Posted on 08/27/2002 6:26:51 AM PDT by Jalapeno
Discover the cosmos! Each day a different image or photograph of our fascinating universe is featured, along with a brief explanation written by a professional astronomer.
Explanation: The ancient text has no known title, no known author, and is written in no known language: what does it say and why does it have many astronomy illustrations?
The mysterious book was once bought by an emperor, forgotten on a library shelf, sold for thousands of dollars, and later donated to Yale.
Possibly written in the 15th century, the over 200-page volume is known most recently as the Voynich Manuscript, after its (re-)discoverer in 1912.
Pictured above is an illustration from the book that appears to be somehow related to the Sun.
The book labels some patches of the sky with unfamiliar constellations.
The inability of modern historians of astronomy to understand the origins of these constellations is perhaps dwarfed by the inability of modern code-breakers to understand the book's text.
The book remains in Yale's rare book collection under catalog number "MS 408."
Of course, not knowing the language for the code you're breaking makes it difficult....
The eleven secret ingredients are salt, pepper, ...
(See page two.)
And an "f.Christian" to provide the documentation. : )
The easiest thing to encrypt would be a meaningless text -- say an al gore speech -- that has no information content.
For those who've been following the Medved story here at FR, I found this report of a debate with Velikovsky himself. Do we notice any similarities in debating techniques between our own beloved Medved and Velikovsky himself?
This is an excerpt from a letter from someone who actually debated Velikovsky. It's printed in the current issue of Skeptic Magazine, and the author notes that a more complete report of the event is printed in At The Fringes of Science. It's signed, "Michael Friedlander, Department of Physics, Washington University, St. Louis, MO.
In my presentation, I gave examples of Velikovsky's distortion of the published scientific literature in quotations that he used to support his theses. For example, he quoted Lyttleton as writing that "the terrestrial planets, Venus included, must have originated from the giant planets ... " Lyttleton did not use the word "must." In another case, Velikovsky cited thermoluminescence studies of Apollo 12 lunar cores, reporting that "disturbances were of a thermal nature." Those measurements were made by some of my colleagues, and Velikovsky's description is, at best, imaginative.Of course, we cannot discount the possibility that Friedlander's slavish devotion to the Physics Cult has blinded him to the truth of Velikovsky's quoting techniques. Forced to chose, I'd go with an f-stop of 5.6.When I gave each example, his response was "Where did I write that?"; when I showed a photo copy of the quoted pages, he simply switched to a different topic.
Ah, so this must be the inspiration for the legendary Holden Context Switch!
Not me. In the first place, 5.6 is too
wide-eyed (naive) when dealing with
poltroons whose loony-box is lit.
Something like f-22 would help.
Additionally, the high f-stop might
induce a little sharpness around
the circles of confusion.
· join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic · subscribe · |
|||
Antiquity Journal & archive Archaeologica Archaeology Archaeology Channel BAR Bronze Age Forum Discover Dogpile Eurekalert LiveScience Mirabilis.ca Nat Geographic PhysOrg Science Daily Science News Texas AM Yahoo Excerpt, or Link only? |
|
||
· Science topic · science keyword · Books/Literature topic · pages keyword · |
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.