It is volume 7 ( 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 )

Note Knowed Knot

I'm going to spiral around these topics until I arrive to my destination or wherever it leads me.



A complete new source of inquiry:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talking_drum
and the more informative piece in russian: https://theoryandpractice.ru/posts/8179-info100
(google's translator translates it better and better, you should be able to use it to read russian)
It tells of african telegraph-like communication with the help of drums and ancient greeks' way of using signal fires to transmit messages (thus beacons could be something more than what we thought)

What could be the very origin of drum-communication? Probably to help hunters to find way home. And then they would recognize that something's happening if the drum beat came uneven. and now they say that whole complicated phrases are communicated in just the drum beat. Brian Eno said that afican music in the sense of rhythm went much further than european ever was. Europeans have every reason to be proud, but sometimes we're too proud to the level of some ignorant arrogance.
Or could those drum beats begin as a scaring technique when they needed to scare the predators away? Probably it was the beginning: a man hits the water with a stick, another man asks him wtf he was doing, scaring the crocodiles away was the response, but there's no crocodiles for miles around. see, it's working.

speech, drums, horns, fires, maybe lyres were bows and.. bows were arrows.

bow is дуга as if above, rain..bow!

if bow is arrow then (a = b ? R = B?) then what was the instrument? the catgut?!

arrow as a bow, you can throw it, you can shoot it, you can use it as a pike. pick,
pike is the metal part of the arrow (among other things: spear, luce (щука (щ ~ п?)), thorn, pitchfork, застава взымающая подорожный сбор)
pick is many verbs, probably related to pike, and among them is перебирать струны

(щ ~ п?)
ц ~ r (both could be c & г)
not ц! ч ~ r! (in cursive)

(both could be c = г)

bow is лук, so they didn't play cords with the arrow, but with the bow, the horse hair bowing a stick is the bow, because it's in the form of a bow. and струной could be the road between those ends, because it's believed that a potful of gold is at the end of it, but it was a lie, of course, and it stuck because nobody could disprove it (was there a lack of water or what? whatever)
Drum were the shields? and some mighty sticks served as the bangers?

So are girls bows and arrows and guys are shields and swords?
shieled (защитил?)
swored(рвал? материл? драл?)
schiele is squint in german which makes me believe that shields were the mirrors and thus girls could use it if their simbol is actually a person with a mirror, as if + is mirror, becuse it's lines are in focus (не совпадают, но пересекаются (в точке фокуса? they're all at the surface of the mirror, because it's not lense. not lance? lance could be some magic stick, so one side of it would be a spear, the other could be some magic stone. glass balls can burn fire!!! I told you that they were used as lenses to read, but fire, of course!!!

lance from the one side, lense from the other one? a & i as two forms of syllable, only two position in the consonants: palatalized and not.
and labialization doesn't usually matter in consonants, but it can influence the vowels.

As if palatalization is from vowel i, and labialization is from consonant v

I & V the first in roman (numerals)

labialized or nasalized? m is pronounced over nose.
n is also, even though it's managed not to be labial.
nevertheless, m & n are cognates, and n is probably new.
as abc it was imk I MK it is crazy.
where's l? I is l. K ~ N? ᚴ ~ ᚿ (because o is ᚮ in unicode and upwards in Bornholm)
are k & n come out of ᛜ?



𐰖𐰗 are both [j]
𐰗 is in Yenisei
𐰖 is in Orkhon

𐰶𐰷 are their q
𐰷 is in Yenisei
𐰶 is in Orkhon

If 𐰗 relates to ᛜ I dunno, but 𐰶 does both look and sound like ᚲ
(if it's truly etymology or merely mnemonics I dunno as well)



> As if palatalization is from vowel i, and labialization is from consonant v
nasalization (the same as labialization) turns into йотирование in russian: я & ю are believed to be юсы (according to Даль, носы)
So these deviations are in a sense both i's: palatalization is i after the letter, labialization is paradoxically also i but before the letter. as if и[i] is u (look the same in cursive)
i jklmnopq r
у фхц ч
u vwx y.. ?
nah..

у ф   х цч шщ
u vw x  y    z
шщ s z
z is zed zd st (t short s aor s long t? ת is reported to sound as θ which make it reflect θ)

ε ζ η θ
and that demands θ to take the place of ζ so ζ can be final as z is as З is in ёжз η is ᚼ is Жж



As I said before, fuck academia.
Museion forever!
The british museum responded to my message with an offer to use their collection to further my research: https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection
And dice, die, palamedes, these search didn't show me anything I didn't know before,
Abecedaria also, but abecedarium returned this image:




























it went structurally for the first half:
Α Β Γ Δ
Ε Ζ Η Θ
Ι Κ Λ Μ...
and then, where M was out of place it's as if it's broken by the additional Ν Ξ which could be nix.
Ο Π Ρ Σ Τ
Υ Φ Χ Ψ Ω
are five letters per a line, not four, and these added complexities make this structure not exactly evident.




Was looking for "abecedary ostracon" and the first good find is this:

I hope sometimes people are not so poor that they place their pdfs behind the paywall or at least I am reich and subscribe to all the journals just for the hell of it. but fuck it, I don't do it by ideological reasons.

That ostracon uses a good method to conserving the information: they start with the abecedary so those who use some other font will be also able to read.

It's even good that I don't see the rest of it, so I can make my own transliteration just to practice
(or you may)


and another one:
:
Inscription on the 'Izbet Sartah ostracon represents the earliest known non-cuneiform abecedary. The ostracon is discovered in 1976 in 'Izbet Sartah in Israel, and it is dated to the 12th or the early 11th century BC.

The inscription is written by an unskilled scribe, probably a student, and it consists of four lines of writing exercises, followed by the 22 letters of the Ancient Hebrew alphabet in the fifth line.




The following table is stumbled upon during that ostracon abecedaria quest, but it's something different, it compares phoenician to hieratic which is awesome if true






another piece of that Budge-Brugsch-Rouge egyptology abecedaries was shown to me by some Maxim Makarov: it's from a book by Budge:


I just noticed that since I learned that wehn frsit and lsat ltteers are the smae, you can raed txets dritotsed lkie tihs, I bgaen mkiang mtasieks lkie tihs, so beware of them and this way of writing, this bug didn't happen to me until I dared to write like this somewhere before in this draftflow.

I also noticed that
these three are different: it's Birch instead of Brugsch this time. I wonder if Birch is just another way to transliterate the same name, and either way why are their names so much alike!


In my notebooks I discover how lines of the alphabet could be aranged into syllabary sets of
voiced-plosive
voiced-glides
sonors (whatever they are)
voiceless-plosive
voiceless-glides

and then I go further to the 4*4 table with no sonors, but some of them appear other spots or are they?
Check the first knitten (нить [nitt] is thread in russian) notebook when it's scanned (see further for it or the manuscript folder past #50 (it may be closer to #100 because tens of unscanned notebooks predate it)



Why do they keep on pushing "fewer" instead of less?
The form "fewer" is almost never use, thus it's whether obsolete or completely made up by academia: "fewer" sounds especially retarded when you count in millions.
(the tread where I posted it was immediately deleted, but 4plebs remembers)




a drop into that bucket with swasticas and triple yin-yangs:



notice that it's both directions at the same time depending ot nhe way wou see it.




sincerely, sensibly, in these two words first parts could be cognates to sign, but to tell it for sure we need some ai to feed all these pairs and other things. What is your aspirations in life? You can achieve anything in just 10 years, so a person (and perdaughter) can achieve several incredible goals during their lifetime. Are you into ai or biology or programming or music or where would you be?

caught got, this kind of cognates, vocal cognates, I wonder if all vowel-cognates synonymous, because vowels are vocales in spanish. пора давай пока were the first ones, and they can be cognates, пока is bye, and пора is "it's time" and давай say for bye. So this mental experiment could set the borders of the vocalization liberties, and if fills like weak-strong stressed-unstressed beats, like in heart. a steady bye-bye with the second bye stressed. I heard of a guy who claims that intonations are the key to understand any language, I didn't take him seriously, but maybe he discovered some animal level of understanding the language. I will check him.



the power of ultimate honesty yet, try it accurately, recognize its limits: to tell truth to enemies can be dangerous, first you have to realize what is the truth in the world where those people can be your friends, but this is so raw for me too, I'm a theorist, I can only guess where the implementations of these ideas can lead.




