[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: VMs: re: testing Dr. Rugg's theory of hoax
6/09/2004 7:16:00 PM, Luis Velez <luis.velez@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>"...the lack of pairs and triplets of words (e.g. "next to", "on top
>of" in English) is also inconsistent with a real language, or with a
>word-by-word coding of a real language.
We've been through that and more like it so many times... *sigh*
Let's go through it again. Knowing only English helps a lot in
holding such views. And not looking at the VMS does too.
19 occurrences of chol.daiin, the first pair that came to my
>The lack of corrections in the
>manuscript is also inconsistent with a real language or a code.
I won't even address that. It is too preposterous a non-sequitur
and counter-examples are a dime a dozen.
>"An example from folio 78R of the manuscript reads: qokedy qokedy dal
>qokedy qokedy. This degree of repetition is not found in any known
Rumahku penuh dengan buku-buku. Di mana-mana di kamar-kamarnya
ada buku-buku. Buku-buku itu...
>yet more recently:
>"... these hints point towards Voynichese words being `numbers' rather
>than linguistic entities. Therefore, the encoding is probably a
>codebook-based cipher. (A nomenclator, is that the term?)"
>Source:" On the VMS Word Length Distribution" (2000)
There is more recent stuff, 2002, I think, which brings back
to the natural-language hypothesis.
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying: