Oera Linda Book and the Great Flood [Part 2]

[Ott]

The Bible gives the genealogy and years. s. http://en.wikipedia....ee_of_the_Bible .

The wiki site you linked to has genealogies, but not a year for the flood.

I found on wiki/Chronology_of_the_Bible:

Year of the Flood

Masoretic: 1656 AM (anno mundi)

Alexandrinus: 2262 AM

Vaticanus: 2242 AM

Samaritan: 1307 AM

And on wiki/Anno_Mundi: (different dates, a.o.)

Earliest Christian chronology: 5529 BC

Roman tradition: ca. 5200 BC

Bede: 3952 BC

So which one is it?

I can't find the date from the Statenbijbel. Do you have a source for that?

Anyway the Frisian Almanak is based on the Bible (Statenbijbel), not on the OLB or any Frisian tradition, not even on oral tradition.

Again, how do you know?

[Ott]

ooievaar s. http://www.etymologi...fwoord/ooievaar . Has nothing to do with od(em). Please, first check existing etymologies before you make your own.

Well, that's what the etymology suggests.

From the site you linked to:

Mnd.odevare, odever; ohd.Odabaro

(although they give a different interpretation of the word based on the fabricated 'proto-germanic')

The ooievaar (stork) was traditionally used as fertility symbol (delivering babies). Coincidence?

Edited October 28, 2013 by gestur

[Ott]

Otharus/Gestur,

If you like you can use my real name, (Jan) Ott.

Here is an excellent genealogy to complete your genealogy of Over de Linden: https://wiewaswie.nl.../31908634/oid/3 . Quite some additional information, which you cannot find elsewhere.

Thanks for the tip!

Looks like a very helpful site indeed.

[The Puzzler]

ooievaar s. http://www.etymologi...fwoord/ooievaar . Has nothing to do with od(em). Please, first check existing etymologies before you make your own.

Not saying yes or no, but how co-incidental that the stork actually 'brings' the baby - like a hidden meaning for what actually 'brings' the baby - comparable to my explanation above.

Well, that's what the etymology suggests.

From the site you linked to:

Mnd.odevare, odever; ohd.Odabaro

(although they give a different interpretation of the word based on the fabricated 'proto-germanic')

The ooievaar (stork) was traditionally used as fertility symbol (delivering babies). Coincidence?

Yes, I picked up on that too, see my post above.

Edited October 28, 2013 by The Puzzler

[Mario Dantas]

Congratulations on the 300th page!

The meaning of the letter O:

Odin is ring, Odin is everything and Odin is the sun... (BS)

Regards,

Mario Dantas

[The Puzzler]

Please, let us know why the Old-Frisians use the calendar, which refers to a flood which is beyond their knowledge and experience, somewhere outside of Europe in a hostile territory reigned by Finda.

Exactly!

The ode to Frya ends with the land where she lived sinking and everything being lost, the people fled and resettled and named the land Texland.

Therefore - although in one text it is suggested that (an) "Aldland" had been in the east - it is more likely that the Fryan calendar was named after the " old land" somewhere northly of our current Texel (between England, Holland, Denmark and Norway).

(Sandbach p.19)

Exalted Frya! When she had thus spoken the earth shook like the sea of Wr-alda. The ground of Flyland sank beneath her feet, the air was dimmed by tears, and when they looked for their mother she was already risen to her watching star; then at length thunder burst from the clouds, and the lightning wrote upon the firmament "Watch!"

Far-seeing Frya! The land from which she had risen was now a stream, and except her Tex all that was in it was overwhelmed.

Obedient children! When they came to themselves again, they made this high mound and built this citadel upon it, and on the walls they wrote the Tex, and that every one should be able to find it they called the land about it Texland.

Yes - also note that the regulations and laws had been established a hundred years - the Magy arrived 101 years after Frya had gone to her watch-star.

All the regulations which have existed a century, that is, a hundred years, may by the advice of the Eeremoeder, with the consent of the community, be inscribed upon the walls of the citadel, and when inscribed on the walls they become laws,

They were not inscribed on the walls which made them LAWS until the arrival of the Magy 100 years after Frya had Fasta write them.. Prior to that they were written by Fasta as Frya's Tex only.

Edited October 28, 2013 by The Puzzler

[The Puzzler]

Congratulations on the 300th page!

