Re: Vinca script, cross bar angle - Ki Ri Ke


Peter T. Daniels wrote:

I was writing in English, not German. I didn't mention Ziffern.

English cipher, deciphering. 1 2 3 ... are ciphers.

<one two three> or <eins zwei drei> is writing. <1 2 3> is ideography.
Knots in quipus are the latter, not the former.

1 2 3 are abbreviations of one two three.

This time your mind wandered after less than a line and a half -- years
have nothing to do with it.

I follow ideas, I don't live in the cage of your categories
and classifications. When I begin a message you think:
aha, now he is in this category. And a couple of lines
later you see me in another of your categories, and you
say: his mind wandered off. Niot at all. Your categories
and classifications have no hold over me, they are
imaginary walls, I walk through them, but not off.

You do not have the slightest idea what you are talking about. Learn how
cuneiform, hieroglyphs, and Mayan were deciphered. (As it happens, the
best places to do so are my own publications.) Numerals were not
involved in the slightest in deciphering the scripts.

I just looked up The World's Writing Systems, and saw
how you deny that pictures can convey language, so
I don't feel like reading your book. I take it you are Jewish.
The Jewish tradition forbids pictures. This may be the
reason for your stance in this question. I respect it for
you, but you can never oblige me to obey the same
commandement, not to consider pictures.


<eins zwei drei> and <United States of America> and <Vereinigte Staaten>
are writing. <1 2 3> and a picture of an eagle clutching arrows and an
olive branch, or of an American flag, are not writing.

And U.S.A. is not writing? an abbrevation of the United
States of America, just as 1 2 3 are abbreviations of
one two three.

You changed your claim regarding the authorship of the articles you
previously attributed to Joan Marler, so I am not claiming Ms. Marler
wrote them, only that Prof. Gimbutas did not.

No no no, don't lie. I remembered that Marija Gimbutas
wrote about the Sacred Script of Old Europe that predates
the Sumerian invention of writing by two millennia, but I
wrongly thought it was in The Language of the Goddess,
then I corrected my mistake, it 's captter 8 of The Civilization
of the Goddess. I apologize now for about the fifth time for
that mistake. Still not enough? I never see you apologize
for one of your mistakes. I have a brief biography on Marija
Gimbutas (five pages) and a speech held at the opening of
the Wiesbaden exhibition (June 1993) by Joan Marler in the
catalogue of the Wiesbaden exhibition (1994, in memoriam
Marija Gimbutas), both by Joan Marler, and she does not say
one single word on the Vinca script. You came up with the
silly notion that she must have imposed the Sacred Script
chapter on Marija Gimbutas, in the way of any conspiracy
kook of talk.origins. I really don't understand why you did
such a thing. I just checked the World's Writing Systems.
There you say correctly that Marija Gimbutas considers
the Vinca signs actual writing, an actual script. No need
to come up with a stupid theory now that contradicts what
you say in WWS, and correctly, carefully weighing your
words. You also say that there seems not to be a reccurent
sequence of signs. In the Usenet you say there _is_ no
recurrent sequence of signs. A big difference. I want
back the Peter T. Daniels of The World Writing Systems,
the impostor in the Usenet may please go away.

I've warned you before about lying about me.

Don't lie about me. What you suggested happened with
chapter 8 of The Civilization of the Goddess casts an
oblique light on your profession (editing).

I said no such thing about "editors."

You suggested that Joan Marler imposed chapter 8 on
the Sacred Script in The Civilization of the Goddess on
Marija Gimbutas, you made repeatedly fun of me when
I said that I recognize Marija Gimbutas' own voice in
that chapter, and you raised the suspicion that editors
are doing such things, turning around their authors who
depend on them. I am most glad that Stephen Jay Gould
resisted the lot of you when it came to his great legacy,
The Structure of Evolutionary Theory.

I don't happen to have an archeological library at my beck and call.

You ignore all I write about Goebekli Tepe, then you complain
that you have no archaeological library at hand. Must I tell
you the call number of Klaus Schmidt's book at the Public
Library New York, Research Library? it may be kept there.
Derk Ohlenroth's book is there, and I published the call
number. I will look up the catalogue for Klaus Schmidt's
book, and if I find it in that library I will inform you about
the call number. Apart from that you may have read Brian
M. Scott's reply to you. He says that Goebekli Tepe is no
village, and of more importance than you assume (although
he doesn't share my fantasies). Did you look up the page
he gave a link to? And the photographs on that page are
nothing compared to the ones in the book.

