When I first started looking into the VM about 10 years ago, I was also lured in by its deceptively decipherable appearance. I thought I could translate a label here and there (some kind of Greek was my language of choice), and it was an exhilarating feeling. An immense dopamine release. Am I really the first person reading these words in 600 years? How did nobody else see this before? I have to share this somewhere, people will be so thankful that they can finally start understanding this book!
I'm not joking, those are the kinds of things I actually thought. In my defense, this was in the Stephen Bax era, and there was still a broader belief that some form of simple substitution might work. The problem was placed with the language (we have to find the right dialect, something that is likely poorly attested). Of course, some people understood that the whole system of Voynichese was problematic, but this sentiment did not yet permeate public awareness as it does today. Again, Stephen Bax was one of the most prominent figures at the time, and his approach seemed respectable, and thus imitable.
After half a year or so of messing around with my Greek, I started getting this weird, unpleasant feeling. No more dopamine, but rather unease. I can find dictionary words for this, but does it really make sense? Aren't I changing too much to make it all work? Did anyone ever write like this? My usually critical self took over again, and the curse of the Voynich had been lifted.
The research has come a long way in those 10 years, and concepts like conditional entropy, that were previously understood only by people with a certain background, have become better known to a wider audience. I am happy to have contributed to that with my own videos, which turned out to be a much more long-term rewarding endeavor than playing word games.
We can all see that you are playing the same word games hundreds of people have done before you, falling for the same traps. They were all more certain than the last that they were the ones to solve it. Every one of them felt exactly the same as you do, and all were deaf to objections. It's the manuscript that initiates this, but it's people that stubbornly continue it.
You will only receive applause from people who don't know much about the manuscript. Not because they are unbiased, but because they don't have the background knowledge to see how wrong you are.
(17-11-2025, 12:42 PM)Rafal Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Doireannjane, you should really read the threads with solutions of Ahmet Ardic or Gerard Cheshire. Or even an old book by Leo Levitov ...
You may be surprised how these people were sure about their results. How it all made sense for them.
The subject of this thread is Irish as the original language of the Voynich manuscript. Why mix it with other theories?
If Doireann was directed to this forum, in my opinion, it's to be able to express her method clearly and conventionally, not to be discouraged from the outset.
By the way, since there are examples of medieval Irish manuscripts in this thread, maybe Irish should be included too when running statistical tests and making possible decoding attempts. Could anyone help with the following questions?
1) Generally how often was Irish used for manuscripts in the XV century? Are the known medieval Irish manuscripts a rare oddity, or is there a lot of them?
2) Was Irish usually interspersed with Latin in the Irish manuscripts?
3) Is there an easy way to get a sample (ideally ~4000 words) of digitized Irish with the ~XV century spelling? (a text file, not only images, but having both text and images would be perfect)
4) Are there any known examples of medieval ciphertexts in Irish?
I believe these questions are on topic in this thread anyway, since they are quite relevant to establishing the plausibility of any proposed Irish solution.
(17-11-2025, 01:14 PM)Ruby Novacna Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The subject of this thread is Irish as the original language of the Voynich manuscript.
One of the more surprising revelations yesterday was that this is in fact
not the case.
(16-11-2025, 06:27 PM)Doireannjane Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I think they could have been Celtic speakers in and around Portugal or Northern Italy (because of the plants and the sentence structure occasionally leaning SVO), not necessarily Irish/from Ireland (I say this in my publication)
(16-11-2025, 09:56 PM)Doireannjane Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I will repeat love, THROUGH, in my publication and I've said multiple times in this thread, THROUGH. Understanding the Voynich Through modern phonetic Irish.
As I understand it, the underlying language of the manuscript has not been identified on this thread yet and we should understand Irish as an intermediary.
Ruby, it is because the method is flawed.
None of these solutions arrived at their positions by following correct reasoning based on knowledge that is available today.
We have become stuck in a "you can't reason someone out of a position they did not reason themselves into" loop here, and with all similar previous solutions.
I used Doireann's method with middle English, it produces the same level of results.
All of these solutions used the same methods on other languages and produced the same level of results.
