2 ms·
The short answer is "probably, yes". This thing's been pretty exhaustively analyzed. After an afternoon of armchair research, I personally felt the evidence lea
by coldpie 10y ago
The short answer is "probably, yes". This thing's been pretty exhaustively analyzed. After an afternoon of armchair research, I personally felt the evidence lead most to a fascinating fake made much later than its claimed origin date in order to fetch a high asking price. In any case, check it out sometime, it's fascinating. I may pick up this reprinting.
- Nursie 10y agoI also find it fascinating. Have you read Stephen Bax' paper on partial decode based on botany? https://stephenbax.net/?page_id=11 https://stephenbax.net/?page_id=11 I find it quite compelling.
- coldpie 10y agoI have not, thank you for the link.
- kristopolous 10y agoI've looked quite a bit including doing my own research with respect to that. I've come down to three possibilities: (1) it could be a copy of a much older, now lost document, which puts the timeline in question. (2) Colonialism and imperialism really did a number on indigenous people and culture. This could be an ethnography of sorts of am indigenous people's knowledge in their now lost language. (3) We could be fundamentally "reading it wrong". I've extended this question as to "Well how else would this be done?" beyond mechanical cypher machines. Maybe glyphs we've bucketed are actually distinct or maybe some aspect of it such as the length of a stroke have semantic meaning. It could be an extremely poorly designed and confusing script. I know it's been looked at by people likely smarter than me, but I really don't believe in gods, whether human or otherwise - so I'm not discouraged ... although really, finite time, finite time.