I lean toward “efficient entertainment”, but I do sometimes wonder what that chunk of my free time would look like otherwise.

  • AllNewTypeFace@leminal.spaceEnglish
    41·
    2 个月前

    It is not clear that the Voynich Manuscript is a hoax/fantasy book. The plant illustrations, whilst ambiguous, do look like plausible real plants (though some have features of multiple species), and while nobody has decoded the text, the letter and word frequencies are consistent with it being natural language rather than gibberish.

    Perhaps you’re thinking of the Codex Seraphinianus?

    • AnActOfCreation@programming.devEnglish
      2·
      2 个月前

      Hey I just wanted to say, thank you for sending me down the rabbit hole of both of these texts. Fascinating!

      Regarding the Voynich Manuscript, and to be fair to the person you’re responding to, with no current decipherment, there is a good possibility it’s a hoax.

      Churchill acknowledges the possibility that the manuscript is either a synthetic forgotten language (as advanced by Friedman), or else a forgery, as the preeminent theory. However, he concludes that, if the manuscript is a genuine creation, mental illness or delusion seems to have affected the author.

      Also the Codex Seraphinianus is much newer and self-admittedly describes an imaginary world in an imaginary language.

      Anyway, thanks again for the Wikipedia adventure. :D