Voynich manuscript breakthrough as the 600-year-old document is partially decoded for the first time
41 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Crazy Ivan;43979785]Cryptography is hard without a key. There's the story that the monument outside of the CIA's headquarters has an undeciphered code on it that the sculptor thought would be cracked nearly immediately. It's not just a problem of "finding the pattern" but finding a meaningful one that can be used again and again. If I say these three letters are cat, but they also spell dog somewhere else, I may not have really cracked it.[/QUOTE]
IIrc it points to some dig site at the premises, which they won't allow.
Also in the case of the Voynich manuscript there have been plenty of dead-end "breakthroughs", so I wouldn't be surprised if this is another one.
[IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1d/Voynich_manuscript_bathtub2_example_78r_cropped.jpg[/IMG]
ye olde vore fetish?
[editline]20th February[/editline]
deviantartists confirmed for undying vampires
bunch of tampons that got stuck together falling into a kiddie pool filled with pea soup and women
also there's a cross-section of a pinecone made by someone who has clearly never actually cut a pinecone in half
Wasn't it thought to be gibberish for quite a while?
[QUOTE=Cone;43986928][IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1d/Voynich_manuscript_bathtub2_example_78r_cropped.jpg[/IMG]
ye olde vore fetish?
[editline]20th February[/editline]
deviantartists confirmed for undying vampires[/QUOTE]
Is that a fucking Sarlacc?
[QUOTE=Cone;43986928][IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1d/Voynich_manuscript_bathtub2_example_78r_cropped.jpg[/IMG]
ye olde vore fetish?
[editline]20th February[/editline]
deviantartists confirmed for undying vampires[/QUOTE]
Are they all just missing legs or something, or are their legs just submerged in the pea soup
[editline]21st February 2014[/editline]
Some of this shit looks like something a 3rd grader would draw. Not so much in terms of quality, but more in terms of "what the shit am I seeing"
[QUOTE=Stonecycle;43979828]You knew it was coming.
[img]http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/voynich_manuscript.png[/img][/QUOTE]
I don't even want to think about the stirrup if they find a Dungeons & Dragons bestiary six centuries from now.
What? Did they found the Necronomicon?
[QUOTE=Swebonny;43982461]I've been interested into this thing for years. This is great, but he's still making a lot of assumption, however based on these assumptions he gets a lot of new stuff that seems so reasonable:
His presentation:
[video=youtube;fpZD_3D8_WQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpZD_3D8_WQ[/video]
His paper: [url]http://stephenbax.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Voynich-a-provisional-partial-decoding-BAX.pdf[/url]
[editline]20th February 2014[/editline]
And here's the manuscript: [url]https://archive.org/details/TheVoynichManuscript[/url]
I wonder if we can use his table to decipher some plants.[/QUOTE]
I don't know... I feel the proof he presented is kind of stretching it a bit and grasping at straws. He seems to make a lot of assumptions and then pass them as facts.
what really bothers me about the Voynich manuscript is that Capital H-like character that shows up so often throughout the paragraphs. It makes me think it's just a bunch of nonsensical bullcrap.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.