Science and Technology news... :: View topic - Minerva-paper on the Phaistos Disk : The main argument

grapheus@www.com · Guest

The main argument for suspecting the Phaistos Disk to be a hoax has
been summarized as follows :

[quote]The signs of the Phaistos Disk are a jumble of often
completely
unrelated objects, the sources of which date from Egyptian tomb
reliefs and
Anatolian objects of the mid-2nd millennium BC to 6th century BC
Attic
vases.
[/quote]
To what, I>ve already answered :
"a jumble of completely unrelated objects"?..
Not at all !.. ALL these objects are related to "Cycladic
Civilization", to "Greek Civilization" and to the "Peoples of the
Sea"
as represented on Egyptian monuments!.. Plus some "characters", like
"the ram" or "the feline head", etc. WHICH ARE UNIVERSAL...
And, as a general rule, the design of these can be found later in
Attic-Euboean vases.
To what one may add that the hieroglyphs, which are supposed to have
been "inspired by the Luwian Hieroglyphic script" are all dubious.
They also represent characters or objects belonging to the "Peoples of
the Sea Civilization".

So, the "main argument" of the Minerva-paper can receive another
interpretation than the Disk being an hoax : THE DISK BELONGS to the
PROTO-IONIAN CIVILIZATION evidenced by J. Faucounau. A terrible
conclusion for the followers of the "Risch-Chadwick Theory" !!!!!

grapheus

grapheus@www.com · Guest

On Jul 24, 12:07 am, "graph...@www.com" <graph...@www.com> wrote:
[quote]The main argument for suspecting the Phaistos Disk to be a hoax has
been summarized as follows :

The signs of the Phaistos Disk are a jumble of often
completely
unrelated objects, the sources of which date from Egyptian tomb
reliefs and
Anatolian objects of the mid-2nd millennium BC to 6th century BC
Attic
vases.

To what, I>ve already answered :
"a jumble of completely unrelated objects"?..
Not at all !.. ALL these objects are related to "Cycladic
Civilization", to "Greek Civilization" and to the "Peoples of the
Sea"
as represented on Egyptian monuments!.. Plus some "characters", like
"the ram" or "the feline head", etc. WHICH ARE UNIVERSAL...
And, as a general rule, the design of these can be found later in
Attic-Euboean vases.
To what one may add that the hieroglyphs, which are supposed to have
been "inspired by the Luwian Hieroglyphic script" are all dubious.
They also represent characters or objects belonging to the "Peoples of
the Sea Civilization".

So, the "main argument" of the Minerva-paper can receive another
interpretation than the Disk being an hoax : THE DISK BELONGS to the
PROTO-IONIAN CIVILIZATION evidenced by J. Faucounau. A terrible
conclusion for the followers of the "Risch-Chadwick Theory" !!!!!

grapheus
[/quote]
The dismissal of the hypothesis that four Phaistos Disk>s signs would
have been "inspired to Luigi Pernier" by Luwian
Hieroglyphs is important. So, I repeat here what I wrote in another
thread :