It's hard for me to look into my own drafts because they are full of obsolete ideas which were rejected or forgotten, but those drafts still contain their gems demanding some further.. cognitions?
(I don't even know what exactly they're demanding. Being archived and never touched maybe?)

It is just wrong. It's good I explored the possible arrangements, but why is it even here?
Was I surprised by three-mother-ness of ems or dollarness of dlr and chequeness of ckq?
Now this is how apophenias work. It could be anything, and thus it's nothing.

Those three columns from a to t are three by six, and I probably didn't think about it then,
and h among vowels also makes sense which I wouldn't probably see back then,
even though I studied japanese already.
d reflects r as in the k-symmetry, which I already knew then,
f reflects t which is all very interesting, but I don't think this representaion goes far,
but it does reflect the idea of g being a form of c and h coming the latest.
Was g the original as in original g? Because runic alphabet doesn't distinguish ᚦ into c and d.
and j & h meet in ᚼ which just as j can sound as h in one context and as short i in the other,
so h can sound as h and yet in greek it's i the way it was transmitted into russian,
unless they took it directly from ugaritic 𐎊 or egyptian 𓇌(𓏭)
I don't like how m stands out of labials, but it's nothing new.
I especially don't like how f stands out of that column, but that could be the reason behind greek θ.
Either way what's about E? Is it why it's consonantalized in arabic?
In greek z is the final of the first column, which demands me to ponder on it in greek:

Α Β Γ Δ Ε Ζ
Η Θ Ι Κ Λ Μ Ν Ξ
Ο Π Ρ Σ Τ Υ Φ Χ Ψ Ω

Α Β Γ Δ Ε Ζ
Η Θ Ι Κ
Λ Μ Ν Ξ
Ο Π Ρ Σ Τ
Υ Φ Χ Ψ Ω

Α Β Γ Δ
Ε Ζ
Η Θ Ι Κ
Λ Μ Ν Ξ
Ο Π Ρ Σ Τ
Υ Φ Χ Ψ
Ω

I dunno, it doesn't seem to lead anywhere, the first case of 6 8 10 was the most interesting, even though it also didn't have much of symmetry between it's neighbours. and even those other three wouldn't help.
See, returning to the old notebooks is a waste of time. I was so worried about my drafts (and I probably should, but let some other people or machines look into that whatever.




About those intonations, melodic patterns as information:
покА, давАй, пиздУй, летИ, bye-bYe, /
but
остАнься, stay hEar, ^
as if / is waving goodbye, and ^ is waving welcome.
отстАнь, but остАнься
as if the final syllable is not sya, but not.
Pronouns are often antonimous towards itself (in different languages)
Can yes/no go like that? can sya be no event though si is yeah?
like what's the difference between hai & nai in japanese?
is it the same letter but h is upwards, and μ is down?
but "how do you do" has the same melody as "нахуй иди" or do those i & u make all the difference?
I think that work is done, so why should I wånder? To make an independent research to compare afterwards? I doubt this flow delivers me to the my goal in in all: to recognize all the morphemes.
Let's begin with building a map of only pronouns, it's a simpler task and those alone could connect to tribes names and the gods they worshiped. Read the first knitten notebook for more detail. or that's it.
how do you do is more like хавай еду



This world is enough
(that was an automatic writing, the one french modernists promoted over a century ago)
((hopefully thinking about how it's all going to be just alright (with the capsule and such)))




Some more of ogham:

not the best example to learn ogham by, but it definitely contains some info, here's the clearer one:

I only wanted to try to read the ligatures of the following image, but what use, I don't speak Gaelic.

I don't even know if that's the same writing system. If it's a writing system.



An update on Great Parma:
(archived)
I fancy thinking that what I write in vol.1 influenced that guy, because I spoke about it elsewhere anonymously. Either way he did some great work, showing historic pages I never had an idea about. Bravo. but nevertheless freaky, so be aware and trust nothing, we all make mistakes. I go freakier..

(clickable)

Though I think this very script has nothing to do with the permian, that video mentions some other accounts of non-kirillic writing systems used in moscovy. нас заковали москали. кали цари k-ings z-s.
z-r zar kniazer khazar? knyaZ Znatt (weed suddenly hit me high, I guess, reading it later)
г-дь г-дин господин господень божий человек божий народ боярин богач богатырь богатырень
боится трясётся бьёт тряплет трясёт просит prays бьётся// цwhat do

That piece of the bell is from the russian public opposition to official academia, it's here not because I immediately see something in it, but because it was in a film about anbur my friend and colleague who helped me with .odo have shown me, and I also want to collect all the writing systems, even invented writing systems deserve being preserved for history as clouds around tree of writing systems, simultaneous with the language tree. now back to the black text: only why didn't they teach us that? why would they drive us crazy? also nationalism and separatism are felonies in putin's russia, pr, P as rusia's torch at olimpics:

For russians it's Р in Россия, for foreigners it's P in Putin, so I may only hope that next will be navalny because n is п in путин (doubtful foreigner, see the cursive forms) that sosni zainцу's another story.
Even though I recognize another jew in navalny, they play us like children, but their games brought me the understanding of some bond between several letters:
n-п-p-р-r-г-g-д-d-D-and back to ᚦ and р and p
g-д - see russian cursive to understand (same as with m-т further on)

let's find the other raws like that to see if this game even plays:
b-B-В-v-u-и-И-Н-h-n-ν

b&d are supposed to be the opposites, but they meet at n, but they also meet in roman cursive, where they both look in he d-side, only Б (there flipped to the left) has a longis-kind just as ᛒ is double ᚦ.

M-m-т-T the weirdest yet thoroughly separated from BD, so that is how it is? Bd and mT
That is ultra funny, because they look like Majuscule and minuscule forms of Bb and Tт
Oh wow, no need to see cursive tables, т is officially the italic form of т.


little form of B could be farting sound or was В [v] as that russian letter is, and B [b] is its english form.
but then it doesn't explain how d is a small B other than ᚦ is a half of ᛒ
Was it semantic notation instead of phonetic one? Two lips, but only one tongue.
Tт contradicts Пп a little bit, because in cursive standart (устоявшееся искусство? fole etymology)
see again:

it's as if ПТ challenge the order of MN, as if П is M and thus n is m and N... error, error, building of a sand, guessing too far, bridge doesn't want to appear, or I simply panicked, but it's something to ponder on that's for sure, only if this cursive isn't cursed, because it delivers some mindfucks, like why д looks like g? and why п lookls like english n, and especially why т looks like english m now?
I'm not sure I placed these two sides by side, I must be sure I do when I combine it in different books.

According to that right image, ч/ц is like ш/щ, even though the order doesn't support it, compare the majuscule forms, ⰀⰁⰂⰃⰄ of абвгд shows how free russians are about hight of such elements: в & д oppose eachother completely in the other font of theirs, where bubbles on them are all like the last one.

