/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11606782
pt2
Runes he uses isn't original, but some pulling in upon english alphabet (you can see it among other things by rune ᚲ repeating three times (c k q)
He could be right that (he quotes here someone else) english language being somewhat authentic (after all it's name is close to angelic (engels is both english and angels in Dutch, actually I'm lying, they have another suffix for plural form, and angels is engelen) but it's one of the less based elements of my theory, yet one of the most based parts of his rant.
Then he tells that etymology is the universal language, which is very smart. He also seems to be a sincere guy, so I could be the missing links between academic science and the freaks like him, who actually also collect enormous ammount of obscure information on this little-studied subject, they only lack some self-irony and healthy scepticism to distinguish righteous knowledge from ridiculous fabrications (but who of us is not guilty, we all want it all and right now)
He also pronounces etymology as if it's from atom, very interesting interpretation. It's at least poetic, or maybe even accurate, I cannot tell for sure yet.
8 minutes deeper into his lecture, and I got irritated by his not exactly scientific approach, but when he mentions that rune=ram it made me go hm... because golden fleece is zlato runo, which could explain argonauts' trip full of dangers for some fur with golden pieces, it didn't make much sense, but if it was some furry parchment, it makes perfect sense: it was on a tree, protected by some mighty snake, which correlated norse mythology of tree of life where probably Odin hanged for three days when he conceived them. Also the trip took place after LinearB was lost and Alphabet wasn't acquired yet(and this interpretation btfo the phoenician origin)
And when he began saying lamb is the light because lamb is the lamp - I got overirritated and stopped at around 10:00 so I will maybe return to his babble later. don't disconnect.