1)- S38 (rosette) : It is true that this sign can be found on Hittite
Seals from Boghazköi that L. Pernier could have seen. But it is
MAINLY
a motive VERY USUAL in the Minoan-Greek Civilization. It has been
found on Camares vases as on the Tempel on the Akropolis at Athens.
Saying that the "inspiration is Luwian" is NOT proved.
2)- S26 (horn) : It is also true that this sign (corresponding to
Hitt. surna) has bee found at Keratepe, Kargamis, Alep and even
Assur.
So it is "not impossible" that Luigi Pernier knew its existence. But
it is the design of an UNIVERSAL object. So much, that one can also
found it AS a HIEROGLYPH, in the Egyptian script... Nothing
surprising, therefore, to find it ALSO in the Phaistos Disk>s script,
and NO NEED for the "inventor of this script to have followed a
model !!!!!
3)- S15 (pic-axe) : A SIMILAR , but NOT IDENTICAL, is attested ONLY
in the Karahöyük-Elbistan 10 Inscription. There seems NO POSSIBILITY
for L. Pernier to have known it, as this inscription has been
published for the first time in 1949 by GÜterbock (cf "Karahöyük
Hafrojati Raporu", Pl XLIX and ss).
But a STRICTLY
IDENTICAL object has been found at Kythnos in a CYCLADIC layer.
4)- S12 (rosette) : As far as I know, there is NO strictly identical
hieroglyph attested in a Luwian/Hittite inscription, that L. Pernier
could have known, and I challenge Dr Eisenberg to bring some contrary
proof.
But this "type of shield" has been used by GREEKS and by "Sea
Peoples".
CONCLUSION : The hypothesis that Pernier "WOULD have been inspired by
Luwian Hieroglyphs" is SURELY FALSE. Pernier was living in 1908, not
TODAY, when there have been LOTS of PUBLICATIONS about the Luwian
Hieroglyphic Scripts by Merrigi, Güterbock, Laroche, E. Masson,
etc. !!!

grapheus

Peter T. Daniels · Guest

On Jul 24, 7:56 am, "graph...@www.com" <graph...@www.com> wrote:
[quote]On Jul 24, 12:07 am, "graph...@www.com" <graph...@www.com> wrote:

The main argument for suspecting the Phaistos Disk to be a hoax has
been summarized as follows :

The signs of the Phaistos Disk are a jumble of often
completely
unrelated objects, the sources of which date from Egyptian tomb
reliefs and
Anatolian objects of the mid-2nd millennium BC to 6th century BC
Attic
vases.

To what, I>ve already answered :
"a jumble of completely unrelated objects"?..
Not at all !.. ALL these objects are related to "Cycladic
Civilization", to "Greek Civilization" and to the "Peoples of the
Sea"
as represented on Egyptian monuments!.. Plus some "characters", like
"the ram" or "the feline head", etc. WHICH ARE UNIVERSAL...
And, as a general rule, the design of these can be found later in
Attic-Euboean vases.
To what one may add that the hieroglyphs, which are supposed to have
been "inspired by the Luwian Hieroglyphic script" are all dubious.
They also represent characters or objects belonging to the "Peoples of
the Sea Civilization".

So, the "main argument" of the Minerva-paper can receive another
interpretation than the Disk being an hoax : THE DISK BELONGS to the
PROTO-IONIAN CIVILIZATION evidenced by J. Faucounau. A terrible
conclusion for the followers of the "Risch-Chadwick Theory" !!!!!

grapheus

The dismissal of the hypothesis that four Phaistos Disk>s signs would
have been "inspired to Luigi Pernier" by Luwian
Hieroglyphs is important. So, I repeat here what I wrote in another
thread :
[/quote]
Anyone who is interested has already read it in another thread. Stop
doing this.

grapheus@www.com · Guest

On Jul 24, 4:10 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
[quote]On Jul 24, 7:56 am, "graph...@www.com" <graph...@www.com> wrote:

On Jul 24, 12:07 am, "graph...@www.com" <graph...@www.com> wrote:

The main argument for suspecting the Phaistos Disk to be a hoax has
been summarized as follows :

The signs of the Phaistos Disk are a jumble of often
completely
unrelated objects, the sources of which date from Egyptian tomb
reliefs and
Anatolian objects of the mid-2nd millennium BC to 6th century BC
Attic
vases.

To what, I>ve already answered :
"a jumble of completely unrelated objects"?..
Not at all !.. ALL these objects are related to "Cycladic
Civilization", to "Greek Civilization" and to the "Peoples of the
Sea"
as represented on Egyptian monuments!.. Plus some "characters", like
"the ram" or "the feline head", etc. WHICH ARE UNIVERSAL...
And, as a general rule, the design of these can be found later in
Attic-Euboean vases.
To what one may add that the hieroglyphs, which are supposed to have
been "inspired by the Luwian Hieroglyphic script" are all dubious.
They also represent characters or objects belonging to the "Peoples of
the Sea Civilization".