How reliable a source the russian alphabet? al russian regimes were rather ominous, so ominous that the current cleptocracy seems as one of the best ones, so shitty they govern us here. So wasn't russian writing mutilated to fuck us up especially: like russian cursive fucks us up, why would Д & д look differently in cursive, and they both look differently, but especially д (that's italic д, but it goes g way too, which is especially f-ed-up, but probably refers to ᚦ)

Back to that bell. Not that it has anything to do to my research, but it's a language thing, and as in the television manner when they feed the viewers some based stuff and then add some atrocious bs, I feel it to be my duty to take a good care of that piece I never even knew about. As I said, that misterious script isn't permian, but what is it, Here let me link a good article about it: https://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/ruwiki/505332 (mirror)
and a simple bilingua

(it's like six different cyphres one after another, check the link above to see if it's okay. there they admit, that some mistakes are made, and that mistakes are considred by that freaky opposition to be evidence of the translation being false, but they could be explained by the artists not knowing that script (as it used to happen with chinese manuals in russian before the internet got better) and the tzar himself, who probably inspected the forms before the cast could be unable to read them without the tables of his)

I took that episode close to heart, because I saw one of my discoveries used by somebody else (and I cannot patent history or to let other people use it, but I told myself that they will attach to it shitload of their own shit, and those this bell thing is an interesting curiousity, it is probably work of art of the tzar of the occupiers, it has probably has nothing to do to writings of the conquered nations, it's just some high-ranking retard having fun. I refuse to keep on digging into that episode for now, I only keep it here because of that n-п-p-why doesn't that p go more г-like or rather г-like (that first one is just in italic)
but to my surprise that г would look like what I was looking for if you placed it instead of ɔ in p.
yeah, because of that being stuck in this part, and it's also freaky in its way, maybe even freakier
Бd and ПMт is a great breakthrough, so why worry if some people spread my thought the way they can, it still get out there, I can catch it later, I also can prove that I was first (if Fomenko didn't say it first. I contacted both him and Nosovsky, because I referred to them and not only in the freaks.html, so they could take it from that first volume (but I backed it up just in such a case, or if they spoke about it before me, then I should stick my чсв into my own. I don't really care, but I do. not really. yes. but not too much.

ᛆᛒᚦ would make more sense if d was a consonant form of a (as if they both were da, the one syllable of some prehistoric syllabary) then it would go 1212121212.. and just as ᛒ is double ᚦ, so ᚾ is double ᛆ and thus again e ~ o (because aa is o, but it makes more sense if aa= o, oo=u, but then again ee=i, so does it say that u = i? which is strange, because и [i] in russia.
but why ᚠᚵ follows ᚾ if ᚾ is already doubel? 12122120 it all doesn't look right, and thus my guess is wrong. or was there a letter between ᚾ and ᚠ or I'm making it up? I most probably do. It's time to go work on my capsule, but I'm a commonner and don't just dare or what, please god reprogram me, I must build that immortality capsule, it's not enough to just know the way, one must also walk the walk. Please! Gods! Muses! Superstars! All make me mighty and powerful so I use this might for good.



So, in conclusion of this freaky day, I must say that language enthusiasts who are looking for russian scripts are desperate, because they grasp every straw, but ignore the based glagolythic script, for whether ertza (zyryan, komi, parmic) script is ancient or not, it isn't russian (even though it could be a criminal thing to say, as a free scientist I must.) There were writing systems on the territory of Russia before christians, because it's impossible that they wasn't, because the fashion for national writing systems was universal. Whatever, the possibility maps will be built with some advanced computing powers, I only set the vectors, the fractals will be drawn by the other beings.

Why didn't I dig in into that knitting stuff, I found it and as if left interest to it immediately, and that is how I usually work: I discover something, I let it lay, if it matters I return to it. or am supposed to.

but one final chord:
The city where that bell used to be is called zvenigorod (toll-city) and for whatever reason their emblem is like that, with 88 in the centre of some seamingly meaningless text:

is it also why they call us racia? are they preparing us to be cannon fodder for another rahowa?!!
fodder feeds, huh



So I guess the first incident of somebody using my research (if we call my thoughts on anbur research) was good enough: somebody translated my separatistic tendencies further the knoosphere with a sticker on it: I had some pdf-library mirroring my pdfs and now somebody transmits it further as their own. ir could be some plural suffix like aettir. their = те их? иf ich, whiy the? 
eir ear ух
i ~ и
a ~ у(u)
are all these one letter and only o is double a? a is oi? or si as duh? as is is? a is i? a as ا? 
ו doesn't wan't to stand peacefully with that ا on the same line (try to put a spacebar and ו after that ?)
ו is o and u, thus any vowl could be |
разделитель? не бру, а беру, типа тпру, стой, сними той, buy бери, буй (стопори?) бери? обуй вокруг возьми (кожу вокруг ноги продают?) обувь о- boot, boot is boat? 𓃀-ed or 𓃀-еть. 𓃀-ell? 𓃀-owl? 𓃀-rake? 𓃀-ellow? 𓃀-ong? 𓃀log! 𓃀ox 𓃀ottle 𓃀 значии стоячая, ? ШэI'm so high? , why dare I say? don't get hight until you're adult, I took tit since 16 or 18, and I don't recommend it to anyone who doesn't made his or her serious opinion of what cannabis smokers are in the society and if you want to be like one of them, and depending on your personality you will whether see musicians like me and others or you see them as slobos. maybe my trippies are you most or least favourite parts.
𓃀 shows flat bottom in some eau-ed-el
𓃀 keeps the ox still (standing, st-el)
𓃀 makes your log not laying in your table, but up as on site (not down)
𓃀 is standing (as in thang instead of thing)
𓃀 is standing yellow, as if he pissed himself, that's why yellow is associted with cowards in english
a𓃀ove is showing ab as up?
abnormality is abov normal level anomality, so it's not ab, it's a.
a above
b belov
a obey (не дерись)
b бей
a ata
b baba mama
a ash пламя flame fire F? father?
b meim вода woта WM woman mother?
a d t
bmb



кирилица подделка под глаголицу как иврит поддерлка под санскрит
глаго лица - говорящие образы (конечно же это поэтическое осмысление, не вычитанное)
также и анбур наверняка имеет своё значение, а за ним и целая культура
(но это философское осмысление, тоже не вычитанное)

google translates глаголица like verb (глагол, cлово слогово) word = verb, d = b, do is be and be is do? verb v or b
d was b and b was v? В is V in russia. as if В is also Ⰲ turned 90° just as Б came out of b or Д came out of d - as if russian forms are latin forms tuned 90° clockwise. And thus somehow Ⰲ is an ancient form of V which also looks like Ф and M and UWand so on and מם𐡌 and 𓅓
and that owl makes Ⰲ more ancient form than B
did B form appeared when we began drawing bodies instead of faces.
so glagolitsa are calling faces (see litso in clockwork orange)
and Ⰲ is exactly gragolythic (lythic is stone, and it's as if litso is foundry, founding, and those who called lythic stone were speaking in stone age, and we acquired these types of words like face only when we knew forgery so good we had foundry? But then our language should be developing among vulcanos? or forest is better to experiment with fire? or is ll these etymologies absurd? I do the best I can, I wll sort out them later.

will = in all? вообще?* когда-нибудь, ? сделаЮ futURum but I'm lost again and don't know latin



I tried to find it in a better quality, but only found this:


And I asked myself? Could these secret 15 be those legendary 15, the original canon of the alphabet?
ABCD
EGH
KLN
PST
UW? nah


So that trip was high and low until I went of f the track.


