Implications of the continuity of Currier "languages"

[MarcoP]

Several researchers have pointed out that the features underlying Currier's A and B "languages" do not form two separated sets, but spread over a continuous range. For instance, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. represents pages on the basis of word frequencies: Donald used Principal Component Analysis (PCA) to reduce the number of dimensions from the long raw vectors to plottable 2d points.

   

Currier A (green), Currier B (red), or uncertain (black).

[I have trimmed the image and made it more contrasted]

Similar results are presented by You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.. The continuity between the two "languages" appears both in character-based and word-based analyses (this plot is by Sarah Goslee).
   

Researchers have drawn different conclusions from this evidence:

...Prescott Currier reported in Papers on the Voynich Manuscript that the text is in two separate languages or dialects, now commonly referred to as Currier A and Currier B. It will be shown here that this distinction is somewhat fuzzy. There are differences (see "A Principal Component Analysis of the Voynich Manuscript Words"), but these can be explained more simply by differences in the text's subject matter.

When Currier identified his languages A and B, he did this on the basis of the different statistics of the initial herbal pages in the MS [...]. It is clear that these have distinct properties - the clouds do not overlap. He also checked the other pages, and noted more variations, but his criteria for distinguishing the languages did not allow him to see that the overall statistics demonstrate that there is a continuum, and the other (not herbal) pages actually 'bridge the gap'.

This does not demonstrate that the text is meaningful, or that the text variations are caused by different subject matter (as suggested in by Montemurro and Zanette). If that were the case, the difference between herbal A and herbal B should not exist. The cause of the (statistical) language variation is still unexplained.

As always, things are puzzling. I understand that both points of view have their value.

Let's speculate
What are the implications of these findings?
What the reasons for the observed phenomena can be?