RE: VMs: Mad Kircher, was (lots)

["Don Latham" <djl@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree with Rene. If it was a hoax, where's the historical horselaugh?  If
a copy for profit, where's the profit and the original(s)? Too organized for
psychotic glossolalia, so an organized, encoded/encrypted belief system.
Don Latham

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx]On
Behalf Of Rene Zandbergen
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 12:20 AM
To: vms-list@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: VMs: Mad Kircher, was (lots)



--- Nick Pelling <incoming@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> At 08:34 09/09/2003 -0700, Rene Zandbergen wrote:
> >I note the smiley, but this has been suggested
> >before. Can we rule this out, based on the
> >problem that there is no-one who was actually
> >perpetrating the hoax?
>
> Well, unlike most other hypotheses, this one at
> least has a precedent
> (IIRC). :-)

You're thinking of the Andreas Mueller hoax, I
guess. Do we have a year for it?

In any case, the Voynich MS was sent to Kircher
in 1666 by Marci, but was already owned by Baresch
in 1637. So who planned the hoax, if it was one?
Not Marci, for sure. Was Marci duped as well?
Was Kircher a good target for a hoax in 1637?

That's why I think this scenario doesn't make
complete sense.

Cheers ,Rene


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list



______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list