I've warned you before about lying about me.

Everybody can see that you deny everything that goes
beyond your book. You are shaping the world according
to your ignorance. Don't you lie about me by insinuating
I was lying. Contrary to you I admit mistakes. I make
mistakes, and when I recognize one I apologize, but
I don't lie. Careful now about your wording and accustaions.

All I know about G.T. is that you think it was the origin of
civilization and that your nutty "language" was used there. I have no
opinion of it.

I see you know nothing about Goebekli Tepe, and you
go on shaping the world according to your ignorance.

And you'd better take a course in remedial reading. I tell you that *The
Language of the Goddess* contains nothing like what is in the first page
or so of that chapter in *The Civilization of the Goddess*, and you tell
me again and again to read that chapter.

For the sixth time: I wrongly assumed that there is a passage
on the Vinca script in The Language of the Goddess, but
I was wrong, there is "only" chapter 8 on the Sacred Script
in The Civilization of the Goddess. As you correctly say in
chapter 2 of the World's Writing Systems, Marija Gimbutas
believes that the Vinca signs were an actual script. Why do
driop below your own level? I want back the real and genuine
Peter T. Daniels of the World's Writing Systems. I have
enough of the dummy that took his place in sci.lang.

Does _anyone_ find it possible to converse with you?

Yes, people with an open mind. I am getting contacted
by Professor swho want my advice. I give them my advice.
I tell them what I see and how I understand things. I tell them:
you must not believe me, just play, look at things my way for
once, you may notice new aspects, then you can reevaluate
your own opinion, or return to your own former opinion, and
perhaps widen it in this or another aspect. I take my time
to write long letters and long mails, which means very
long letters and very long mails, carefully explaining,
and its big fun, for both sides.

She had nothing to "fear." She was a highly respected archeologist and a
tenured professor at the University of California.

And near the end of one's life one finds the courage to say
what one wants to say, without any restraints anymore,
leaving a legacy. And of course also Marija Gimbutas had
to fear the hounds of academe, didn't you notice all the hateful
response?

Finally you admit that you are not interested in facts or accuracy.

You are a fool.

If you understood anything about human language, you would know that
peoples who "wander widely" no longer speak the same language, or even
similar languages, after a very short time. Look how different English
and German are, after well under 2000 years of separation. Yet you posit
identity of "language" between your (newly named) "Franco-Cantabrians"
and your "Magdalenians" of G.T.

So when Americans fly to Europe and Asia and return
to America they don't speak American English anymore?
When a Magdalenian tribe spent winter in the southern
Rhone Valley and summer in western Switzerland,
roughly 400 kilometers, did they loose their language?
And did tribes wandering from the Magdalenian homeland,
which extended from the Franco-Cantabrian space to at
least Hungary in the east, lose their language in a period
of 400 years, from around 12 000 BP, end of the Magda-
lenium in the Guyenne, to 11 600, begin of Goebekli Tepe?
No, language has a much longer life, words have a long life,
Darwin's model of evolution is wrong, stasis has a strong
hold on a species and on a language.

Mammoths are irrelevant. Land bridges are irrelevant. Precise dates like
11,400 are absurd. 600 years is enough to change the language of Chaucer
to the language of me.

Changes of the material culture make language change.
The material culture changed between Chaucer's time
and our time, which is mirrored by the changes of
the language. Material culture didn't change between
the end of the Magdalenium and the begin of the Azilium.
Relevant changes occured, however, in the late phase
of Goebekli Tepe, when the first cereals were breeded
and planted in large fields at the base of the Karacadag
west of Goebekli Tepe.

And you haven't managed to get yourself even from 15,000 to 12,000
without changes to the "language," let alone to 5000 and Vinc^a.

A stable material culture keeps a language in shape,
while a changing material culture makes a language shift.
No change of the material culture from 15 000 to 12 000
BP, a considerable change orccurring around 11 600 BP
in Goebekli Tepe, statues, t-shaped pillar up to eight meters
tall, weighing up to fifty tons, decorated with carved reliefs
and carved hieroglyphs, big change of the material culture
occurring with the begin of agricultre in the late phase
of Goebekli Tepe (oldest breeded cereals known so far),
turning the absolute male culture of Goebekli Tepe in
the female centered culture of the Balkans in the time
of the Bird Goddess Ki Ri Ke.

Franz Gnaedinger

.