let's conspect the tasty pieces of the trip:
Ⰲ was before B
глаго лица is probably главо лица or гласо лица глотка т, с, в, г
вгст I wonder what it means. гла mattered the same thing and вгст changing changed the meaning.
глава вааббще,
глосо голос с эс ин сэй скажи ска~жи ска-зывай жи ори жжи ори жги оги I dunno, could be.
глото if all гло is head, глв, глава главна в энд н сффиксыс

𓃀 lives in b
a above
b below
if b matters in below, it's 𓃀
a thus is 𓂝
and if it's in above then that ab is up, and shown by the hand up 𓂧aar

𓂝rm
han𓂧
𓃀oot but 𓆑oot
улиточка считалась подошвой? если всё живое на разных уровнях развития (что видно при сравнении человека с обезьяной, то улиточка лишь подошву и ноготок или клювик или череп или панцырь черепахи


Let's use egyptian symbols more and more.
I will when I install some patch or attach or addone or additive to my station so I can type with egyptian b d f g i k m r s t to see where they lead me, eventually writing it all in egyptian letters and watching how the meanings floeat.

leg is 𓃀een [bejn] in dutch (bone is also been, so they saw bones as legs?, plural form is benen)
foot is voet [fut] and poot [pəʊt] which pretty much unifies all the labial (except m)

been en steen is bone and stone, начало и конец, bot is also bone.

Yet in deaf alphabet a is a fist and palm is b (d is also palm, but in the form of closed c (c is a palm showing c with thumb for the bottom end and finures for the top. why finures? gingers, fingers....
d as closed c
b as closed ɔ
and thus c is a for some hebrew alephs remind k?
male and female, yang and yin

But back to the deaf stuff:
I was speaking looking at the end of /deaf.html (which was end then, my now, here it is again)

but there are other sign alphabets:

being completely different system, surprisingly L O and T are the same, and some other letters demonstrate similar meaning (if the mining is in the fingers themselves, compare E, F, M, N, P, S, Z, especially look at how there are two R's in the second one, so these three variants are as if R occupies two fingers, and you can press any of them or both. Why is it here? To make it clear. It makes it more complicated, but it's here to clarify the first of these two: It's as if it counts fingers FGHI from index to pinky, L is similar to G which reminds me a lot, MNO simply draw the letters in air, on both tables so, PQRST counts fingers back from pinty to thumb or rather it's as if it's FGHPQRST, notice how o reminds s as if it's σ (Q could be the nameless finger, but then not to confuse it to R, R doesn't need thumb and Q is modified too to make it clear. Hh & Ы are the other uses of this simbol, as if for Horns and for drawing the letter in the air, like those MNO are. Now I wonder if those 15 letters are 14 falangs and the whole fist for later-induced A?
 

Look what I found: Ivan or Juan or Sven:

probably I can see now why cursive is called that.
I even read around as world, which maybe stopped me from readin that ivan word, still can't read it.
but if' it's let's s... this around, his s and t look very much alike, huh, drawn differently: s in one line, t is in two.



Here's an ironic truth: I learnt scientific method from a protestant pastor: 1 2
observation, hypothesis, experimentation, theory, communication, replication

and now I apply it to my work and I see some irregularities:
I experimented with hypotheses I got during my observations of the language: armenian regained the link to the structure I've onserved when I digged depper in the past (in Mashtots's students memoirs)

So now I must build my theory, but theory began growing further. I had hypothesis that the structure is universal, so I observed (during the "experiments") the other languages and explained all the irregularities (greek myth writes of 2 vowels added to the 5) only M is not explained properly, but what is Ζ and Θ then? ΕΖ/ΗΘ are invariant pair as in OP/QR and in russian after З(Z) goes И(I) as if Z is the final, and I is digits, 1I 2J 3K 4L 5M 6N they're tens, 7O but 8 fits O much more, but in hebrew 1i 2k 3l 4m 5n 6o 7f 8q 9Я
s is sto (hundrend)
я загнался, в иврите 1i 2k 3l 4m 5n 6s 7ayn 8p 9ts  (as if tsadi is z)
100 is q 200r 300s 400t + 5soFits (co Fin's)
q and a are similar in latin, in cursive hebrew it's as if stick around a curve siply stands at the other side, and then yod is that curve? It's observation, but what it's hyposesis is? Hebrew ones tens hundreds somehow reflect each other? Let's see it in others bet, kaf, rush, all are very similar graphicaly, but almost three mothers in phonetic structure, it could be another guess, but a i q don't play this way, unless I recognize some form of p or ф - let's go on with the previous hypothesis
gimel, lamed, shin - gimel and lamed are very close in this work, I observed their similarities many times (mostly graphical, but 2's are also only graphically alike, but what is shin! completely different, but if it was S, lamed is very similar, and s is related to c.
dalet reflects tav I see it clear, the 2nd is M do die tav morte? I didn't expect this company, even though т is russian italic т(t) but now dalet is out of suit, colour, масти.
Did D gave birth to T and Т gave birth to т? В смысле не просто та, но моя, Not only that, but mine.
I-row is full of questioning postfix: did humans learn property when they began to ask questions? Просите и дано будет вам. а не каббалу ли я открываю: каббала как вера что понимая язык можно творить магию (то, что другие считают невозможным)



So let's start that good topic again:
observation, hypothesis, experimentation, theory, communication, replication
Justus didn't explain it, but I can say it myself, that theory is a complex of hypotheses, confirmed by the experiments (by the further observations, observation is always present, or at least in every second step? because hypothesis is made with the observations we already acquired, without looking at the randomness of the rest of the world, or is it just that additional observation, that allows a break-through of a good hypothesis? So observation is surely exist in experimentation, but building of a theory is again the thought process, only it works not with observations, but with hypotheses, observing the hypotheses about the subject of the theory. Communication is observation of that theory by the other people, replication is experiments they make (they observe the language with my theory in mind to see if they can find the contradictions to it)
I knew why I communicated it too early, at the stage of acquiring the hypotheses, before the theory was built. But that mistake lead to something good: now I can show my site to my investors so they see I'm not just some crazy pothead, but that I actually work on a problem or two.
So now I made it a race, I'm a racian, racist, racer, chaser, rats chat rock choke jewels rules)

parallelly to this text go notebooks (second (third of two) knitten notebook tells of !? being ab, yes no, and so on
Those notebooks mostly have observations, but also hypothesis, so I have to feed them all to an ai which would build to me the links between the observations and hypotheses to make me see if it leads to a theory. The larger hypothesis, that all morphemes are universal, will be guaranteed a theory while I have a head large enough to build it, to collect all the possible morphemes in a moment. Most of my observations are comparing different morphemes if they click or not. a net of false (failed by experiment hypotheses should be also built, separately from the main, confirmed ned of observations (see if it connects into a net at all)
A lot of work is to be done. I make it online, which is awesome, I died to see drafts of the guys I read as a teenager, I guess some young blood is lurking around gulping this honey or smoke.