The meaning of the letter O:

Odin is ring, Odin is everything and Odin is the sun... (BS)

Regards,

Mario Dantas

[Ott]

Prior to that they were written by Fasta as Frya's Tex only.

Yes, and I suspect Fàsta (Vesta) to have made that (or at least part of it) up herself.

(And if so, being the first to create pseudo-history and putting a time-bomb under what would become Fryan culture):

(Sandbach p.23:)

Upon my servant [fám, maiden] Fasta I have placed all my hopes.

Therefore you must choose her for Eeremoeder [Honorary-mother].

Edited October 28, 2013 by gestur

[Mario Dantas]

This was taken (ipsis verbis) from a video (but i don't recall which):

We start the Alphabet with i, and

1 - I is the prick of this bock. The second sound is A, and

2 - A means “Aser”, the people who lived in Odenma, the north pole before the ice age, who spoke Rot language.

3 - B means “Borg” or castle. One cas is one rock in the nature and when you “tell” from the “cas”, you put one building on top, so you get one castle.

4 - C means “moon skara”, “moon sickle” which is the fallow symbol related to this Frey, but C also means: “You see!” That is why in English you pronounce it “C”. ABC

5 - D means “Dag” or day, nice day today.

6 - E means “Ek” and Ek means “oak tree”, all people outside of the Bock family belonging to “oak tree”.

7 - F means “Fro”, Frey or Freya, Frey means the seed, the seed from where all life is coming.

8 - G means “Grund”, Ground, the ground we sit on.

9 - H means “Home” or Hell, hell is our home because that is where we originated from (hell - whole, complete).

10 - I is repeated in this sound system. We have two “I” in the story . So we have “I” at the first place and we have “I” in the tenth place in the sound system and “I” and “I” makes eleven.

11 - J means “Jarl”, and Jarl are one class of people of the Vaner who go out, the highest class of the Van people.

12 - K means “Karl”, the second class of people

13 - L means “Lag”, law, logic, “lucky” in Van language

14 - M means “Mane”, the “Moon”

15 - N means “Nordstjierna”, the “North Star”, the “Pole Star”, and N also stands for “Knowledge” because the sound “knowledge” starts with “N” “knoll” and “edge”, so when you take the “edge” on one “knoll”, on one ring, you open it up and it starts to happen all kind of things, “knowledge”! you can write “knowledge” or whatever you write there but the sound “knowledge” starts with N.

16 - O means “Oden”, ring.

17 - P means “Pale”, the pole, north pole, south pole.

18 - Q means “Quadrat”, and Quadrat is the symbol for mathematics, when you have Oden, one ring, and you put pole in the center, you get two dimensional Q. When you put the whole thing in sunlight you see that the shadow will create Q, so Oden and the pole create Q, the symbol for mathematics.

19 - R means “Ra” and Ra means the first s(u)n? of Bock, Ra means also moon.

20 - S means “Solen” and Solen means the sun, “So” means mouth and “len” means smile, so Solen means smiling mouth. Big magic on the planet, every child who is making a sun is drawing it with a smiling mouth.

21 - T means Thor, the art, the art friend, and Thor´s hammer.

22 - U means ursprung, the horse shoe, Ursprung meaning origin and everything is coming out of one Ursprung.

23 - V means Vaner, and Vaner are the people who live outside of Odenma, who speak Van language which is based on the twenty nine sounds of Rot, so we start the alphabet with A (Aser) and we finish with V (Vaner) and in between is “I”, VIA .

VIABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVIABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVIA... so they go around.

Outside of this ring are six more sounds:

24 X "Eks"

25 Y "Yggdrasill"

26 Z "Zeta"

27 Ö "Ö"

28 Ä "E"

29 Ȧ "O"

(27, 28, and 29 are probably wrong...)

Edited October 28, 2013 by Mario Dantas

[The Puzzler]

I dunno on Aldland, it seems fairly clear that Findas birthland is named Aldland. Nothing in the whole thing really can assume that it's anywhere else as far as I can see, too late for me on that one.

Note i is first letter - the dot/prick of the i in Hebrew is called yod - this to me also seems a likely connection to od - the beginning point so to speak, which could take you, in that language, to a point of creation.

I could stay here all night but I must get some sleep, night all.

[Ott]

I would like to discuss a more fundamental question.

Why did no promotor of the hoax-theory ever seriously publish about the question why OLB can not be authentic? Since BV's flimsy report (1876), they have all assumed that OLB is self-evidently fake.

