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.

 

Voynich Manuscript 'Has Genuine Message'

page: 4
61
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 22 2013 @ 10:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Rosinitiate
 


Some of the people alive back then were VERY clever. Hell, DaVinci used a magnifying glass when he was painting the Mona Lisa. There are 30 layers of paint on her face and he wrote words in her eyeballs that you cannot even see at first glance.

A spectral analysis of the painting itself shows that the model for the painting was wearing her hair in a bun, but he added the flowing hair later. Impeceptible to the human eye.

These people were VERY good at coding info.

Any alien galavanting the galaxy is almost certain to have an intellect orders of magnitude greater thn our own. Any hyper intelligence should translate to higher quality of art work than is displayed in this manuscript.

Just look at DaVinci. A genius. His paintings look real.




posted on Jun, 22 2013 @ 10:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Deetermined
Based on the dating of the manuscript, I wonder if this was some kind of witch doctor that was trying to preserve some medieval thought on the universe without being "found out" and burned at the stake for some ancient esoteric practices.

It looks like they did find some Latin in the book.



Were John Dee’s Enochian Keys of magic intended to unleash violent occult forces that would hurl us into another age?

His book of Angelic messages.
www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

John Dee the famous mathematician who through scrying spoke to angels and wrote a book from what they told him is possibly connected.


Voynich Manuscript[edit] He has often been associated with the Voynich manuscript.[21][54] Wilfrid Michael Voynich, who bought the manuscript in 1912, suggested that Dee may have owned the manuscript and sold it to Rudolph II. Dee's contacts with Rudolph were far less extensive than had previously been thought, however, and Dee's diaries show no evidence of the sale. Dee was, however, known to have possessed a copy of the Book of Soyga, another enciphered book.[55]

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 12:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 


As the Devil's advocate ...

Gordon Rugg, a mathematician from Keele University, UK, is one such academic. He has even produced his own complex code deliberately similar to "Voynichese" to show how a text can appear to have meaningful patterns, even though it is "gibberish hoax text".


So it seems we have little new here.



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 12:56 AM
link   
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
 


It seems we have little new here.

Since the external source quote you quote (without attribution) is in fact the article linked in the OP, the same may be said of your post.



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 01:04 AM
link   
reply to post by JayinAR
 


Any alien galavanting the galaxy is almost certain to have an intellect orders of magnitude greater thn our own. Any hyper intelligence should translate to higher quality of art work than is displayed in this manuscript.

Assuming that the galactically gallivantatory alien was the one who wrote it down. However, the manuscript – as was pointed out earlier – is obviously a copy of a pre-existing work, now lost.


edit on 23/6/13 by Astyanax because: of weight watching.



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 01:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 


Well, crap. I missed that. I think I skipped one of the pages.
Thanks.



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 01:20 AM
link   
Why would the fact that there are no corrections mean that it is a recreation?

I don't follow that logic at all. The author would have worked out his code on another piece of paper, obviously. Once he has all that info he just sets to writing.

As far as the artwork goes, again, it doesn't follow. The art work isn't all that good to begin with, so I see no reason for anything to be corrected. Plus, you can make corrections with art if you wanted anyways just as DaVinci did with Mona Lisa.
edit on 23-6-2013 by JayinAR because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 01:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Rosinitiate
 


I can't help but think that those "tubes" look like cell receptors.



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 01:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 


Just throwing ideas out there





posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 02:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
 


It seems we have little new here.

Since the external source quote you quote (without attribution) is in fact the article linked in the OP, the same may be said of your post.




That's the reason I did not attribute, it should be understood it's from the article being discussed. I was actually pretty interested until halfway through the article we are literally told this exciting "new" revelation has been known for a long time.

The findings aren't anything new. It's been accepted for decades that the statistical properties of Voynichese are similar, but not identical, to those of real languages.

www.bbc.co.uk...

There I wasted space attributing it to make you happy.



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 04:07 AM
link   
reply to post by JayinAR
 
Given how scripted the book is leads me to believe that it was copied from another source. If this book was the original source, then the pictures would have been done better or there would have been corrections to them made.

While the thought that the writer could have worked out a code on another place does pop up now and then, it really doesn't seem like a code but rather a language of some sort. A scribe could have been hired to copy the book, but that doesn't mean that the scribe would have to be able to read the language it is written in. They would only need to copy the writing and pictures.

Also if we are to believe that John Dee did sell this book to Rudolph II, then more then likely Dee would have only sold the copy (I base this off of how zealously Alchemist would guard their source material)



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 04:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Guyfriday

reply to post by JayinAR
 
While the thought that the writer could have worked out a code on another place does pop up now and then, it really doesn't seem like a code but rather a language of some sort. A scribe could have been hired to copy the book, but that doesn't mean that the scribe would have to be able to read the language it is written in. They would only need to copy the writing and pictures.

Per Gordon Rugg

"I don't think there's much chance that the Voynich manuscript is simply an unidentified language, because there are too many features in its text that are very different from anything found in any real language."