Monk knoW

's (in english, latin, greek) is it the same э'с sit, зад, to shy (shaddow) the euphemisexed ass.
x could be (but that was typo) an unknown letter, как звонкий вдох, если как тот же самый, то это многое объяснит про русов. приты as's но русы как's - and both are probably c, and  could be a luckier, purer form, k could be tabooed for this reason. (I just erased "was" in stead of "could be" because I knew it was not some holy typo, but an error, errors erase. oh! red light! why not arise? errors later arise in the form of a problem. and error A problem B crashing C?

monk know made me read upside down, erase turned in a saje 一 я сначала подумал в саже, а теперь вижу что может и sage 一 I first sought of шалфей, and now I can see there a sage, мудреца. same se as in science and conscience. I scio I know. sc as kn? c as n? g? ᛜ?  Ŋŋ is literally eng, as in english, as if those were two brittish suffeces: ing and ish who could be two mothers? B & T? and vowels are still don't always considered to be letters, but positionally vowels and labials can be together both by their positions in alphabets,  and because linguals (the C's) are twice as much or even bigger if tey unite. I hope there are 13 vowels+labials in english, because it's a 26(-letter) alphsbet (s for a, why? next button) a b e f (h) i (j) (l) m (n) o p u v w y — withouth grey brackets only 12, n~m? or h~n?
but b is closer to d — it's hard to believe b was considered among vowels than among d, they look so alive, but are as different as
as as так как (as is literally kak, both are c, both are que. c срань и caca & ссу waste, shite, w & ш мит эгэйн, э is энглийскиое а.

n is both m and п(p) ᚱ and ᚢ could meet here somewhowre
h is a form of n, some n with a stick, high nog i don't know. (nog is a typo instead of nig, wheteher gnigeh or nign or nig indeed I thought about it)
h is probably double i, see how H turned into И in russian as if it doesn't matter, and N is Н in russian.
N stands for &, just as И
и also is a pustfix of plural noun, just as n in german, ИNSZ are four mothers? four phases moon has. four week, four wigs? four wicks? four знаков, wick and witch are close to wit and wisdom and weet, and ведь? ведать see = видь=ведь? но это натягивание stretch. пространно. speculation? something like that.

ИМСЗ
IMSZ
I(wait) Z (wax) M (foolMoon) S=С (С is russian S)
and disagreement about C (B & D are much more certain across the alphabet) tells that ᛆᛒᚦ is ABD, and modern meme ABC just tells that... what... whether that it's of the modern period where C in some form is present in all the alphabet, except that norsk one from bornholm, or is it even russian, because only russians have Ж (also berbers do, and they worship it, and binderunen are often drawn around it:




Three goddesses are known - brits have more of ass than rus have cacs - also in non-jewish middle-east as Allat Manat and al-Uzza, which allowed me to put Uzza first, because al of allat could be also an article, that allowed me to declare them three mothers as Uzza Manat alLat, as if Uzza was winter and autumn in one piece, Lat would be l'ete - french guys have similar article, is it why they merge with arabs, frencha and spanninsh are visuably darker than the north. It is another form of subjugation, slow and lte stealthy
Now I see that Allat and Manat have similar suffices, as if they'r are aL Ma(N)
what is al ma na ch? el em en ts? ts is ты in russian (as if the you ты)

my text is so difficult, no editor will do it. In the past editors didn't show how it was before them, now we'll see who's in the wrong.

And I read about al Uzza:
она вместе с богинями Аллат и Манат входила в триаду богинь-дочерей Аллаха.
На юге центральной Аравии аль-Узза выступает в качестве супруги Аллаха, матери аль-Лат и Манат

Here I can only poetically guess that Uzza was уста and vowels, and Лат was tongue, Манат was lips
If UzzA are vowels, than it's childish cry of inhaling U and exhaling A,
and A gave birth to Λ and U gave birth to ν and μ, hence in and im
им and 'em is close in russian and english, and that 'em form exposes that th is the. in that too? the 't = it = это и то. th's as сие, в противоположность к то, те, та, тот, то-то. кто-то
к in кто is que. а что? dialectnot prochtenie? t is where е in russian lays on the keyboard.



the following piece (until he word tits) was born in socrates line, where it's doubled. Be careful not to double it when you edit it all in a brand new book.
about allat: אלה, אלת-הים‏‎ is translated as These, the goddess of the sea.
Where
אלה is both these and goddess, not god,
both אלה and אלת
are goddess
but אלה is also those and these, just as I read about Elohim, where im is the additional plural suffix to a plural word as it seems. only im is supposed to be male suffix, but אלה is not god, but goddess, thus we consider god bigender, as if it's male priests playing roles of females, as theatre we know of declared to be a norm. Read socrates_line.html to know more about this, but be careful, it's a messy rabbithole.

Allat is believed to be in the centre, accompanied by Manat and Al Uzza.
Uzza is the only one having a separated Al as if uzza is mother and suffix is needed to say that it's their mother.
тех shows that те is that very the: because их is the sinonym, just as it to that.
те и си, the & she? h was sh initially, thus her, not sher. t is

 
that piece after Randomness was supposed to go to 7.html, but by some surprise it is placed in that very socrates_line I just mentioned, thus now it belongs here. I will rehash it when and if I publish.


t is ᛏ the male indicator of ♂
Doesn't that Allat look like a cross-dresser to you? A son dressed as a woman to protect them, and if such a priest plays in the temple, nobody understands how they give births without grooms, was it followed or preceded by the taboo on genitalia demonstrations? Those priests probably discovered shaving first, so they fooled the public. And "her" hat reminds te one of Mitra,


I thought to search for Allat and Mitra in one sentence, and what I found:
The Assyrians call Aphrodite Mylitta, the Arabians Alilat [Greek spelling: Ἀλιλάτ], and the Persians Mithra.
and there are more:
They believe in no other gods except Dionysus and the Heavenly Aphrodite; and they say that they wear their hair as Dionysus does his, cutting it round the head and shaving the temples. They call Dionysus, Orotalt; and Aphrodite, Alilat. (wiki: Herodouts, Histories I:131)

I used to think this to be a young woman whose tits are not shown, but I was gay myself to think it's a woman, the very same accompanying figures could be at the corners of the bas-relief. Snake and scorpio could indicate that this cross-dresser used poison on his knife to easily kill a bull, a female way of doing murder, so it's a prince grown up by the mother and grandmother or a mother and a wife? A family unit, women demand families, guys would rather walk гуляли (к ляле) гулять (to блять) but that's poetry more than science
See how at the previous image, the one before the bull, where the three "divas" are above a lion, there the coentral figure (Allat) is larger than other two, and has no tits.