Here is a list of some of the most significant publications, with my summaries:

1876, J. Beckering Vinckers: De Onechtheid van het Oera Linda-Bôk, aangetoond uit de wartaal waarin het is geschreven ("the inauthenticity of the OLB, proven by the gibberish in which it was written")

Summary: It must be fake, while the language is gibberish

Quote: "Het doel dat ik mij voorstelde is bereikt; ik heb de taal van het Oera-Linda-Boek belagchelijk willen maken. Dit is voor 't oogenblik voldoende." (I have reached my goal; I aimed at ridiculing the language of the OLB. This satisfies for now.)

1877, J. Beckering Vinckers: Wie heeft het Oera-Linda-Boek geschreven? ("who wrote the OLB?")

Summary: Assuming it is fake, Over de Linden must have made it

1927, M. de Jong: Het Geheim van het Oera-Linda-Boek ("the secret of the OLB")

Summary: Assuming it is fake, Verwijs must have made it

(Over de Linden had not lied, but had bought the manuscript and created his own reality about it, which he believed - in other words he was delusional)

1928, P. Boeles: De auteur van het Oera-Linda-Boek ("the author of the OLB")

Summary: Assuming it is fake, Over de Linden must have made it

(and Verwijs can not have been involved)

1978, G. van der Meij: Kanttekeningen bij het Oera Linda Boek - Een afspiegeling van de taalgeleerdheid, denkbeelden en schrijfstijl van dr. J.H. Halbertsma, doopsgezind predikant te Deventer. ("Notes on the OLB - a reflection of the linguistic erudition, ideas and writing style of baptist vicar dr. Halbertsma")

Summary: Assuming it is fake, Halbertsma must have made it

2004, G. Jensma: De Gemaskerde God - François Haverschmidt en het Oera Linda-boek

Summary: Assuming it is fake, Haverschmidt must have made it

(in a conspiracy with Verwijs and Over de Linden)

~

Beckering (who was an insignificant highschool teacher English and an utter amateur compared to dr. Ottema) in his publication of 1876 was the only to 'prove' the inauthenticity, and he did so by claiming that the language was gibberish. He admitted that his aim beforehand had been to ridicule OLB's language. How scientific is that?

This thread (following the previous one) has given abundant proof that the language is NOT gibberish. It can be understood and studied like any real language. The claims that the language would be too modern have been systematically refuted as well. It is just different from what some people would have expected. No hard evidence of inauthenticity.

All of the above listed theories about who might have made it, start with the assumption that it is fake.

This is like trying to identify a murderer, when the deceased might have died a natural death.

Edited October 28, 2013 by gestur

[Knul]

The wiki site you linked to has genealogies, but not a year for the flood.

I found on wiki/Chronology_of_the_Bible:

Year of the Flood

Masoretic: 1656 AM (anno mundi)

Alexandrinus: 2262 AM

Vaticanus: 2242 AM

Samaritan: 1307 AM

And on wiki/Anno_Mundi: (different dates, a.o.)

Earliest Christian chronology: 5529 BC

Roman tradition: ca. 5200 BC

Bede: 3952 BC

So which one is it?

I can't find the date from the Statenbijbel. Do you have a source for that?

Again, how do you know?

1 Dit is het boek van Adams geslacht. Ten dage als God den mens schiep, maakte Hij hem naar de gelijkenis Gods.

2 Man en vrouw schiep Hij hen, en zegende ze, en noemde hun naam Mens, ten dage als zij geschapen werden.

3 En Adam leefde honderd en dertig jaren, en gewon een zoon naar zijn gelijkenis, naar zijn evenbeeld, en noemde zijn naam Seth.

