12-11-2018, 04:00 AM
There is a scientific community involved in radio-carbon dating, who are continually reviewing their and others' work, improving methods, and exchanging ideas in symposia and through scientific journals. They are better aware than anyone else of the limitations of the method.
At the 2012 Voynich conference, both Nick and myself (with Philip Neal, Rafal Prinke, Jorge Stolfi, Rich Santacoloma, Stephen Bax and many others) saw a presentation by Greg Hodgins of the Voynich dating.
One of his slides was dedicated to a cross-check of C14 results, either between two labs or with independent evidence. This largely confirmed the validity of the estimated error margins.
While these experts are happy to make such comparisons with other data, all of the many doubts that have been expressed against the Voynich MS dating are based on MS hypotheses that clash with this dating. I am not aware of any evidence with some reliability that would invalidate it.
One may explore the possibility of a 1460 or later date of the Voynich MS, but one will be working in an area of low to very low probability.
The observations that have been made about the MSs from the Lauber workshop do not appear very strong to me. The fact that their illustrations tend to be bssed on earlier models reinforces this.
At the 2012 Voynich conference, both Nick and myself (with Philip Neal, Rafal Prinke, Jorge Stolfi, Rich Santacoloma, Stephen Bax and many others) saw a presentation by Greg Hodgins of the Voynich dating.
One of his slides was dedicated to a cross-check of C14 results, either between two labs or with independent evidence. This largely confirmed the validity of the estimated error margins.
While these experts are happy to make such comparisons with other data, all of the many doubts that have been expressed against the Voynich MS dating are based on MS hypotheses that clash with this dating. I am not aware of any evidence with some reliability that would invalidate it.
One may explore the possibility of a 1460 or later date of the Voynich MS, but one will be working in an area of low to very low probability.
The observations that have been made about the MSs from the Lauber workshop do not appear very strong to me. The fact that their illustrations tend to be bssed on earlier models reinforces this.