first time !

For some reason, it censored the word lsd. Lysergic acid Diethylamide.
edit on 6-4-2015 by Okeyd57 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 02:06 PM
link   
a reply to: CallmeRaskolnikov

The drawings are so crude compared to daVinci I just can't even come close to believing it was him. His work is so precise and these are slopped on the page in comparison.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 03:12 PM
link   
a reply to: noeltrotsky

well you should actually look at the Ph.D's site and read her research before coming to that conclusion. Da Vinci would have been but a boy when he made this. Which would be even more impressive.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 04:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: CallmeRaskolnikov
a reply to: noeltrotsky

well you should actually look at the Ph.D's site and read her research before coming to that conclusion. Da Vinci would have been but a boy when he made this. Which would be even more impressive.


Yes that would be quite the feat. The writing alone in fact. Come to think of it, maybe Da Vinci was an extraterrestrial. It would explain A LOT for both the manuscript and Da Vinci's unbelievable talents.

edit on 6-4-2015 by Rosinitiate because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 06:55 PM
link   
I did relatively extensive research on this particular mystery in the past, mainly because of my interest in cryptography in general. We know that the book is from the 15th century. Considering all of the things that can be determined from analyzing the manner in which the manuscript was written we are also safe in assuming it originated in Europe. Despite claims to the contrary, all of the plant and cosmological illustrations are in no way representations of fact. None of the plants depict known plants on our planet, and none of the stars and other astrological drawings align with what we know about the universe in modern times. Thus from this evidence a quite compelling argument can be made for the illustrations originating from someone's imagination.

None of that really interests me, while analysis of the text itself does. We know that most words are made up of so many letters, and this is also indicative of a European language, although this says nothing about whether it is truly encrypted text or just gibberish. Despite this correlation with a European language, there are no two-letter words. This is highly unusual for any European language, which raises the first red flag. Certain results suggest a language from Europe, while others contradict this. All of the encryption methods available during the 15th century were relatively simple. Yet performing frequency and other analyses on the words and letters, as well as their distribution, there is nothing that suggests a simple encryption method. Yet even with the aid of modern computers, which WOULD find patterns indicative of specific languages, there is nothing to suggest we are dealing with an actual language.

There have been a handful of proposed solutions over the decades, but absolutely none of these makes any sense, or uses a coherent rule set of any kind. The most brilliant minds in the world of cryptanalysis that have studied this manuscript have all come to the same conclusion, which is that it is a hoax- a random collection of letters dressed up to look like words. That is the gist of my belief as well, having studied the issue. I am 100% confident that it is impossible for this manuscript to be encrypted text from any language. The fact that the drawings also appear to be inventions just bolsters this fact. And for those who would claim it is some alien language and has drawings of some alien world, you are probably the exact type of person the author of the manuscript was trying to separate from their money. Undoubtedly that was the reason someone would put in the time necessary to create something like this. They were going to sell it to someone and tell them it held various secrets, whether they were secrets of alchemy, the universe, or whatever else. The seller could tailor his sales pitch based on the interests of the potential buyer. If they were interested in alchemy, all of the sudden it was a book with all the secrets of alchemy encoded within. The author would most likely not say that he had in fact written it either.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 07:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: CallmeRaskolnikov
a reply to: noeltrotsky

well you should actually look at the Ph.D's site and read her research before coming to that conclusion. Da Vinci would have been but a boy when he made this. Which would be even more impressive.


Oh she's a PhD...well then! *laugh*

I'm familiar enough with daVinci to confidently say this isn't his work. You do know that he already has a different way to write and keep his secrets, right? So this 'PhD' is saying he only used that style of writing for ALL HIS OTHER SECRETS...this ONE manuscript he invented a different way to keep his secrets. Sure.

Anyone can believe anything they like...that's the beauty of life.



posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 07:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: noeltrotsky

originally posted by: CallmeRaskolnikov
a reply to: noeltrotsky

well you should actually look at the Ph.D's site and read her research before coming to that conclusion. Da Vinci would have been but a boy when he made this. Which would be even more impressive.