4 En Adams dagen, nadat hij Seth gewonnen had, zijn geweest achthonderd jaren; en hij gewon zonen en dochteren.

5 Zo waren al de dagen van Adam, die hij leefde, negenhonderd jaren, en dertig jaren; en hij stierf.

6 En Seth leefde honderd en vijf jaren, en hij gewon Enos.

7 En Seth leefde, nadat hij Enos gewonnen had, achthonderd en zeven jaren; en hij gewon zonen en dochteren.

8 Zo waren al de dagen van Seth negenhonderd en twaalf jaren; en hij stierf.

9 En Enos leefde negentig jaren, en hij gewon Kenan.

10 En Enos leefde, nadat hij Kenan gewonnen had, achthonderd en vijftien jaren; en hij gewon zonen en dochteren.

11 Zo waren al de dagen van Enos negenhonderd en vijf jaren; en hij stierf.

12 En Kenan leefde zeventig jaren, en hij gewon Mahalal-el.

13 En Kenan leefde, nadat hij Mahalal-el gewonnen had, achthonderd en veertig jaren; en hij gewon zonen en dochteren.

14 Zo waren al de dagen van Kenan negenhonderd en tien jaren; en hij stierf.

15 En Mahalal-el leefde vijf en zestig jaren, en hij gewon Jered.

16 En Mahalal-el leefde, nadat hij Jered gewonnen had, achthonderd en dertig jaren; en hij gewon zonen en dochteren.

17 Zo waren al de dagen van Mahalal-el achthonderd vijf en negentig jaren; en hij stierf.

18 En Jered leefde honderd twee en zestig jaren, en hij gewon Henoch.

19 En Jered leefde, nadat hij Henoch gewonnen had, achthonderd jaren; en hij gewon zonen en dochteren.

20 Zo waren al de dagen van Jered negenhonderd twee en zestig jaren; en hij stierf.

21 En Henoch leefde vijf en zestig jaren, en hij gewon Methusalach.

22 En Henoch wandelde met God, nadat hij Methusalach gewonnen had, driehonderd jaren; en hij gewon zonen en dochteren.

23 Zo waren al de dagen van Henoch driehonderd vijf en zestig jaren.

24 Henoch dan wandelde met God; en hij was niet meer; want God nam hem weg.

25 En Methusalach leefde honderd zeven en tachtig jaren, en hij gewon Lamech.

26 En Methusalach leefde, nadat hij Lamech gewonnen had, zevenhonderd twee en tachtig jaren; en hij gewon zonen en dochteren.

27 Zo waren al de dagen van Methusalach negenhonderd negen en zestig jaren; en hij stierf.

28 En Lamech leefde honderd twee en tachtig jaren, en hij gewon een zoon.

29 En hij noemde zijn naam Noach, zeggende: Deze zal ons troosten over ons werk, en over de smart onzer handen, vanwege het aardrijk, dat de HEERE vervloekt heeft!

30 En Lamech leefde, nadat hij Noach gewonnen had, vijfhonderd vijf en negentig jaren; en hij gewon zonen en dochteren.

31 Zo waren al de dagen van Lamech zevenhonderd zeven en zeventig jaren; en hij stierf.

32 En Noach was vijfhonderd jaren oud; en Noach gewon Sem, Cham en Jafeth.

[Knul]

I would like to discuss a more fundamental question.

Even Cornelis over de Linden started to disbelieve the authenticity of the OLB but was then convinced by Ottema that the OLB was authentic. It may well be, that Ottema at the end found that he was wrong and therefore committed suicide. In fact the whole OLB does not indicate any sign of authenticity. On the contrary, everything indicates that it is a mid 19th c. literary product, in my view written 1836-1845 by Dr. J.H. Halbertsma (text) and adapted by E. Stadermann (translation and transcription), who was a friend of the owner Cornelis over de Linden. In my view the present manuscript was a printer's concept text for publication.

[Abramelin]

It is just like our Dutch letter "ij"; some consider it as one letter (like the greek y), others as i+j.

They used the double U/V as ONE letter around the Yule wheel.

When you read the OLB, you will see that the double V was used, but also the letter W.

That happened around the10-12th century AD, not 600 BC.

If you have proof of the contrary, pleas post it.

[Abramelin]

The Bible gives the genealogy and years. s. http://en.wikipedia....ee_of_the_Bible .

Anyway the Frisian Almanak is based on the Bible (Statenbijbel), not on the OLB or any Frisian tradition, not even on oral tradition.

What you should do is give us a link to a site that calculates the date of the Flood according to the Frisian historians/bible-thumpers.

Puzz and I have tried our best - we both went as far as astrology and astronomy, lol - , but none of you onlookers added anything relevant. Puzz added a relevant source, and so did I.

But where the hell did that date- 2194 BCE- come from?

And we want calculations, not just the mentioning of some Frisian Almanac.

=

Knul, Wiki does NOT explain the 2194 BCE date.

So why do you post it?

.