The level is not to a standard that can be considered seriously. This is obvious by the fact several languages produce the same level of results.
What Lisa suggested (amongst other things) was to take a step back and consider "knowledge that is available today". Then we can have a solution that arrived with a proper basis.
Otherwise, we will never leave this loop and everyone here is wasting their time trying different reasoning to convince Doireann to abandon her beliefs. When you try to do this, as we have seen countless times, eventually there is a big blowout. This is because we are not dealing with reason, but belief. This is evident by this suggestion by Lisa being considered an attempt to convert, by Doireann "This was said by Lisa and it reads a bit like scientology?".
No one ever wants to accept this but if you refuse to go down the dunning kruger chart, you will never go right either.
(17-11-2025, 01:52 PM)rikforto Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.As I understand it, the underlying language of the manuscript has not been identified on this thread yet and we should understand Irish as an intermediary.
If our author succeeds in describing her method in a classic way, there will always be volunteers to check if it works, just for the pleasure of refuting the new theory.
The reason I posted to this, is to find repeatability. I have plant taxonomies that others do not. That is an element of successful translation, to myself. I have approached this with sounds in a way that others have not.
The thread itself, I use the word THROUGH.
My videos clearly state I believe this could provide evidence to the Italo Celtic theory.
I say earlier in the thread, Dittany is from Crete and this isn’t based in Ireland.
Everyone has failed to provide commonly spoken, written Irish or Celtic adjacent manuscripts of the time.
If you and most people all have gotten most taxonomies back, where are they?
As for dunning Kruger, I definitely see that on this thread. I say in most my videos, i feel I’m delusional half the time. I also say I believe translation is a COMMUNAL effort, meaning I don’t have everything. My work is to bring logical conclusions, and it is illogical that this hasn’t been solved. I want to bring more conversations to public spheres. There is a reason.
I was made fun out the gate on this forum, excuse me for having a response. I understand more of your context for doing so, but How do you expect it to get solved if some people and certain thinkers, with less time to dedicate, are not welcome?
(17-11-2025, 04:02 PM)Doireannjane Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I was made fun out the gate on this forum, excuse me for having a response. I understand more of your context for doing so, but How do you expect it to get solved if some people and certain thinkers, with less time to dedicate, are not welcome?
This is unfair. While I cannot speak for others or all of the many comments, I don't think the main thrust of this thread has been to make fun of anyone. I also don't think you're not welcome. And it's OK to not have a lot of time to dedicate to this.
But it's also true that your theory - and I know that you believe otherwise - is not convincing. And conveying this and the reasons for it always risks coming across as rude, insensitive, and unwelcoming. But what is the alternative? Do you want to be lead on by false, encouraging comments? Do you want to be left alone?
Thinking is good, but gets better when it has to make contact with and become shaped by what we know about the world - or the manuscript and other translations, in this case. Community outreach is great, but while building a community around the theory that the earth is flat might be nice in some sense it's not a way of getting closer to the truth.
You said that you hoped this to be useful, and maybe it is? Just not in the way you initially hoped.
I entered the forum for repeatability, not to convince anyone. I have others to help with repeatability now.
I will also say, I was told to come here by Lisa without any prep or helpful resources.
All my hard work was boiled down to a golden dollar sign on this forum within the first 2 pages.
I don't need to tell you how horribly classist and elitist that is.
All of my hard work boiled down to money sign just because I couldn't upload videos over 2mb directly and linked them instead.
I don't and have never made a single dime on any social media or any publication. My work is about public education and community. It's about research without red-tape and finding logical conclusions, liberating certain conversations and ideas from gated communities.
I'd like others reading this to know what they're walking into here on this forum.
I have no idea what you're talking about. Dollar sign?
Several people here have attempted to meaningfully interact with your content, which is much more than the deafening silence theorists often receive. If you don't like this discussion though, I respect that, and I can lock the thread for you if you wish. Nobody is making you stay here.
I can't do anything about criticism though. When theories like yours (of which we have seen dozens) do draw reactions, those are always critical and with good reasons. It's a tale as old as the term "Voynich Manuscript" itself: while everybody sees the glaring issues, the solver remains convinced. There's nothing I can do to close that gap.