So, the "main argument" of the Minerva-paper can receive another
interpretation than the Disk being an hoax : THE DISK BELONGS to the
PROTO-IONIAN CIVILIZATION evidenced by J. Faucounau. A terrible
conclusion for the followers of the "Risch-Chadwick Theory" !!!!!

grapheus

The dismissal of the hypothesis that four Phaistos Disk>s signs would
have been "inspired to Luigi Pernier" by Luwian
Hieroglyphs is important. So, I repeat here what I wrote in another
thread :

Anyone who is interested has already read it in another thread.
[/quote]
How can I know, when there are no reactions ?..

grapheus

grapheus@www.com · Guest

On Jul 24, 7:38 pm, António Marques <m...@sapo.pt> wrote:
[quote]graph...@www.comwrote:
So, I repeat here what I wrote in another thread :

Anyone who is interested has already read it in another thread.

How can I know, when there are no reactions ?..

There are no reactions because people are not interested. I think I>ve
said it once to Ole Hagen: people usually get interested in deciphering
scripts because knowing how to read one artifact you know how to read
other artifacts using the same script, and possibly decipher related
artifacts.
[/quote]
This is really a very narrow point of view !!!
Happily you must the ONLY ONE to think that way !... Because ANYTHING
one may learn from EVEN A SINGLE ITEM, would it be a little broken
piece of pottery, increases our understanding of the past... And this
is the MAIN INTEREST of Historians.
OK. I should have posted my message in another Group...

[quote]This applies not only to scripts but to everything, the
delight in understanding a particular thing lies in no small part in the
way it brings other things closer to you.
[/quote]
YES.

[quote]One-of-a-kind items - be they
the PD or some weird disease someone caught in 1856 and nobody>s ever
heard of either before or since - are just not interesting to the human
mind.
[/quote]
You are CONTRADICTING YOURSELF from one sentence to the next !!!!
The Phaistos Disk, although a single item for the moment (because no
digging has been done until now at the right spot) is HIGHLY
INSTRUCTIVE, with the QUESTIONS it raises. And I>m very grateful to dr
Eisenberg for HAVING ASKED some of them !...

[quote]This is also why facts which don>t fit established scientific
theories are disregarded - there is no clear way to integrate them.
[/quote]
But the "Proto-Ionian Theory" CAN BE EASILY INTEGRATED in the
SCIENTIFIC FRAME !!!!
The ONLY "Scientific HYPOTHESES" which have to be left are 1)- that
"Ionic is a Late Dialect, posterior to 1200 BC" 2)- that "Mycenaeans
were "the First Greeks".."

grapheus

Ramblin Bob · Guest

Peter T. Daniels wrote:
[quote]Anyone who is interested has already read it in another thread. Stop
doing this.
[/quote]
That was a public service announcement from sci.lang>s
Dictator for Life.

grapheus@www.com · Guest

On Jul 24, 8:38 pm, António Marques <m...@sapo.pt> wrote:
[quote]graph...@www.comwrote:
On Jul 24, 7:38 pm, António Marques<m...@sapo.pt> wrote:
graph...@www.comwrote:
So, I repeat here what I wrote in another thread :
Anyone who is interested has already read it in another thread.
How can I know, when there are no reactions ?..
There are no reactions because people are not interested. I think I>ve
said it once to Ole Hagen: people usually get interested in deciphering
scripts because knowing how to read one artifact you know how to read
other artifacts using the same script, and possibly decipher related
artifacts.

This is really a very narrow point of view !!!

It>s not a point of view, it>s the way the human mind works. Even yours.
Your interest in the PD is not the general kind of interest described
above, but specific interest. Which applies only to you.
[/quote]
STRANGE narrow point of view again !!!!
In fact, I>ve always been interested in misappreciated theories in
History/Archaeology... But it happens that the "Proto-Ionian Theory"
is the most important !...