- - -   – – –   — — —   一 一 一(japanese 1)  − − −   +++   (japanese longis)   ꟷ ꟷ ꟷ(sideways I)
♭♯♀♂ ß ſʒ «» „“ Åå šʃ  Ґґ Єє Її Ϻ Ϲϲ. Ⲥ 卍卐(swas) ᚹꝨꝩǷƿ°
अआइईउऊऋॠऌॡएऐओऔअंअःकखगघङहचछजझञयशटठडढणरषतथधनलसपफबभमव
ᛆᛒᚦᚾᚠᚵᚼ(or ᛡ)ᛁᚴᛚᛘ(even though it looks like ᛉ)ᚿᚮᚱᛦ(if R, or ᛣ if Q)ᛋᛏᚢ of bornholm
ᚡᚣᚤᚥᚧᚨᚩᚪᚫᚬᚭᚯᚰᚲᚳᚶᚷᚸᚹᚺᚻᚽᛀᛂᛃᛄᛅᛇᛈᛊᛌᛍᛎᛐᛑᛓᛔᛕᛖᛗᛙᛛᛜᛝᛞᛟᛠᛢᛤᛥᛦᛧᛨᛩᛪ᛫᛬᛭ᛮᛯᛰᛱᛲᛳᛴᛵᛶᛷᛸ (norsk, L2R)
𐲀𐲁𐲂𐲃𐲄𐲅𐲆𐲇𐲈𐲉𐲊𐲋𐲌𐲍𐲎𐲏𐲐𐲑𐲒𐲓𐲔𐲕𐲖𐲗𐲘𐲙𐲚𐲛𐲜𐲝𐲞𐲟𐲠𐲡𐲢𐲣𐲤𐲥𐲦𐲧𐲨𐲩𐲪𐲫𐲬𐲭𐲮𐲯𐲰𐲱𐲲(old hungarian)
𐳀𐳁𐳂𐳃𐳄𐳅𐳆𐳇𐳈𐳉𐳊𐳋𐳌𐳍𐳎𐳏𐳐𐳑𐳒𐳓𐳔𐳕𐳖𐳗𐳘𐳙𐳚𐳛𐳜𐳝𐳞𐳟𐳠𐳡𐳢𐳣𐳤𐳥𐳦𐳧𐳨𐳩𐳪𐳫𐳬𐳭𐳮𐳯𐳰𐳱𐳲 𐳺𐳻𐳼𐳽𐳾𐳿 (old hungarian & next R2L)
𐰀𐰁𐰂𐰃𐰄𐰅𐰆𐰇𐰈𐰉𐰊𐰋𐰌𐰍𐰎𐰏𐰐𐰑𐰒𐰓𐰔𐰕𐰖𐰗𐰘𐰙𐰚𐰛𐰜𐰝𐰞𐰟𐰠𐰡𐰢𐰣𐰤𐰥𐰦𐰧𐰨𐰩𐰪𐰫𐰬𐰭𐰮𐰯𐰰𐰱𐰲𐰳𐰴𐰵𐰶𐰷𐰸𐰹𐰺𐰻𐰼𐰽𐰾𐰿𐱀𐱁𐱂𐱃𐱄𐱅𐱆𐱇𐱈(old turkic)
𐩠 𐩡 𐩢 𐩣 𐩤 𐩥 𐩦 𐩧 𐩨 𐩩 𐩪 𐩫 𐩬 𐩭 𐩮 𐩯 𐩰 𐩱 𐩲 𐩳 𐩴 𐩵 𐩶 𐩷 𐩸 𐩹 𐩺 𐩻 𐩼 𐩽 𐩾 𐩿 (Old South Arabian, R to L)
א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ ל מ נ ס ע פ צ ק ר ש ת   ך ם 𐡌 ן ףץ
ا ب پ ت ث ج چ ح خ د ذ ر ز ژ س ش ص ض ط ظ ع غ ف ق ک گ ل م ن ه و ی
ა ბ გ დ ე ვ ზ თ ი კ ლ მ ნ ო პ ჟ რ ს ტ უ ფ ქ ღ ყ შ ჩ ც ძ წ ჭ ხ ჯ ჰ (vdo)
Α Β Γ Δ Ε Ζ Η Θ Ι Κ Λ Μ Ν Ξ Ο Π Ρ Σ Τ Υ Φ Χ Ψ Ω
α β γ δ ε ζ η θ ι κ λ μ ν ξ ο π ρ σ/ς τ υ φ χ ψ ω
𐎀a 𐎁b 𐎂c 𐎃ḫ 𐎄d 𐎅h(e) 𐎆w 𐎇z 𐎈ḥ 𐎉θ 𐎊и 𐎋 𐎌 𐎍 𐎎 𐎏 𐎐 𐎑 𐎒 𐎓 𐎔 𐎕 𐎖 𐎗 𐎘 𐎙 𐎚 𐎛 𐎜 𐎝         𐎟
𐎠 𐎣 𐎧 𐎥 𐎨 𐏂 𐎩 𐎫 𐎰 𐎭 𐎱 𐎳 𐎲 𐎴 𐎶 𐎹 𐎺 𐎼 𐎾 𐎿 𐏀 𐏁 𐏃 𐎡 𐎪 𐎮 𐎷 𐎻 𐎢 𐎤 𐎦 𐎬 𐎯 𐎵 𐎸 𐎽 
𐎠a   𐎡i   𐎢 u  𐎣k  𐎤ku   𐎥g   𐎦gu    𐎧x   𐎨c   𐎩j   𐎪ji    𐎫t    𐎬tu   𐎭d    𐎮di   𐎯du   𐎰θ   𐎱p    𐎲b   𐎳f   𐎴n   𐎵nu  𐎶m  𐎷mi  𐎸mu  𐎹y  𐎺v  𐎻vi  𐎼r  𐎽ru  𐎾l  𐎿s  𐏀z  𐏁š  𐏂ç  𐏃h (Old Persian)
    ɨʉɯuɪʏɪ̈ʊ̈ʊeøɘɵɤoəɛœɜɞʌɔæɐaɶɑɒ
here I collected several writing systems I use the most, so I don't have to search for them.
aäɑɒæbḇβcčɔɕçdḏdʸǰðḍɖdˁeəɚɛɝfgḡɣhʰḤḥħḫχẖçiɪỉɨjỉʲǰʤʒkḳḵlḷɭɬɫmnŋṇɳɲñɴoŏɸθpp̅ þθðqrɹɾᴅʀʁṛɽsšʃśɕṣʂsˁštṭʈtˁṯtʸčʨuʊŭüvʌɣwʍxχyʸʎzẓʐzˁðˁžʒ’‘ʔʕ Œœ
Ææ Øø Åå    Ää Öö Üü ẞß     ā ē ī ō ū ǖ á é í ó ú ǘ ǎ ě ǐ ǒ ǔ ǚ à è ì ò ù ǜ â ê î ô û
and here lays an article explaining these IPA sighns.
(I only lost the hyperlinks because where I took it, ctrlc+ctrlv behaved weirdly) here it is.
but it could be too much of an honor, because it seems to be not the only set of those:
pbp̪ b̪ t̪ d̪ tdʈɖɓ̥ɓɗ̪ɗpʼt̪ʼtʼʈʼm̥ mɱ̊ɱn̪̊ n̪ n̥ nɳ̊ɳʙr̥ rɭ̆ɺ̣ⱱ̟ ⱱɾ*(ɽɺ)ɸβfvθðszʃʒʂʐɧɬɮꞎsʼʃʼɬʼʬʭβ̞̊ β̞ ʋ̥ʋð̞ ɹ̥ɹɻ̊ɻɥ̊ɥl̥ lɭʘǀ(ʇ)ǃ(ʗ)ǂ(⨎)*(ǁʖ)ǁȶȡcɟk͡pɡ͡bkɡqɢʡʔʄɠʛcʼkʼqʼȵɲŋ͡mŋɴʀ**(ʡʡ̆)*(ʎ̆)*(ʟʟ̆)ɕʑçʝxɣχʁħʕʜʢhɦjʍwɰȴʎʟ (wiki)
though these two sets ar probably of different fields (orthography & phonetics)
and phonetics being so abundant in its symbolics still places same signs in different cells, which tells it's all not certain (and different people pronounce the same sounds differently) and unnecessary when audio-recordings is widely available (but not in books made out of trees)
and I still didn't find the one I needed: Åå so it was too much of an honour indeed, or am I just grumpy?
either way look at what I had to go through to get the å I could write in my nnotbook in a second.
(I add it upstairs just now, even though you saw it earlier than this)