Edited October 28, 2013 by Abramelin

[Abramelin]

Wordfk will not get us anywhere,

We need real physical, archeological proof of this socalled ancient European civilization of before 2000 BCE.

Maybe by some other ancient document written in OLB script, or the remnants of a Fryan citadel...

But I will bet nothing like that will ever show up. Archeologists have discovered many things much older than anything Fryan, things made of wood or stone, but never anything resembling something from the OLB.

And why not? Because it is a hoax, a forgery, a fantasy, that's why.

.

Edited October 28, 2013 by Abramelin

[Knul]

What you should do is give us a link to a site that calculates the date of the Flood according to the Frisian historians/bible-thumpers.

Puzz and I have tried our best - we both went as far as astrology and astronomy, lol - , but none of you onlookers added anything relevant. Puzz added a relevant source, and so did I.

But where the hell did that date- 2194 BCE- come from?

And we want calculations, not just the mentioning of some Frisian Almanac.

=

Knul, Wiki does NOT explain the 2194 BCE date.

So why do you post it?

.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anno_Mundi

[The Puzzler]

Wordfk will not get us anywhere,

Does that make me a wordfk wit?

On a more serious note, I hope you fellas are all OK with the wild weather hitting Northern Europe including the Netherlands today.

[Knul]

Does that make me a wordfk wit?

On a more serious note, I hope you fellas are all OK with the wild weather hitting Northern Europe including the Netherlands today.

It's nothing compared to the disaster described in the OLB.

[The Puzzler]

It's nothing compared to the disaster described in the OLB.

Fair enough.

[NO-ID-EA]

I lost the back garden gate , and two slate tiles off the roof , but slept through it all ! . ..... but thks for asking Puz

[Ott]

1 Dit is het boek van Adams geslacht...

So how does all that add up to the flood year as used in the Frisian Almanak and the OLB?

[Ott]

Even Cornelis over de Linden started to disbelieve the authenticity of the OLB but was then convinced by Ottema that the OLB was authentic.

What is your source for this?

It may well be, that Ottema at the end found that he was wrong and therefore committed suicide.

It may also be, that Ottema was in fact murdered.

How easy would it have been to hang an old hermit and make it look like suicide?

I never read of any suidide note or witness who heard him admit this assumed insight.

In fact the whole OLB does not indicate any sign of authenticity.

Does it indicate clear signs of inauthenticity?

Think about this analogy:

A dead man is found and two medical doctors arrive.

The question is: Is this man murdered or did he die a natural death?

One doctor says: "I see nothing that indicates murder and conclude natural death."

The other says: "I see nothing that indicates a natural death and conclude murder."

Now, does it make sense to assume the man was murdered and try to find a suspect?

Which of the two doctors must come forward with evidence to support his conclusion?

On the contrary, everything indicates that it is a mid 19th c. literary product, in my view written 1836-1845 by Dr. J.H. Halbertsma (text) and adapted by E. Stadermann (translation and transcription), who was a friend of the owner Cornelis over de Linden. In my view the present manuscript was a printer's concept text for publication.

"everything indicates"

You have given some examples of what you see as indications and I have always refuted them.

If it is really that obvious, it should be easy to give convincing examples.

"Dr. J.H. Halbertsma"

If he wrote it, he must have done a hell of a lot of research, and used as many sources. He also must have done this in utter secret, while no one has ever come forward, confirming that he had worked on it. I have posted a strong argument against the Halbertsma thesis earlier (27 oct. 2011):

Halbertsma had something with Hindeloopen, he considered its culture as most traditionally Frisian.

He was fascinated with the long hair-braids and he collected garments and house-goods, which he donated later to the first Frisian museum.

Knul and Abe, you believe that Halbertsma was the creative genius behind the OLB (while some others changed and added things later).

How do you explain the fact that OLB contains loads of trivia, but says NOTHING about Hindeloopen and the hair-braids? See fragments below.

"The braiding of the hair in Hindeloopen, according to J.H. Halbertsma a tradition that was already described by Roman writer Tacitus, and that is characteristic for the free Frisians.

[...]

In two rooms [of the Palace of Justice in Leeuwarden] the Antiquarian Cabinet of Friesland was situated... [...]

In there the traditional garments from Hindeloopen were kept, that honorary member dr. Joost Hiddes Halbertsma (1789-1869), the famous Frisian linguist and literary man, had collected and donated to the Cabinet. [...]