[quote]
Happily you must the ONLY ONE to think that way !... Because ANYTHING
one may learn from EVEN A SINGLE ITEM, would it be a little broken
piece of pottery, increases our understanding of the past... And this
is the MAIN INTEREST of Historians.
OK. I should have posted my message in another Group...

This applies not only to scripts but to everything, the
delight in understanding a particular thing lies in no small part in the
way it brings other things closer to you.

YES.

One-of-a-kind items - be they
the PD or some weird disease someone caught in 1856 and nobody>s ever
heard of either before or since - are just not interesting to the human
mind.

You are CONTRADICTING YOURSELF from one sentence to the next !!!!
The Phaistos Disk, although a single item for the moment (because no
digging has been done until now at the right spot) is HIGHLY
INSTRUCTIVE, with the QUESTIONS it raises. And I>m very grateful to dr
Eisenberg for HAVING ASKED some of them !...

Just where is the supposed CONTRADICTIon?
[/quote]
In your two sentences : "This applies not only to scripts..." and "One
of the kind item is not interesting"..

[quote]Where are the other disks
written in the PD>s script?
[/quote]
In the island where the Disk is coming from.

[quote]
This is also why facts which don>t fit established scientific
theories are disregarded - there is no clear way to integrate them.

But the "Proto-Ionian Theory" CAN BE EASILY INTEGRATED in the
SCIENTIFIC FRAME !!!!

Which has nothing to do with what I say in this sentence you quote.
[/quote]
???????????

[quote]The ONLY "Scientific HYPOTHESES" which have to be left are 1)- that
"Ionic is a Late Dialect, posterior to 1200 BC" 2)- that "Mycenaeans
were "the First Greeks".."

...and which (my sentence you quoted just above) hasn>t got to do with
disproving this or that hypothesis - that>s done all the time - but
simply with having no possible framework in which to intregrate
one-of-a-kind items.
[/quote]
BUT THIS FRAMEWORK DOES EXIST !!!!!!
It is called "The Proto-Ionian Theory" !..
BTW, have you ever read any book or paper on it ???

[quote](My mention of the disregarding of facts which
can>t be assimilated has nothing to do with the PD - it>s just the
reflex in science of the same general lack of interest that makes the PD
uninteresting to people.)
[/quote]
THIS is WRONG : Many scholars say that they are "not interested" in
the Phaistos Disk ONLY BECAUSE they know that studying it SERIOUSLY
would lead them to ABANDON the DOGMA they have defended for years !!!!

[quote]Your digression on how the
PD is so important and how your protojonians could explain everything
completely misses the mark.
[/quote]
NOT AT ALL !!!! It is THE HEART of the matter:
BECAUSE, as you wrote, to be "interesting", the Disk has to be
integrated into a SCIENTIFIC COHERENT THEORY.
That you refuse to be informed about this theory is YOUR problem. But
some scholars - happily - are of a different opinion, in spite of the
pressure of the "Guardians of the Chadwick DOGMA" !!! (In particular,
your compatriot A.Tovar. If he is still alive, ask him what he think
about the "Risch-Chadwick Theory" !).

grapheus

grapheus@www.com · Guest

On Jul 24, 9:17 pm, "graph...@www.com" <graph...@www.com> wrote:
[quote]On Jul 24, 8:38 pm, António Marques <m...@sapo.pt> wrote:

graph...@www.comwrote:
On Jul 24, 7:38 pm, António Marques<m...@sapo.pt> wrote:
graph...@www.comwrote:
So, I repeat here what I wrote in another thread :
Anyone who is interested has already read it in another thread.
How can I know, when there are no reactions ?..
There are no reactions because people are not interested. I think I>ve
said it once to Ole Hagen: people usually get interested in deciphering
scripts because knowing how to read one artifact you know how to read
other artifacts using the same script, and possibly decipher related
artifacts.

This is really a very narrow point of view !!!

It>s not a point of view, it>s the way the human mind works. Even yours..
Your interest in the PD is not the general kind of interest described
above, but specific interest. Which applies only to you.

