WN: Are the coded systems you used the same systems that (CIA cryptographer) Ed Scheidt gave you or have they been altered?
Sanborn: Mr. Scheidt basically gave me an outline of historic and contemporary … encoding systems that have been formally used by the agency and were still used by the agency and other people (in 1990). He gave me a whole variety of possible systems to use and ways to modify all of those systems. But as a visual artist, I like to rely on systems that include visual (material) as well as digital material that can be deciphered by machines. It’s also well-known that I did use some matrix codes Ed gave me, and I have also designed visual systems for encoding, which are much harder for cryptographers to crack because they’re individualistic.
(WIRED Interview, 01/20/05)

So it’s all fine and good until we get to the “as a visual artist” part.  That’s what worries me.  What are the visual systems for encoding that he designed?

It seems to me like he’s out of chronology here.  It’s like WN is asking a straightforward Kryptos-specific question and he’s answering by describing his work since 1990.  He did that binary thing outside the IRS and the Cyrillic projector…

Ref: http://elonka.com/kryptos/sanborn/list.html, take a look and see if you disagree with my interpretation of his answer.

Dude makes some random crap.  I just hope he doesn’t get cancer from all that Atomic Time stuff, radioactivity – especially the way we used to practically roll in the stuff – is no laughing matter.  It’s all fine and good to collect old antiques from the Manhattan project but don’t be surprised when you end up glowing in the dark.

Does Kryptos glow in the dark?

How about UV?