There's a simple but effective way of finding out what kind of "language" you are dealing with, i.e. if we're looking at an alphabetical code of a
known language or not:
1. count the frequencies of letters in the text (you will find tools via Letter frequency
2. check out the letter frequencies for any language you might find it to be a code version of (English and Latin would offer themselves, maybe German
or Ancient Greek as well)
3. compare the results:
- you quickly notice that the letter distribution is very similar to that of existing languages... but of none of them in particular. (this makes it
unlikely that it is a simple alphabetical code, which would distort the frequency, e.g. leaving "e" strangely rare)
- you will also find that the language makes use of all (!) the letters available on a normal keyboard, which most languages do not: w/v are used
alongside each other, as well as j/y, for example (this makes it unlikely to be, e.g. a Romance or Slavonic language in simple disguise, and, quite
frankly, more likely to be the result of a keyboard, a perfectly monolingual English speaker or so, and lots of pot or shrooms)
4. Move on to morphology and grammar: can you find words that...
- reappear? (e.g. auxiliaries -- he does use some words more than once, but not many)
- often go together?
- often are preceded or followed by another kind of word?
- end similarly?
- begin similarly?
Or, on a more limited note:
- common combinations of letters?
- letters or combinations fewer words end on?
- letters or combinations fewer words begin on?
If yes, there might be a real grammar and a real morphology behind it. I'm too bored to do it (it's entertaining stuff, but not more than that), but
at a first glance I would say: nope.
If you asked me, I'd tell you it's by a chap with too much time on his hands, trying to create something similar to the Voynich manuscript, samples
of which he seems to include on the page.
Ideally (and most entertainingly, I have to say) it would be someone who has actually made an effort and created some sort of a cipher that could
translate the text into something legible (check out WP on Voynich for inspiration) -- rather than creating page upon page of mumbo jumbo. If he had,
he would be on a similar level to the V. manuscript. If not, well, it's a nice riddle for a Sunday evening. And I love the rude "translations" the
de-jumbler on the bottom keeps suggesting. I got a few very anatomical ones.