Collecting traditional garments was still an unknown phenomenon in the rest of the Netherlands.

Halbertsma was intrigued by the culture of Hindeloopen. [...] His first notes date from 1820. [...]

The casques from Hindeloopen [...] were so capacious, that long braids could be rolled and placed under them, so there was no need to cut the hair. Halbertsma explained: "Because of those long braids the Frisian women were not just the women of a free people, but of the most distinguished women of the Germanic races; this in contrast to the unfree, who were forced by the old Germans to wear their hair short." With this Halbertsma made a direct connection between the Frisian popular culture and the description of habits of the old Germans by Roman writers. [...]

The Frisian Cabinet received many objects from folks-culture as a gift from Halbertsma, like garments and household goods, mostly from Hindeloopen."

These were fragments of:

The Frisian Society as frontrunner in museological understanding - 19th Century initiatives to musealization of folks-culture in Friesland

by Ad de Jong (2002)

Original title and fragments:

Het Fries Genootschap als koploper in museaal besef - Negentiende eeuwse initiatieven tot musealisering van de volkscultuur in Friesland

"Het vlechten van het haar in Hindeloopen, volgens J.H. Halbertsma een traditie die al door de Romeinse schrijver Tacitus beschreven is en kenmerkend is voor de vrije Friezen.

[...]

In twee lokalen [van het Paleis van Justitie te Leeuwarden] bevond zich het Antiquarisch Kabinet van Friesland... [...]

Daarin waren de Hindelooper kledingstukken opgeborgen, die het erelid dr. Joost Hiddes Halbertsma (1789-1869), de beroemde Friese taal- en letterkundige, had verzameld en geschonken aan het Kabinet. [...]

Het verzamelen van klederdrachten was toen in de rest van Nederland een nog onbekend verschijnsel.

Halbertsma werd [...] geïntrigeerd door de Hindelooper cultuur. [...] Zijn eerste aantekeningen dateren zelfs van 1820. [...]

De Hindelooper kappen [...] waren zo ruim, dat daaronder lange vlechten kunnen worden opgerold, zodat het haar niet kort geknipt hoefde te worden. Halbertsma gaf daarbij de volgende toelichting: ‘Door die lange vlechten plaatsten de Friezinnen zich niet slechts onder de vrouwen van een vrij volk, maar onder de aanzienlijkste vrouwen der Germaansche rassen’; dit in tegenstelling tot de onvrijen, die bij de oude Germanen verplicht waren kort haar te dragen’. Halbertsma legde hier een direct verband tussen de Friese volkscultuur en de beschrijving van de gewoonten bij de oude Germanen van de hand van Romeinse schrijvers. [...]

Het Fries Kabinet [kreeg] van Halbertsma een groot aantal objecten uit de volkscultuur ten geschenke zoals kleding en huisraad, merendeels afkomstig uit Hindeloopen."

source: http://www.friesgeno...elen/dejong.htm

"E. Stadermann"

If Stadermann translated it in (a reconstruction of) Oldfrisian that fooled specialists like Ottema and De Haan Hettema, he must have been a genius. Where and how did he study to be able to do this? Why was no other trace of his talent found anywhere? He could have become very famous with it.

"the present manuscript was a printer's concept text for publication"

Then why was it made to convincingly look medieval?

Why has many years of research on the paper still not revealed how the paper was made to look that old?

Edited October 29, 2013 by gestur

[Ott]

When you read the OLB, you will see that the double V was used, but also the letter W.

Just like OLB has much spelling variety, there is also variety in the use of W: sometimes as one letter (e.g. around that wheel), sometimes as clearly seperate V's (and why it does not show up in the alfabet sheet).

I don't see the significance of this.

Do you think it somehow supports your claim of OLB being a hoax?

Edited October 29, 2013 by gestur

[Ott]

Wordfk will not get us anywhere

It has already gotten us to the conclusion, that Beckering Vinckers was wrong, when he claimed to have proven that OLB must be inauthentic, because its language would be gibberish ("wartaal'). It has become obvious, that the language is NOT gibberish.

Although BV's 'proof' was invalid, and his publication full of falacies, it has since been assumed (in public opinion), that his general conclusion (OLB is fake) was right, and that no further investigation was needed.

A study of the language gets us to the conclusion, that further investigation into OLB's authenticity is needed.

Edited October 29, 2013 by gestur