STRANGE narrow point of view again !!!!
In fact, I>ve always been interested in misappreciated theories in
History/Archaeology... But it happens that the "Proto-Ionian Theory"
is the most important !...

Happily you must the ONLY ONE to think that way !... Because ANYTHING
one may learn from EVEN A SINGLE ITEM, would it be a little broken
piece of pottery, increases our understanding of the past... And this
is the MAIN INTEREST of Historians.
OK. I should have posted my message in another Group...

This applies not only to scripts but to everything, the
delight in understanding a particular thing lies in no small part in the
way it brings other things closer to you.

YES.

One-of-a-kind items - be they
the PD or some weird disease someone caught in 1856 and nobody>s ever
heard of either before or since - are just not interesting to the human
mind.

You are CONTRADICTING YOURSELF from one sentence to the next !!!!
The Phaistos Disk, although a single item for the moment (because no
digging has been done until now at the right spot) is HIGHLY
INSTRUCTIVE, with the QUESTIONS it raises. And I>m very grateful to dr
Eisenberg for HAVING ASKED some of them !...

Just where is the supposed CONTRADICTIon?

In your two sentences : "This applies not only to scripts..." and "One
of the kind item is not interesting"..

Where are the other disks
written in the PD>s script?

In the island where the Disk is coming from.

This is also why facts which don>t fit established scientific
theories are disregarded - there is no clear way to integrate them.

But the "Proto-Ionian Theory" CAN BE EASILY INTEGRATED in the
SCIENTIFIC FRAME !!!!

Which has nothing to do with what I say in this sentence you quote.

???????????

The ONLY "Scientific HYPOTHESES" which have to be left are 1)- that
"Ionic is a Late Dialect, posterior to 1200 BC" 2)- that "Mycenaeans
were "the First Greeks".."

...and which (my sentence you quoted just above) hasn>t got to do with
disproving this or that hypothesis - that>s done all the time - but
simply with having no possible framework in which to intregrate
one-of-a-kind items.

BUT THIS FRAMEWORK DOES EXIST !!!!!!
It is called "The Proto-Ionian Theory" !..
BTW, have you ever read any book or paper on it ???

(My mention of the disregarding of facts which
can>t be assimilated has nothing to do with the PD - it>s just the
reflex in science of the same general lack of interest that makes the PD
uninteresting to people.)

THIS is WRONG : Many scholars say that they are "not interested" in
the Phaistos Disk ONLY BECAUSE they know that studying it SERIOUSLY
would lead them to ABANDON the DOGMA they have defended for years !!!!

Your digression on how the
PD is so important and how your protojonians could explain everything
completely misses the mark.

NOT AT ALL !!!! It is THE HEART of the matter:
BECAUSE, as you wrote, to be "interesting", the Disk has to be
integrated into a SCIENTIFIC COHERENT THEORY.
That you refuse to be informed about this theory is YOUR problem. But
some scholars - happily - are of a different opinion, in spite of the
pressure of the "Guardians of the Chadwick DOGMA" !!! (In particular,
your compatriot A.Tovar. If he is still alive, ask him what he think
about the "Risch-Chadwick Theory" !).

grapheus
[/quote]
Here is a good link about Tovar>s ideas on the Risch-Chadwick
Theory :
<http://www.varchive.org/dag/dialect.htm>

grapheus

Peter T. Daniels · Guest

On Jul 24, 2:50 pm, Ramblin Bob <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
[quote]Peter T. Daniels wrote:
Anyone who is interested has already read it in another thread. Stop
doing this.

That was a public service announcement from sci.lang>s
Dictator for Life.
[/quote]
Interesting. I clicked on jagoff bob>s "Profile" and learned that he
has been "banned" from google groups for violating its Terms of
Service.

If jagoff "Ramblin Bob" wants to discuss the Phaistos Disk with
grapheus, Hagen, Franz, and Eisenberg, he is free to do so wherever he
chooses.

Hopefully he will not choose to do so in some new thread.

