The Voynich Ninja

There's this (surprisingly) long thread about a new proposed solution. I don't want to make it even longer, and I agree it is better to wait until there is some tangible public information.

A few thoughts, which are not just valid for this case.

In my opinion it is completely fair if someone doesn't want to share his/her work until it is completed, or with some safeguard against copying. The risk is real. Just ask people who is the brain behind Tesla.... The person with the best access to publicity will be remembered.

On the other hand, I don't think it is useful to write in a forum with hundreds(?) of members that one has the solution, if one has no intention of sharing it.

Many reading here will remember the case of Gerard Cheshire. He said he found the solution in two weeks. He was completely certain that he was right. He could never be convinced that he was wrong, even when everybody tried to point it out to him. Very similar case, but most of that discussion took place after he shared the principles of his solution in some papers.

I have been asked many times to comment on proposed solutions. In the majority of cases, the person was not asking for my opinion or advice, but was just looking for a confirmation that he/she was right. When my feedback was not this confirmation, it was rejected, usually in relatively unfriendly terms. Not always though! There were some completely reasonable exceptions. Usually, I had to promise (or sign for) discretion.

About the probability that a proposed solution from someone not familiar with most of the previous analyses is right: I would put this generously at 10**-6 (1E-6). It should be lower, but smaller numbers become too difficult to argue.
That's what we are talking about here. (The probability that Koen's analysis is correct is well over 50%, without having seen it of course).

It's remarkable how many parallels there often are. One day I'd like to do a video about "the psychology of the Voynich solver", but it would come with some challenges.

One is that I would not like to single out individuals. This could be avoided by focusing on common behaviors and mechanisms.
The other is that I'd like to talk to or interview some expert about this, but I'm not yet sure what I'm looking for (and who would be willing to do this). There are probably significant parallels with conspiracy theories, but also differences.

There are certainly several examples. But also in both directions.
For example, the results of the C14 test in 2009.
How long did it take to let go of America? I don't think it's over yet.
For me too. How many years did I preach that before 1500 there were no dovetails north of the Alps? I had to provide proof for every castle, which has shaken many a theory.
It was Koen's collaborative work that set me free.
But I'm still not entirely clear about that. Did they really want to know the truth or teach me a lesson?
Well, there's also the issue of fantasy plants.

I wanted to find out the truth, it's a nice map. And also I was getting annoyed at having to explain all the time that date of construction matters.

Regarding C14 and letting go of America, I almost finished a new video, should be up later today.

(15-04-2025, 08:47 AM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It's remarkable how many parallels there often are. One day I'd like to do a video about "the psychology of the Voynich solver", but it would come with some challenges.

One is that I would not like to single out individuals. This could be avoided by focusing on common behaviors and mechanisms.
The other is that I'd like to talk to or interview some expert about this, but I'm not yet sure what I'm looking for (and who would be willing to do this). There are probably significant parallels with conspiracy theories, but also differences.

Yes. I've been active in the skeptic community since the early 2000s, studied and debunked many cases especially UFO-related. Retired in 2015 from active debunking after a big one (made international news!) I prefer to be a part of the much less toxic Voynich community.

Without going too deep into psychology (we are not psychologists), one remarkable thing is the truther mindset, impervious to contrary evidence that is so prevalent in conspiracy/crank theory proponents. Their "theory" is The Truth. Anything that can be linked to it (or imagined to be a link) is seen as a confirmation and only confirmation matters.

I generally avoid commenting on the specifics of particular claims, largely because 99+% of the time (a) it's clear the "solution" isn't going to get any traction, and (b) it feels like punching down. I prefer to offer more general methodological advice (and BTW, I think Koen's videos do a good job of that), although sometimes I feel like the Voynich equivalent of Jeff Foxworthy's "...you might be a redneck" shtick, i.e. 

"If your 'solution' involves a hypothetical and otherwise unattested dialect of a language that you've reconstructed by 'deciphering' the Voynich manuscript without evaluating the plausibility of that 'dialect' given the body of knowledge that's been accumulated about how languages change and evolve (Grimm's Law, etc.)...ya' might be a failed Voynich solver."

