Follow

"In addition, the fundamental underlying argument—that there is such a thing as one 'proto-Romance language'—is completely unsubstantiated and at odds with paleolinguistics. Finally, his association of particular glyphs with particular Latin letters is equally unsubstantiated. His work has never received true peer review, and its publication in this particular journal is no sign of peer confidence."

💀

I think that is academic speak for "lol dude you are full of bullshit, fuck off"

our collective fascination with the Voynich Manuscript is fascinating in itself

as the hosts of the Stuff You Missed In History Class podcast would say, "who doesn't love a good history mystery?"

speaking of that podcast, the last Voynich Manuscript update they did was in 2014, guess they have to do another one like "nope, still undecoded"

if you are looking for other history mysteries in their catalogue:

The Dyatlov Pass Incident
Villisca Ax Murders
The Lost Roman Legion
The Vanishing of the U.S.S Cyclops
The Disappearance of the Sodder Children
The Hagley Woods Murder
The Green Children of Woolpit
The Mysterious Disappearance of Theodosia Burr Alston

@staticsafe "in conclusion, i award you no points, and may god have mercy on your soul".

I'm very sorry for this, do not read, uh, NSFW, probably like a lot of other things but I can't figure 'em out, just don't read it, it will ruin the phrase 'history mystery' for you forever Show more

@staticsafe

Oooooooh! I recognize a few of these. IIRC Dyatlov's got a very plausible explanation that is just ignored by people who want to theorize (and, well, it's their life I guess). The Sodder kids, IIRC what that is (and I'll be looking all these up anyway, probably, I love weird shit like this), I had my own fairly plausible theory but it was, ah, rather, um, unsavory. Anyway.

Neat!

@staticsafe

Paradoxical undressing and animal scavenging, IIRC. (There were a few more things addressed but none of them seemed implausible, just somewhat uncommon.)

@sydneyfalk ahh yeah I remember those being mentioned in the episode

@staticsafe

Paradoxical undressing is absolutely a thing and people will do that shit; it's bizarre but humans are weird.

As for the other aspects, honestly? I think humans just love a good mystery and don't want to "ruin it" with "plausible truth".

Same reason nobody wants to believe JFK got hit by his own Secret Service guy by accident -- it's anticlimactic.

@staticsafe

(and I'm not claiming that is somehow, factually, THE most plausible explanation; but I am saying I've seen accounts of people rejecting it with no explanation of WHY so many times. Conspiracy theorists as a whole really, really get attached to this stuff, and believe There's Got To Be A Real Truth, and all this. So the mundanity of 'real truth', i.e., logical plausible explanations, is extremely upsetting to them.)

@sydneyfalk the X-Files theme is playing right about now

THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE

@staticsafe

(It's not actually terribly implausible, and some ballistics expert touted that he was CERTAIN this is why the bullet vanished and got replaced, why so much work was done to destroy or vanish evidence, a jillion other things. It makes a lot of sense to me, and I suppose it's my, um, 'historical headcanon' on this, yeah. But it could be wrong. Shit happens. Life's weird. Unusual things occur, and mundane things happen too.)

@sydneyfalk you also mentioned a distasteful theory about the Sodder Children one, what is it?

@staticsafe

Gone Baby Gone, actually. The local LEOs specifically told the FBI they didn't want investigative help, along with a string of lovely horrid things like a "life insurance salesman" who said, quote: “Your goddamn house is going up in smoke, and your children are going to be destroyed. You are going to be paid for the dirty remarks you have been making about Mussolini.”

Sounds like someone who knew where things were going, at least.

(In short: LEO conspiracy to punish the family.)

@sydneyfalk ohh yeah the "life insurance salesman" bit was mentioned in the aspect was mentioned in the episode

my pet theory was always some sort of kidnapping situation

the parents believed their children were alive till the day they died..quite a sad situation

@staticsafe

I suspect they might have survived. If they were carefully contained (rural life can be quite controlled, I assure you), they'd never really get a chance to try to ask for help. And any LEO who called back to the town the kid was claiming they "were from" would claim the kids didn't fit th e description and make the other LEO write it off as a kid wanting attention.

Children are treated like property, even in this day and age. Unfortunately. 🤷

CW: human trafficking Show more

CW: human trafficking Show more

CW: human trafficking Show more

CW: human trafficking Show more

Show more

@staticsafe

Hinterkaifeck was another one like this; there were military operatives working in nearby areas and literally the family noted "footsteps into the house" that they could not account for. Yet around that time a number of those military operatives were scattered by operations within a kilometer or so. One of them, going into a house, hiding, and murdering everybody in it? Trivial. Yet I have never seen it presented as the solution except by, I think, Cracked.)

@sydneyfalk ah yeah Hinterkaifeck, that one is really quite gruesome

that one was part of a double features episode on that podcast

@staticsafe

'Twas. (And I won't say it didn't give me shivers, but I've kinda always been into horrid shit, so yeah.)

@sydneyfalk and I didn't know about the military operatives theory, that still leaves the motive as a mystery, and especially the way it was done too

@staticsafe

Two on the first, one on the second:

1: Witnesses.

If it's an enemy operative stuck in enemy territory, and you have a house, you do not want to leave it full of people who will tell others where you were going.

2: Hate.

If that dude was a bit more of, as they said in Red October, a "buckaroo", they might have decided it was a free killing spree. Who'd ever catch them?

And on the second:

To cover up the training of the murderer. ^_^ Cover your tracks, footprint and otherwise.

@sydneyfalk all plausible

and thinking about it, the methodical way it was done seemed like someone who had some military training (and perhaps the emotional detachment but that's me armchair psychoanalyzing)

@sydneyfalk yeah paradoxical undressing in cases of hypothermia is a real thing

and absolutely we do love ourselves a good mystery

@rafial er sort of? it refers to a categorization of languages not specifically one language

that is what I understood from the way Fagin Davis mentioned the concept

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Zombocom

staticsafe's personal Mastodon instance.