    –    k     s     t     n    h    m    y    r    w
a あア かカ さサ たタ なナ はハ まマ やヤ らラ わワ
i  いイ きキ しシ ちチ にニ ひヒ みミ ※  りリ ゐヰ
u うウ くク すス つツ ぬヌ ふフ むム ゆユ るル ※            んン (n)                  ゛ ゜
e えエ けケ せセ てテ ねネ へヘ めメ ※  れレ ゑヱ
o おオ こコ そソ とト のノ ほホ もモ よヨ ろロ をヲ
ⴰⴱⴲⴳⴴⴵⴶⴷⴸⴹⴺⴻⴼⴽⴾⴿⵀⵁⵂⵃⵄⵅⵆⵇⵈⵉⵊⵋⵌⵍⵎⵏⵐⵑⵒⵓⵔⵕⵖⵗⵘⵙⵚⵛⵜⵝⵞⵟⵠⵡⵢⵣⵤⵥⵦⵧ⵰  ⵿  ⵯ
І і    Ѳ ѳ   Ѣ ѣ  Ѵ ѵ   Ѕ ѕ    Ѯ ѯ   Ѱ ѱ   Ѡ ѡ   Ѫ ѫ   Ѧ ѧ   Ѭ ѭ    Ѩ ѩ  Ꙋ ꙋ
ГҐДЂЃЀЁЄЗ́ЅЍІЇЙЈЉЊС́ТЋЌЎЏNonSlavic:А́А̀ӐА̄А̊А̃ӒӒ̄В̌ӘӘ́Ә̃ӚӔҒГ̧Г̑Г̄Г̣Г̌ҔӺҒ̌ӶԀԂꚂꚀꚈД̆Д̣ԪԬД̆ӖЕ̄Е̃Ё̄Є̈
ӁҖꚄӜԄҘӞЗ̌З̱З̣ԐԐ̈ӠԆӢИ̃ҊӤИ́ҚӃҠҞҜԞК̣ԚӅԮԒԠԈԔӍӉҢԨӇҤԢԊО́О̀О̆О̂О̃О̄ӦӦ̄ӨӨ̄Ө́Ө̆ӪҨԤҦР̌ҎԖҪС̣С̱Ԍ
Т̌Т̣ꚐҬꚊꚌԎУ̃ӮӰӰ́ӲҮ́ҰХ̣Х̱Х̮Х̑ҲӼӾҺҺ̈ԦꚔҴꚎҶӴӋҸꚒꚖꚆҼҾЫ̆Ы̄ӸҌЭ̆Э̄Э̇ӬӬ́Ӭ̄Ю̆Ю̈Ю̈́Ю̄Я̆Я̄Я̈ԘԜӀ
Archaic:ꙀꙂꙄꙆꙈҀѺѸꙊѠѼꙌѾꙎѢꙐꙒꙔꙖѤѦꙘѪꙚѨꙜѬѮѰѲѳѴѶꙞꙠꙤꙦꙨꙪꙬꙮꚘꚚ
ⰀⰁⰂⰃⰄⰅⰆⰇⰈⰉⰊⰋⰌⰍⰎⰏⰐⰑⰒⰓⰔⰕⰖⰗⰘⰙⰚⰛⰜⰝⰞⰟⰠⰡⰢⰣⰤⰥⰦⰧⰨⰩⰪⰫⰬⰭⰮ    
ⰰⰱⰲⰳⰴⰵⰶⰷⰸⰹⰺⰻⰼⰽⰾⰿⱀⱁⱂⱃⱄⱅⱆⱇⱈⱉⱊⱋⱌⱍⱎⱏⱐⱑⱒⱓⱔⱕⱖⱗⱘⱙⱚⱛⱜⱝⱞ    
𓄿  𓇋  𓇌(𓏭)  𓂝     𓅱(𓏲 W)  𓃀  𓊪(p)  𓆑  𓅓  𓈖(n)  𓂋  𓉔(h)  𓎛(H)  𓐍(x)  𓄡
a    i   ij      a(o?)   u            b    p        f    m    n             r     h          ḥ         ḫ         ẖ
𓋴(s)   𓊃(z)   𓈙(𓈛 𓈜 SN38)   𓈎(q)   𓎡   𓎼(g)   t(𓏏)   𓍿   𓂧   𓆓
   s        s                 š                             ḳ(q)       k    g           t         ch    d     dj
𓎤(V33)    𓐝    𓋔(S3)    𓍘(U33)    
g         m      n              t      
