Rune & Nafig
Rune
I was just going through a manuscript that claims the gods were actually ancient astronomers—do you think that’s a neat hypothesis or just another myth wrapped in science?
Nafig
Neat if you like a good pseudo‑archaeo‑myth, but without hard evidence it’s just a myth in a lab coat. Gods still feel more like drama than telescopes.
Rune
I suppose the line between myth and data is thinner than we think, especially when the stars themselves seem to whisper stories. But you’re right, without hard evidence it’s just a story wrapped in science.
Nafig
Fine, but if you start buying star‑whisper tickets, just remember the proof is usually as shaky as a comet's tail.
Rune
Sure, I’ll keep my telescope in the dark, not chasing comet whispers. Just as a collector, I’ll look for the faintest ink on the parchment before I claim a tale is true.
Nafig
Sounds like a good plan, just watch out for that faint ink—could be a modern watermark masquerading as ancient script.
Rune
I'll check the watermark before I accept the text as a relic. If it's modern, I'll treat it as another layer of mystery rather than a falsehood.
Nafig
Sure, because every ancient manuscript comes with a watermark. If it turns out to be a modern trick, you can just call it an "ancient advertising campaign" and move on.