It's possible it's a code, not likely it's a language.
edit on 23-6-2013 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 05:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Deaf Alien
reply to post by Rosinitiate
 


I can't help but think that those "tubes" look like cell receptors.


It would make since its biological in nature seeing how almost everything in the book is.

If only it was redrawn originally the right way the first time. Trying to recreate something that was distorted from its original is very difficult.

One thing that SCREAMS at me is the thought this "artist" is drawing a picture of a photoshop image. The pic you reference is part of a large diagram. I think about how it would look in my old biology school book. I also remember drawing diagrams in school and remembering how often times my recreation would look equally horrible as this artists attempt.

Same can actually be said for the plants. He was trying to draw a 2D image of a photo of a plant. Try as he might, he just didnt comprehend perspective much.



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 05:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by JayinAR
Why would the fact that there are no corrections mean that it is a recreation?

I don't follow that logic at all. The author would have worked out his code on another piece of paper, obviously. Once he has all that info he just sets to writing.

As far as the artwork goes, again, it doesn't follow. The art work isn't all that good to begin with, so I see no reason for anything to be corrected. Plus, you can make corrections with art if you wanted anyways just as DaVinci did with Mona Lisa.
edit on 23-6-2013 by JayinAR because: (no reason given)


Taking into consideration that every plant is unique without corrections would simply add credence to the idea it was copied.

As an artist myself, like DaVinci I too make several corrections in my work. And rest assured the only comparison I will make of me and DaVinci is we both liked art and both make mistakes.


When you are copying something you are less likely to make corrections. Especially when you are hired (trained) to transcribe OTHER people's thoughts and words. If it was his works which is of course possible and he coded it on another piece of really really expensive parchment, technically its still copying, hence no corrections. I'd also note that if he was the original author and was drawing a plant he saw, seen, or was seeing and was from earth, then I fear his vision was much worse than Van Gogh



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 05:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by JayinAR
reply to post by Rosinitiate
 


Some of the people alive back then were VERY clever. Hell, DaVinci used a magnifying glass when he was painting the Mona Lisa. There are 30 layers of paint on her face and he wrote words in her eyeballs that you cannot even see at first glance.

A spectral analysis of the painting itself shows that the model for the painting was wearing her hair in a bun, but he added the flowing hair later. Impeceptible to the human eye.

These people were VERY good at coding info.

Any alien galavanting the galaxy is almost certain to have an intellect orders of magnitude greater thn our own. Any hyper intelligence should translate to higher quality of art work than is displayed in this manuscript.

Just look at DaVinci. A genius. His paintings look real.



Yes and had to make several SEVERAL corrections. This manuscript wasnt designed to be perfect or if it was, was an author of questionable artistic skills aside from good penmanship. The fact that the writing is far superior then the art leads me to believe this is the work of a scribe. Certainly no DaVinci who himself made several corrections.



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 07:46 AM
link   
Maybe they should DNA test the paints, ink and paper to see if they're from earth. It's obviously old



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 08:49 AM
link   
just a one of my theorys

what I think of the Voynich manuscript ....

Could very well be ...

A PAGAN : Shaman aka Witchcraft Reference Book if you think about it it has all the ingredients Does it not?

which shows something like a Galaxy or a plane,Dimension Bio Plants Herbs and Medical Astrology zodiac Solstice a Long Forgotten Language with extinct or non existent Plants here in this Planet Plane Dimension Etc.. it been Colored and Heavy Illustrated


My Guess

What you see in this Book is a Copy tho it is claimed to be made in the 16th century ? It Could be a Copy from something Ancient as like the Pri Ries Map ...

THEN again

This ...

Enochian
en.wikipedia.org...

came around in the 16th century ... if you think about it ...
most of the claimed Angelic UFOs in paintings made around the same time ... 15th 16th century right>>?

they been seeing Ezekiel Chariots across the sky .... during them as it seems ...
Omniglot
www.omniglot.com...

well Ironicaly The Site Link Above Shows Language created
during the 13th to 16th century brought to People
as they Claimed Came From Angels !! ???

as I was Looking through .. One Language Form that Stuck Out Clearly !! as ...
And Alphabet Similar to the Sumerian Cuneiform :: The Dagger Alphabet..

Ive also seen on this site is Pagan Language used by Witches..



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Deaf Alien
reply to post by Rosinitiate
 


I can't help but think that those "tubes" look like cell receptors.


Wow, right? Looking at the bathing ladies, made me think they were on a tiny scale doing cellular-level work in the plants or something totally weird like that.



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 09:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Rosinitiate
 


So are we experts on 15th century flora now?



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by JayinAR
reply to post by Rosinitiate
 


So are we experts on 15th century flora now?


No of course I'm not, but if you are referring to my comment that "they are all unique" doesn't require an expert to deduce that. Certainly you point was something else...



new topics

top topics



 
61
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join