António Marques · Guest

grapheus@www.com wrote:

[quote]So, I repeat here what I wrote in another thread :

Anyone who is interested has already read it in another thread.

How can I know, when there are no reactions ?..
[/quote]
There are no reactions because people are not interested. I think I>ve
said it once to Ole Hagen: people usually get interested in deciphering
scripts because knowing how to read one artifact you know how to read
other artifacts using the same script, and possibly decipher related
artifacts. This applies not only to scripts but to everything, the
delight in understanding a particular thing lies in no small part in the
way it brings other things closer to you. One-of-a-kind items - be they
the PD or some weird disease someone caught in 1856 and nobody>s ever
heard of either before or since - are just not interesting to the human
mind. This is also why facts which don>t fit established scientific
theories are disregarded - there is no clear way to integrate them. (The
last sentence will be fodder to all our beloved kooks, but in fact
they>ve got nothing to hold on to: no kook has ever presented a
scientifically *novel* way to address irregular facts, what they present
is commonplace mumbo-jumbo which they think is original just because
normal people don>t lose 5 minutes with it.)
--
António Marques
--
This signature does not include a prefab parting phrase
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

António Marques · Guest

grapheus@www.com wrote:
[quote]On Jul 24, 7:38 pm, António Marques<m...@sapo.pt> wrote:
graph...@www.comwrote:
So, I repeat here what I wrote in another thread :
Anyone who is interested has already read it in another thread.
How can I know, when there are no reactions ?..
There are no reactions because people are not interested. I think I>ve
said it once to Ole Hagen: people usually get interested in deciphering
scripts because knowing how to read one artifact you know how to read
other artifacts using the same script, and possibly decipher related
artifacts.

This is really a very narrow point of view !!!
[/quote]
It>s not a point of view, it>s the way the human mind works. Even yours.
Your interest in the PD is not the general kind of interest described
above, but specific interest. Which applies only to you.

[quote]Happily you must the ONLY ONE to think that way !... Because ANYTHING
one may learn from EVEN A SINGLE ITEM, would it be a little broken
piece of pottery, increases our understanding of the past... And this
is the MAIN INTEREST of Historians.
OK. I should have posted my message in another Group...

This applies not only to scripts but to everything, the
delight in understanding a particular thing lies in no small part in the
way it brings other things closer to you.

YES.

One-of-a-kind items - be they
the PD or some weird disease someone caught in 1856 and nobody>s ever
heard of either before or since - are just not interesting to the human
mind.

You are CONTRADICTING YOURSELF from one sentence to the next !!!!
The Phaistos Disk, although a single item for the moment (because no
digging has been done until now at the right spot) is HIGHLY
INSTRUCTIVE, with the QUESTIONS it raises. And I>m very grateful to dr
Eisenberg for HAVING ASKED some of them !...
[/quote]
Just where is the supposed CONTRADICTIon? Where are the other disks
written in the PD>s script? *If* you can produce at least another
artifact that fits with it, *then* people will begin being interested.

[quote]This is also why facts which don>t fit established scientific
theories are disregarded - there is no clear way to integrate them.

But the "Proto-Ionian Theory" CAN BE EASILY INTEGRATED in the
SCIENTIFIC FRAME !!!!
[/quote]
Which has nothing to do with what I say in this sentence you quote.

[quote]The ONLY "Scientific HYPOTHESES" which have to be left are 1)- that
"Ionic is a Late Dialect, posterior to 1200 BC" 2)- that "Mycenaeans
were "the First Greeks".."
[/quote]
....and which (my sentence you quoted just above) hasn>t got to do with
disproving this or that hypothesis - that>s done all the time - but
simply with having no possible framework in which to intregrate
one-of-a-kind items. (My mention of the disregarding of facts which
can>t be assimilated has nothing to do with the PD - it>s just the
reflex in science of the same general lack of interest that makes the PD
uninteresting to people.)

