John Wycliffe Latin ms letters and Voynich characters

[ReneZ]

Of course.

But one cannot make generic statements about it, and it is not the fault of the tool.

It doesn't require a degree in physics to use a microscope, but it does, to design the apparatus to perform radio-carbon dating.
To correctly interpret what one sees through a microscope requires considerable knowledge about the materials that make up the object (e.g. an old manuscript). This is best composed of both theoretical knowledge (education) and practical experience.

When Joe Barabe looked at the MS through a microscope, he looked at the pigments. I had a look too, and thought it was very pretty. He, of course, learned things from it.
When a group of conservators looked at the MS through a microscope, they looked at the binding composition. I had a look too and it didn't tell me anything particularly useful. They found all sorts of interesting details. (Note that this is rarely possible with old manuscripts, as one really does not want to break up the binding to look inside).

The advantage with this MS text is that it is *very* long, which favours the use of statistics.
Still, not all statistics are equally reliable, because some depend on subjective interpretations of the handwriting. Also here, it is difficult to make generic statements.
The correct way for all presentations of statistics is to clearly state the assumptions that were made to derive them.