Oh she's a PhD...well then! *laugh*

I'm familiar enough with daVinci to confidently say this isn't his work. You do know that he already has a different way to write and keep his secrets, right? So this 'PhD' is saying he only used that style of writing for ALL HIS OTHER SECRETS...this ONE manuscript he invented a different way to keep his secrets. Sure.

Anyone can believe anything they like...that's the beauty of life.


Phd, Sherwood, who cares what I refer to her as. Are you really that combative?

This woman has done an impressive amount of research on the matter tying da Vinci to the manuscript and he left clues and markers to that effect all throughout the manuscript. And the fact that you dismiss it without even reading a word of it soley because you're "confident enough"(LOL) really goes to show that your confidence comes from keeping your head in the sand and quite literally becoming the living embodiment of the term "embracing ignorance". Again, he would have been a boy at the time of the manuscripts creation. Like he wouldnt have toyed with different ciphers throughout his life. You seem set on an image of da Vinci as a man who was the same throughout his entire life with no evolutionary process of his own.

I think I'll put my faith in the 13+ year effort done by someone who is doing real research and devoting their life to decoding the manuscript as opposed to your snap judgement.

edit on 7-4-2015 by CallmeRaskolnikov because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 12:50 PM
link   
a reply to: CallmeRaskolnikov

The vellum of the MS has been dated to the early 15th century (1404–1438). The ink was applied shortly after according to the McCrone Research Institute. Davinci was born 15 April 1452. Check out www.ciphermysteries.com. Davinci was most likely not the author.



posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 04:08 PM
link   
I have done Herbalism.
And this book looks like a old book on herbalism in a strange language.
It seems to say much on the time of the year to use or plant the herbs.
And some of the text seems to be magical chants in the use of the herbs.
Non of the plants seem to be from what we have now!
Could it be from before the ice age?
A book past down and recopied many times?



posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 04:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: DemiMoore
a reply to: CallmeRaskolnikov

The vellum of the MS has been dated to the early 15th century (1404–1438). The ink was applied shortly after according to the McCrone Research Institute. Davinci was born 15 April 1452. Check out www.ciphermysteries.com. Davinci was most likely not the author.


That actually isn't completely out of range for him then. The vellum or paper it was inked on could have easily been made before da vinci's birthdate. And even if the ink came later on its still a possibility he inked the manuscript as a boy. The timing could be perfect.

Can't look at that site now, but ill check it out later. You should take a look at Edith sherwood's thesis on the manuscript.
edit on 7-4-2015 by CallmeRaskolnikov because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 06:35 PM
link   
New guy here.

I would like to say that I am very pleased to see this topic taking off again, again and again.

That's the point.

Call it a catalyst, if you will.

Good luck to you and your book club!

TW



posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 08:16 PM
link   
a reply to: CallmeRaskolnikov

Will check out her website again as it's been a while since I've taken a gander. Nick Pelling of www.ciphermysteries.com does a great job at analyzing everything about the manuscript, in my opinion. The biggest issue I had with Dr. Sherwood's hypothesis was that her decoding of plant names in Italian never carried over to other parts of the writing. I might be completely off the mark there, but that's what I remember from a few years back. The text also follows a certain syntax but single substitution code is clearly not the answer. I agree with the previous posts that the Voynich MS was most likely a copy of an older text.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 08:43 AM
link   
a reply to: DemiMoore

i did get to check out Nick's blog. Man, there's a lot of information on there. took a look at it right after watching the imitation game so it was pretty perfect timing. lol. He seems pretty dedicated and has a rather wide scope. But, I agree with you that with voynich it seems like it has to be more complicated than a single substitution. But, Sherwood seems the closest to making actual progress in decoding some of what the manuscript has to offer. Maybe all the leonardo stuff is coincidental, but it seems like too much correlation to seem like an accident.

who knows, perhaps it was a copy of an older manuscript with additions made to it by those who copied it. a collaborative effort. either way, still intriguing after all these years.



posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 09:13 AM
link   
I'm in the UK and i saw a bit of a documentary over the weekend that showed how this document had been faked.




top topics



 
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join