Re: Ventris' grid
- From: "grapheus@xxxxxxx" <grapheus@xxxxxxx>
- Date: 1 Mar 2007 07:11:58 -0800
On Mar 1, 1:44 pm, "hagen" <dan5m...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 1, 10:53 am, "graph...@xxxxxxx" <graph...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 1, 1:37 am, "hagen" <dan5m...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 1, 12:13 am, "graph...@xxxxxxx" <graph...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Feb 28, 9:50 pm, "hagen" <dan5m...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 28 Feb., 20:57, "graph...@xxxxxxx" <graph...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Feb 28, 8:22 pm, "hagen" <dan5m...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Arriving from Greek after the excavation of the latest discovered
portion of Pylos tablets in 1953, professor Blegen, as the first,
overlooked and filed the findings. He was disturbed by the the 641th
tablet, and decided to try it with Ventris' grid. When realising its
importance, because of the accordance between the determinatives and
the text, the professor immediately posted a copy to the amateur
filologist Michael Ventris for his information.
Has anyone arrived from Crete lately? then send us a letter, please!http://web.gvdnet.dk/GVD002393/proof.htm
Why are you publishing again this so-called "proof", which shows that
your theory DOESN'T WORK ????
Are you such a masochist ???
Regards
grapheus
I knew, that Sir Arthur Evans was almost blind wearing very strong
glasses.
I did'nt knew you were partial blind. It makes me sorry!
I am not blind, but you are !.. Start from the right part at the
bottom in your figure, and you will clearly see a reversed V (i.e. a
kind of Greek lambda), so that the obliterated sign CANNOT be your
sign P (= Sign 36 in Evans numbering).
I've still not received any information, that tells me whether this
sign is obliterated by putpose or by accident.
This is irrelevant to the reversed V remains.
grapheus
Hagenhttp://web.gvdnet.dk/GVD002393/phaistos.htm
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I'm not saying: I am not biassed in this particular matter; but so are
you.
We need some specialists to settle the case.
We don't need any "specialist" to settle the case. Having two good
eyes is enough !..
What I suggest is launching a pool, and counting the votes : "Yes, the
obliterated sign IS the P-sign" and "No, the obliterated sign CANNOT
be the P-Sign because of the reversed V".
Or just have released some high-resolution photo's of the area.
This is unnecessary. The photos on your own link are sufficiently
clear. Anybody (but you) may see the "reversed V", which has been also
noticed by the scholars having seen the original disk.
grapheus- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Di-dah-dah-dit. It is the sign next to, that forms a V angel.
An optician may correct your Wision
Baloney !.. I am talking about the OBLITERATED SIGN ! It has nothing
to do with the sign next to it !!!!
And as you seem afraid to organize a vote, I will do it for you in
this group.
grapheus
http://web.gvdnet.dk/GVD002393/proof.htm
Hagen
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Ventris' grid
- From: hagen
- Re: Ventris' grid
- References:
- Re: Ventris' grid
- From: grapheus@xxxxxxx
- Re: Ventris' grid
- From: hagen
- Re: Ventris' grid
- From: grapheus@xxxxxxx
- Re: Ventris' grid
- From: hagen
- Re: Ventris' grid
- Prev by Date: Re: unnatural languages
- Next by Date: Re: Proto-Albanian [Was: Venom-spitting from a safe distance - Cybalist cave!]
- Previous by thread: Re: Ventris' grid
- Next by thread: Re: Ventris' grid
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|