I>ve explained to you why people just aren>t interested in the PD. Of
course, *some* people may be, just like some people are interested in
1955 soviet stamps. You either understand and accept the exaplanation,
or you can challenge parts of it. Your digression, however, on how the
PD is so important and how your protojonians could explain everything
completely misses the mark. Not even apples and oranges, but apples and
glasses.
--
António Marques
--
This signature does not include a prefab parting phrase
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

grapheus@www.com · Guest

On Jul 24, 11:19 pm, "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote:
[quote]On Jul 24, 2:50 pm, Ramblin Bob <m...@privacy.net> wrote:

Peter T. Daniels wrote:
Anyone who is interested has already read it in another thread. Stop
doing this.

That was a public service announcement from sci.lang>s
Dictator for Life.

Interesting. I clicked on jagoff bob>s "Profile" and learned that he
has been "banned" from google groups for violating its Terms of
Service.

If jagoff "Ramblin Bob" wants to discuss the Phaistos Disk with
grapheus, Hagen, Franz, and Eisenberg, he is free to do so wherever he
chooses.

Hopefully he will not choose to do so in some new thread.
[/quote]
ANOTHER GOOD DIVERSION from the main topic, eh????

grapheus

grapheus@www.com · Guest

On Jul 24, 12:07 am, "graph...@www.com" <graph...@www.com> wrote:
[quote]The main argument for suspecting the Phaistos Disk to be a hoax has
been summarized as follows :

The signs of the Phaistos Disk are a jumble of often
completely
unrelated objects, the sources of which date from Egyptian tomb
reliefs and
Anatolian objects of the mid-2nd millennium BC to 6th century BC
Attic
vases.

To what, I>ve already answered :
"a jumble of completely unrelated objects"?..
Not at all !.. ALL these objects are related to "Cycladic
Civilization", to "Greek Civilization" and to the "Peoples of the
Sea"
as represented on Egyptian monuments!.. Plus some "characters", like
"the ram" or "the feline head", etc. WHICH ARE UNIVERSAL...
And, as a general rule, the design of these can be found later in
Attic-Euboean vases.
To what one may add that the hieroglyphs, which are supposed to have
been "inspired by the Luwian Hieroglyphic script" are all dubious.
They also represent characters or objects belonging to the "Peoples of
the Sea Civilization".

So, the "main argument" of the Minerva-paper can receive another
interpretation than the Disk being an hoax : THE DISK BELONGS to the
PROTO-IONIAN CIVILIZATION evidenced by J. Faucounau. A terrible
conclusion for the followers of the "Risch-Chadwick Theory" !!!!!

grapheus
[/quote]
I believe useful to point out a BIASED statement in the Minerva-paper.
At the reference "OLIVIER J.-P.", it is mentioned that this author
"questions the authenticity of the Disk", the ref. given being the
B.C.H. 99.
This is UNTRUE : in this paper, Jean-Pierre Olivier (not John-Pierre!)
questions ONLY the Cretan ORIGIN of the Disk.
Without comments.

grapheus

hagen · Guest

On Jul 24, 7:38 pm, António Marques <m...@sapo.pt> wrote:
[quote]graph...@www.comwrote:
So, I repeat here what I wrote in another thread :

Anyone who is interested has already read it in another thread.

How can I know, when there are no reactions ?..

