Morten St George Theory

[Morten St. George]

People who say it's an armadillo do so because they are much more familiar with this species than with the pangolin.

You know, in Dutch, the armadillo and pangolin are called gordeldier and schubdier respectively. Belt-animal and scale-animal. That's because the armadillo has bands, while the pangolin has large scales.

Look for any early armadillo drawing. It will have bands. When an armadillo drawing has no bands, it ignores one of the species' defining features and is hence unreliable. The VM creature's scales are huge, only three are needed to cover top to bottom.

Its tail is split, setting it apart from both armadillo and pangolin. And lizards. This implies again that the image - like any medieval animal drawing - is not scientifically accurate and canot be used as a supporting pillar of one's theory.

I very much doubt that you can find an unbiased zoology expert anywhere in the world who would say that an armadillo could not have been the intention of the VMS drawing. The fact that some other type of animal could have been the real intention does not negate the possibility that an armadillo could also have been the intention.

At the moment, the MSG Theory maintains that the encryption system and many of the drawings were created by Cathars during the 13th century, with botanical and herbal research in the Americas continuing into the 14th century. In the early 15th century, an exact copy of their writings (the current VMS) was made by native American converts to Catharism using buffalo skin for parchment.

If you wish to refute this theory, you should try to find academic or scholarly sources saying that it is impossible to use buffalo for parchment, or that buffalo and cows are so different that it is impossible to confuse their proteins in protein analysis. Continuing to argue that the armadillo might not be an armadillo gets you nowhere because that is only a small piece of the puzzle.