Why the Voynich manuscript is not a hoax (part 1)

Some people consider that the Vm is a hoax, created perhaps by a sort of grille Samsung language. I think I’ve answered that comprehensively in my paper, by showing that it can’t possibly be a hoax, as it contains real semantic content 광고 영상 다운로드.  But in any case, why on earth would anyone waste their time on creating a  hoax of this kind? It’s just not credible, is it?

Yesterday I found this nice account from David Kahn’s book “The Codebreakers” 일본어 회화 다운로드. Although it was written before the hoax mania set in, I still think it is eminently sensible – I can’t argue with any of it. The highlighting is mine:

“Is it [the Voynich manuscript], then, just a gigantic hoax, like the Cardiff giant or the Piltdown man or the fossils of Professor Beringer Transfer Korea? Nobody involved with it seems to think so—and this includes those who have been rebuffed by it. The work is too well organized, too extensive, too homogeneous MonsterHunter 3rd. Nothing repeats larger than a group of five words, whereas in actual hoaxes, such as the fake hieroglyphic papyri sometimes sold to tourists in Egypt, much longer phrases are repeated SocialPhobia replay download. Moreover, the words in the text recur, but in different combinations, just as in ordinary writing. Even if it were a hoax, there seems to be no point to having made it so long 히어로 시즈 다운로드. Most critically, the medieval quasi-science that was seeking the philosopher’s stone and the elixir of life while the manuscript was being written was too credulous to entertain the concept of a hoax Download the bible.

David Kahn (The Codebreakers: The Comprehensive History of Secret Communication from Ancient Times to the Internet) 1996 p871 엑셀 2010 한글판 무료 다운로드.

Surely Kahn is right? In summary:

1. the VM is ‘too extensive and homogenous’ to be a hoax. Why would anyone add pages and pages of extra text at the end, completely unnecessarily, to create a hoax 쇼핑몰 사진 다운로드?

2. There is repetition, but not as much as a typical hoaxer would use.

3. The text shows other patterns which closely resemble real writing.

4. Again, why make a hoax so long?

5. No-one at the time would have believed it, so why bother to do it?

By the way, I’m ignorant of any 15th century manuscript hoaxes of any kind……. does anyone know of any?




Leave Your Comment

Your email will not be published or shared. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>