The Voynich Ninja

Nothing has been disproved.
I’ve nothing against brute-force attacks either, but I know that they’ve achieved nothing over the last 50 years, if only because you can’t carry out a brute-force attack on a good cryptosystem. That’s precisely why it was designed that way.
Specifically regarding the Bible text. In the Bible, it’s difficult to write in the first-person plural (using the ‘we’ ending); that would imply the person was present. But I’m sure they were all already dead by the time the Bible was written, in the instances where they’re mentioned.
As you’ve seen, the distribution isn’t the same across the different sections.
However, this doesn’t apply to words such as ‘and’, ‘a’, ‘with’, ‘the’, ‘that’, etc.
Counting is fine, but it must be done correctly.

I think you should answer the question of why Latin is written in such an unusual way.
I'll be honest, I’m skeptical of all language theories. Even if it’s Latin. You need to explain absolutely all the features of the VMS text, and at the same time prove that such an elaborate text in the language you have presented will make at least some sense.

I have to write one last post because this is getting annoying.

I realize you’re targeting the Bible because that text is the only one where you can still make a weak argument.

But I didn’t just provide the Bible—I also provided a text by Thomas Aquinas (since I already had a transcription of it on hand), and then exactly what you asked for: a recipe text.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

You can read it here.

Funny, all these texts, including the recipe text, come in at around 1 percent—each one on its own, not all together. They’re not at 10 percent, but at 1 percent—so off by a factor of 10—do you get it? A factor of 10!!!!! Three different texts from different genres, each on its own, come in at a measly 1 percent.

And exactly what you mentioned—a Latin medical prescription text: also 1 percent, not 10 percent. 

Okay, NOW I’m out now...


German: 

Ich muss doch noch einen letzten Post schreiben, weil es nervt.

Es ist mir klar, dass du auf die Bibel abzielst, weil dieser Text das einzige ist, wo du noch ein schwaches Argument anbringen kann.

Aber ich hab nicht nur die Bibel geliefert, sondern auch einen Text von Thomas Aquinas (weil ich die gerade schon als transkription hatte) , und dann auch genau das, was du gefordert hast einen Rezepttext.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Kannst du hier nachlesen.

Komisch, alle diese Texte, einschließlich des Rezepttextes liegen bei ungefähr 1 Prozent jeder für sich alleinen, nicht alle zusammen. Sie liegen nicht bei 10 Prozent, sondern bei 1 Prozent also um Faktor 10 daneben - verstehst du? Faktor 10 !!!!! Drei unterschiedliche Texte aus verschiedenen Gattungen, liegen jeweils für sich genommen bei bummeligen 1 Prozent.

Und genau das was du sagst ein lateinischer medizinische Rezepttext: Auch 1 Prozent nicht 10 Prozent. 

So jetzt bin ich raus...

(28-08-2026, 10:31 PM)ololololo Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I think you should answer the question of why Latin is written in such an unusual way.

The answer is simple.
I never said it was Latin.
I said that the basis, foundation and structure are Latin.
From that perspective, it could be Venetic, Friulian, Romansh or another Alpine Latin.
I must therefore also take into account that the relationship is similar to that between Alemannic and High German (both German). The word order is different.
The aim here was not to prove that it is Latin, but rather, through this work, to demonstrate why Latin emerged from the experiments. Suddenly, the Latin was there.
Even if it is not ‘real’ Latin as we know it, I have nevertheless ensured its accuracy according to the dictionary. I have provided sufficient examples.
[attachment=17455]
The aim was to show how I went about it. Step by step.
Example: Breaking down VM words, replacing symbols with letters, and putting them back together. Checking against the dictionary.
Once I have enough words, I arrange them in sequence. Preferably as they appear in the VM. As I have already checked the words, I can also use Google.
I’d be more interested in where Google gets this from the 2 million comparison sentences than in what it translates.
Tests are now underway with a range of words. Without diacritical marks, this is extremely problematic.
Never mind – you take what you can get.
[attachment=17456]
Example: ‘4o’ = qui.
That may be correct, but it’s different from ‘qo’.
Simple, isn’t it? Just as the Templar has his point, so the VM has his corner. The prefix ‘ex’ and its friends.
[attachment=17457]
[attachment=17459]
And finally, never underestimate the art of deception.

The simplest of the three is Level 4.
This isn’t a calculation; it’s a text.
There’s even a report on it.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

After 20 years of cryptology alongside, and with, Klaus Schmeh,
you can already sense something like this.

So I’ll simply end here with the words: why not just do it better?

(29-08-2026, 08:18 AM)Aga Tentakulus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.From that perspective, it could be Venetic, Friulian, Romansh or another Alpine Latin.

If you just want to extract Latin words from the text, then I’ll disappoint you — this approach is pointless. Parallels can be found with any languages.
You must remember who Gerard Cheshire is...

(29-08-2026, 08:18 AM)Aga Tentakulus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.to demonstrate why Latin emerged from the experiments

As an experiment, you can compare it with Arabic, for example. If you wish, you can get a great many results.

(29-08-2026, 08:18 AM)Aga Tentakulus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.replacing symbols with letters

On what basis? How can ch turn into er?
Why is ch not et, since h is more similar to t?

(29-08-2026, 11:07 AM)ololololo Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.On what basis? How can ch turn into er?
Why is ch not et, since h is more similar to t?

[attachment=17467]
Simply because it’s normal.
It’s ‘der’, ‘der’, ‘erden’ – not ‘dch’.
It’s all perfectly normal; the same goes for ‘et’. ‘Et’ isn’t just 7, it’s also a mirror image of ‘S’.
And 89 is tum
Now you’ve got a start. Everything else is hard work.
And don’t ask me any more. I’m not giving any more answers. Use your brains.

(29-08-2026, 11:49 AM)Aga Tentakulus Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.And don’t ask me any more. I’m not giving any more answers. Use your brains.

I’m actually using them, because I don’t blindly trust your comparisons 
I would be more interested if you said that you were able to translate VMS into Latin. But no, you’re talking about some kind of Latin structure. That is, in fact, or based on your logic, you haven’t translated anything.

(29-08-2026, 12:23 PM)ololololo Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.But no, you’re talking about some kind of Latin structure.

The good thing about not having goalposts is: you don't have to move them.