There are no reactions because people are not interested. I think I>ve
said it once to Ole Hagen: people usually get interested in deciphering
scripts because knowing how to read one artifact you know how to read
other artifacts using the same script, and possibly decipher related
artifacts. This applies not only to scripts but to everything, the
delight in understanding a particular thing lies in no small part in the
way it brings other things closer to you. One-of-a-kind items - be they
the PD or some weird disease someone caught in 1856 and nobody>s ever
heard of either before or since - are just not interesting to the human
mind. This is also why facts which don>t fit established scientific
theories are disregarded - there is no clear way to integrate them. (The
last sentence will be fodder to all our beloved kooks, but in fact
they>ve got nothing to hold on to: no kook has ever presented a
scientifically *novel* way to address irregular facts, what they present
is commonplace mumbo-jumbo which they think is original just because
normal people don>t lose 5 minutes with it.)
--
António Marques
--
This signature does not include a prefab parting phrase
** Posted fromhttp://www.teranews.com**
[/quote]
Sometimes my ears nearly not believe what they hear. One of the most
challenging enigma>s ever heard about, is suddently of no interest?
This famous disc from Phaistos, which has withhold all attempts of
deciphering over a time spand of a hundred years and therefore
released by the scholars for you and me to try our hands at. Every
child>s dream of being a new Ventris, because of the full-seize
pictures of this artifact in almost every encyclopedia through
generations, is of no interest anymore? This unbroken disc with its
handsome hieroglyphs, talking to the imagination of everyone,
comparable to the Gordian knot (in two), the quadrature of the
(calendar) circle, the secret of the (calendar) pyramid. What kind of
zeal is this? could it be caused by some dirty gambling in connection
with my decipherment?.
Who>s policeman do you think you are Antonio, the people? or perhaps
the minority millionaire?
http://web.gvdnet.dk/GVD002393/gnomonic.htm
Ole Hagen

grapheus@www.com · Guest

On Jul 25, 4:55 pm, hagen <dan5m...@yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote]On Jul 24, 7:38 pm, António Marques <m...@sapo.pt> wrote:

graph...@www.comwrote:
So, I repeat here what I wrote in another thread :

Anyone who is interested has already read it in another thread.

How can I know, when there are no reactions ?..

There are no reactions because people are not interested. I think I>ve
said it once to Ole Hagen: people usually get interested in deciphering
scripts because knowing how to read one artifact you know how to read
other artifacts using the same script, and possibly decipher related
artifacts. This applies not only to scripts but to everything, the
delight in understanding a particular thing lies in no small part in the
way it brings other things closer to you. One-of-a-kind items - be they
the PD or some weird disease someone caught in 1856 and nobody>s ever
heard of either before or since - are just not interesting to the human
mind. This is also why facts which don>t fit established scientific
theories are disregarded - there is no clear way to integrate them. (The
last sentence will be fodder to all our beloved kooks, but in fact
they>ve got nothing to hold on to: no kook has ever presented a
scientifically *novel* way to address irregular facts, what they present
is commonplace mumbo-jumbo which they think is original just because
normal people don>t lose 5 minutes with it.)
--
António Marques
--
This signature does not include a prefab parting phrase
** Posted fromhttp://www.teranews.com**

Sometimes my ears nearly not believe what they hear. One of the most
challenging enigma>s ever heard about, is suddently of no interest?
This famous disc from Phaistos, which has withhold all attempts of
deciphering over a time spand of a hundred years and therefore
released by the scholars for you and me to try our hands at. Every
child>s dream of being a new Ventris, because of the full-seize
pictures of this artifact in almost every encyclopedia through
generations, is of no interest anymore? This unbroken disc with its
handsome hieroglyphs, talking to the imagination of everyone,
comparable to the Gordian knot (in two), the quadrature of the
(calendar) circle, the secret of the (calendar) pyramid. What kind of
zeal is this?
[/quote]
Nice declamatory spech, Ole !.. All my congratulations for it !
But you must understand : Antonio is a good soldier. He follows the
leader. And the leader has said : "Let us forget about this Phaistos
Disk, which obliges us to abandon our DOGMA... Spread around the
word : People, go your way ! There is nothing to see !"...

[quote]Could it be caused by some dirty gambling in > connection
with my decipherment?.
[/quote]
Of course, not, Ole !.. Don>t be such an ego-centric !..

grapheus


www.GetXFactor.com Leading Technology, Science, Agriculture News and information	Part of the Identityscape.com network... getxfactor.com jmoodmusic.com smartbusinesschoices.com mintdepot.com lowfaresalways.com evangelicalview.com shoppingpodder.com soproudlywehail.com webnews.ws currenthumor.com

Science and Technology news... Forum Index -> Languages Forum	Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2