"Why people often believe they are right, even when they're wrong"  article based on the paper  "The illusion of information adequacy" by Fletcher et al.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Blog post by Schroeder --> "How to tell if you're a crank", based on Martin Gardners book.
    List of handy points to help prevent people going down the wrong path, some are unsurprisingly familiar.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

I think that there is another aspect to the Voynich MS.

It's 'unsolvability' is famous, and so is the statement (fact) that not a word of it has been translated with any certainty.

So, as soon as one 'sees' something promising, or gets a feeling that one can understand part of it, one may be overcome with excitement. Otherwise completely reasonable people could lose most of their capability of critical thinking.

(15-04-2025, 08:05 AM)ReneZ Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.[..]
In my opinion it is completely fair if someone doesn't want to share his/her work until it is completed, or with some safeguard against copying. The risk is real. Just ask people who is the brain behind Tesla.... The person with the best access to publicity will be remembered.
[..]
I have been asked many times to comment on proposed solutions. In the majority of cases, the person was not asking for my opinion or advice, but was just looking for a confirmation that he/she was right. When my feedback was not this confirmation, it was rejected, usually in relatively unfriendly terms. Not always though! 
[..]
About the probability that a proposed solution from someone not familiar with most of the previous analyses is right: [..]

Quite a view, so far at least the first sentence is ok for me.
But from my view, there are other canyons between Voynewbees and Voynichveterans open.

Just try to not keep it all as a big secret and bring your ideas, even uncompleted, here into postings: it takes not much time until some "special guy" starts blaring for "full solution" and "translate me these sentences", and the choir of "HaHa! In 2 weeks you are stucked!", "HaHa! Your are now making advances, but will fail, I`ve calculated it long before" and "HaHa! I can`t see anything at this, feed me with spoon" raises its voices, cheered by those who failed with their own attempts long before.
Some of those are then sitting here and it is years ago that they tried to find out anything.

On the other hand, newbies appear who are convinced that they "have seen it". Since March at facebook for example is a marketing campaign driven to sell some faximile edition, this may cause another wave here. Sold as a Holy Grail of Crossword Puzzling or the Biggest Bingo or Scrabble with just blank pieces or whatever, nobody should expect a bunch of scientists coming up.
Surely most enervating, but most of them are countered with nagging and nihilism, not welcomed with at least fair and rational discussions.
Posting of a development is forbidden now, somehow fitting to the cryout for "it must be complete, I won't accept anything else!" -- high expectations after 600years of non-success and from those here who never found out a single letter validly, apart from an image or such.

You describe that someone asks you for your opinion and gets angry soon when you are not positive about something -- aggravating, yes, but I also saw complaints from other veterans that they were not asked for their opinions and especially this nasty newbie has not read their previous "analyses" and "theories" in advance.

Well, and thats where the canyon between "old" and newcomers is deep open: 
the most new "solvers" don't give a damn for any existing stuff, because Voynich is actively marketed as never-solved and no newbie likes to care for "theories" which are proved with a full quote of 100% wrong because they all failed in past and have zero valid content. 
The only acceptable analysis is that from Lisa Fagin about C14 and different writingstyles, all so-called "theories" from members here are a solid crap which never will bring up a senseful word, and they know it. So new "solvers" in a hurry generally dont waste their time with it, thats bad for the climate.
I must admit I`ve searched longer (and only) for the first steps of my "solution" to avoid a sudden fail because someone tried before. No one did ever.
And yes, most forums are exactly like this here, have been in some before. The guy who described this here as "less toxic" is my king of british understatement.
This here is an atmosphere of mutual despise from the very first second of registration, sorry to say that, you all know it. Would have wished it otherwise.

About that example with Tesla and the best publicity: taking this, our Elon is this guy A. G. Jimenez with his highscore 620,000 views on a 7-years-thread with 153 pages about "Visual Code in VMS".
He is the winner.
But don`t call me when he starts a Voynich-based mission to Mars, I have doubts...

Antonio is just following the forum rules of keeping his theory within a single thread, which is excellent.

Asking someone to read the previous research may not be very productive. 90% of what is written about this MS is speculation. Newcomers don't necessarily have the insights needed to efficiently locate the remaining 10%.