𓀀𓀁𓀂𓀃𓀄𓀅𓀆𓀇𓀈𓀉𓀊𓀋𓀌𓀍𓀎𓀏𓀐𓀑𓀒𓀓𓀔𓀕𓀖𓀗𓀘𓀙𓀚𓀛𓀜𓀝𓀞𓀟𓀠𓀡𓀢𓀣𓀤𓀥𓀦𓀧𓀨𓀩𓀪𓀫𓀬𓀭𓀮𓀯𓀰𓀱𓀲𓀳𓀴𓀵𓀶𓀷
𓀸𓀹𓀺𓀻𓀼𓀽𓀾𓀿𓁀𓁁𓁂𓁃𓁄𓁅𓁆𓁇𓁈𓁉𓁊𓁋𓁌𓁍𓁎𓁏𓁐𓁑𓁒𓁓𓁔𓁕𓁖𓁗𓁘𓁙𓁚𓁛𓁜𓁝𓁞𓁟𓁠𓁡𓁢𓁣𓁤𓁥𓁦𓁧𓁨𓁩𓁪𓁫𓁬𓁭𓁮𓁯𓁰𓁱𓁲𓁳𓁴𓁵
𓁶𓁷𓁸𓁹𓁺𓁻𓁼𓁽𓁾𓁿𓂀𓂁𓂂𓂃𓂄𓂅𓂆𓂇𓂈𓂉𓂊𓂋𓂌𓂍𓂎𓂏𓂐𓂑𓂒𓂓𓂔𓂕𓂖𓂗𓂘𓂙𓂚𓂛
𓂜𓂝𓂞𓂟𓂠𓂡𓂢𓂣𓂤𓂥𓂦𓂧𓂨𓂩𓂪𓂫𓂬𓂭𓂮𓂯𓂰𓂱𓂲𓂳𓂴𓂵𓂶𓂷𓂸𓂹𓂺𓂻𓂼𓂽𓂾𓂿𓃀𓃁𓃂𓃃𓃄𓃅𓃆𓃇𓃈
𓃉𓃊𓃋𓃌𓃍𓃎𓃏𓃐𓃑𓃒𓃓𓃔𓃕𓃖𓃗𓃘𓃙𓃚𓃛𓃜𓃝𓃞𓃟𓃠𓃡𓃢𓃣𓃤𓃥𓃦𓃧𓃨𓃩𓃪𓃫𓃬𓃭𓃮𓃯𓃰𓃱𓃲𓃳𓃴𓃵𓃶
𓃷𓃸𓃹𓃺𓃻𓃼𓃽𓃾𓃿𓄀𓄁𓄂𓄃𓄄𓄅𓄆𓄇𓄈𓄉𓄊𓄋𓄌𓄍𓄎𓄏𓄐𓄑𓄒𓄓𓄔𓄕𓄖𓄗𓄘𓄙𓄚𓄛𓄜𓄝𓄞𓄟𓄠𓄡𓄢𓄣𓄤𓄥𓄦𓄧𓄨𓄩𓄪𓄫
𓄬𓄭𓄮𓄯𓄰𓄱𓄲𓄳𓄴𓄵𓄶𓄷𓄸𓄹𓄺𓄻𓄼𓄽𓄾𓄿𓅀𓅁𓅂𓅃𓅄𓅅𓅆𓅇𓅈𓅉𓅊𓅋𓅌𓅍𓅎𓅏
𓅐𓅑𓅒𓅓𓅔𓅕𓅖𓅗𓅘𓅙𓅚𓅛𓅜𓅝𓅞𓅟𓅠𓅡𓅢𓅣𓅤𓅥𓅦𓅧𓅨𓅩𓅪𓅫𓅬𓅭𓅮𓅯𓅰
𓅱𓅲𓅳𓅴𓅵𓅶𓅷𓅸𓅹𓅺𓅻𓅼𓅽𓅾𓅿𓆀𓆁𓆂𓆃𓆄𓆅𓆆𓆇𓆈𓆉𓆊𓆋𓆌𓆍𓆎𓆏𓆐𓆑𓆒𓆓𓆔𓆕𓆖𓆗𓆘𓆙𓆚
𓆛𓆜𓆝𓆞𓆟𓆠𓆡𓆢𓆣𓆤𓆥𓆦𓆧𓆨𓆩𓆪𓆫𓆬𓆭𓆮𓆯𓆰𓆱𓆲𓆳𓆴𓆵𓆶𓆷𓆸𓆹𓆺𓆻𓆼𓆽𓆾𓆿𓇀𓇁𓇂𓇃𓇄𓇅𓇆𓇇𓇈𓇉𓇊𓇋𓇌𓇍𓇎𓇏𓇐
𓇑𓇒𓇓𓇔𓇕𓇖𓇗𓇘𓇙𓇚𓇛𓇜𓇝𓇞𓇟𓇠𓇡𓇢𓇣𓇤𓇥𓇦𓇧𓇨𓇩𓇪𓇫𓇬𓇭𓇮𓇯𓇰𓇱𓇲𓇳𓇴𓇵𓇶𓇷𓇸𓇹𓇺𓇻𓇼𓇽𓇾𓇿𓈀𓈁𓈂𓈃𓈄𓈅𓈆𓈇𓈈
𓈉𓈊𓈋𓈌𓈍𓈎𓈏𓈐𓈑𓈒𓈓𓈔𓈕𓈖𓈗𓈘𓈙𓈚𓈛𓈜𓈝𓈞𓈟𓈠𓈡𓈢𓈣𓈤𓈥𓈦𓈧𓈨𓈩𓈪𓈫𓈬𓈭𓈮𓈯𓈰𓈱𓈲𓈳𓈴𓈵𓈶𓈷𓈸𓈹
𓈺𓈻𓈼𓈽𓈾𓈿𓉀𓉁𓉂𓉃𓉄𓉅𓉆𓉇𓉈𓉉𓉊𓉋𓉌𓉍𓉎𓉏𓉐𓉑𓉒𓉓𓉔𓉕𓉖𓉗𓉘𓉙𓉚𓉛𓉜𓉝𓉞𓉟𓉠𓉡𓉢𓉣𓉤𓉥𓉦𓉧𓉨𓉩𓉪𓉫𓉬𓉭
𓉮𓉯𓉰𓉱𓉲𓉳𓉴𓉵𓉶𓉷𓉸𓉹𓉺𓉻𓉼𓉽𓉾𓉿𓊀𓊁𓊂𓊃𓊄𓊅𓊆𓊇𓊈𓊉𓊊𓊋𓊌𓊍𓊎𓊏𓊐𓊑𓊒𓊓𓊔𓊕𓊖𓊗𓊘𓊙𓊚𓊛𓊜𓊝𓊞𓊟𓊠𓊡𓊢𓊣𓊤𓊥
𓊦𓊧𓊨𓊩𓊪𓊫𓊬𓊭𓊮𓊯𓊰𓊱𓊲𓊳𓊴𓊵𓊶𓊷𓊸𓊹𓊺𓊻𓊼𓊽𓊾𓊿𓋀𓋁𓋂𓋃𓋄𓋅𓋆𓋇𓋈𓋉𓋊𓋋𓋌𓋍𓋎𓋏𓋐𓋑𓋒𓋓𓋔𓋕𓋖𓋗𓋘𓋙𓋚𓋛𓋜
𓋝𓋞𓋟𓋠𓋡𓋢𓋣𓋤𓋥𓋦𓋧𓋨𓋩𓋪𓋫𓋬𓋭𓋮𓋯𓋰𓋱𓋲𓋳𓋴𓋵𓋶𓋷𓋸𓋹𓋺𓋻𓋼𓋽𓋾𓋿𓌀𓌁𓌂𓌃𓌄𓌅𓌆𓌇𓌈𓌉𓌊𓌋𓌌𓌍𓌎𓌏𓌐𓌑𓌒𓌓𓌔𓌕𓌖𓌗𓌘𓌙
𓌚𓌛𓌜𓌝𓌞𓌟𓌠𓌡𓌢𓌣𓌤𓌥𓌦𓌧𓌨𓌩𓌪𓌫𓌬𓌭𓌮𓌯𓌰𓌱𓌲𓌳𓌴𓌵𓌶𓌷𓌸𓌹𓌺𓌻𓌼𓌽𓌾𓌿𓍀𓍁𓍂𓍃𓍄𓍅𓍆𓍇𓍈𓍉𓍊𓍋𓍌𓍍𓍎𓍏𓍐𓍑𓍒𓍓
𓍔𓍕𓍖𓍗𓍘𓍙𓍚𓍛𓍜𓍝𓍞𓍟𓍠𓍡𓍢𓍣𓍤𓍥𓍦𓍧𓍨𓍩𓍪𓍫𓍬𓍭𓍮𓍯𓍰𓍱𓍲𓍳𓍴𓍵𓍶𓍷𓍸𓍹𓍺𓍻𓍼𓍽𓍾𓍿𓎀𓎁𓎂𓎃𓎄
𓎅𓎆𓎇𓎈𓎉𓎊𓎋𓎌𓎍𓎎𓎏𓎐𓎑𓎒𓎓𓎔𓎕𓎖𓎗𓎘𓎙𓎚𓎛𓎜𓎝𓎞𓎟𓎠𓎡𓎢𓎣𓎤𓎥𓎦𓎧𓎨𓎩𓎪𓎫𓎬𓎭𓎮𓎯𓎰𓎱𓎲𓎳𓎴𓎵𓎶𓎷𓎸𓎹𓎺𓎻𓎼𓎽
𓎾𓎿𓏀𓏁𓏂𓏃𓏄𓏅𓏆𓏇𓏈𓏉𓏊𓏋𓏌𓏍𓏎𓏏𓏐𓏑𓏒𓏓𓏔𓏕𓏖𓏗𓏘𓏙𓏚𓏛𓏜𓏝𓏞𓏟𓏠𓏡𓏢𓏣𓏤𓏥𓏦𓏧𓏨𓏩𓏪𓏫𓏬𓏭𓏮𓏯𓏰𓏱𓏲𓏳𓏴𓏵𓏶𓏷𓏸
𓏹𓏺𓏻𓏼𓏽𓏾𓏿𓐀𓐁𓐂𓐃𓐄𓐅𓐆𓐇𓐈𓐉𓐊𓐋𓐌𓐍𓐎𓐏𓐐𓐑𓐒𓐓𓐔𓐕𓐖𓐗𓐘𓐙𓐚𓐛𓐜𓐝𓐞𓐟𓐠𓐡𓐢𓐣𓐤𓐥𓐦𓐧𓐨𓐩𓐪𓐫𓐬𓐭𓐮
᚛ ᚁᚂᚃᚄᚅ     ᚆᚇᚈᚉᚊ     ᚋᚌᚍᚎᚏ     ᚐᚑᚒᚓᚔ     ᚕᚖᚗᚘᚙᚚ᚜    
alphabet 𐤀 𐤁 𐤂 𐤃 𐤄 𐤅 𐤆 𐤇 𐤈 𐤉 𐤊 𐤋 𐤌 𐤍 𐤎 𐤏 𐤐 𐤑 𐤒 𐤓 𐤔 𐤕      numbers 𐤖 𐤚 𐤛 𐤗 𐤘 𐤙   
some tricky :: ׃ 

will be edited back and forth.

-