Morten St George Theory

[-JKP-]

You have this crazy idea that I WANT the manuscript to be European even though I keep telling you I don't care where it's from. I don't! I was hoping it might be from Madagascar or the Canary Islands or Central or East Asia or something interesting like that but the data doesn't point in that direction.

For the record, there is a pocket in the U.S. that has almost the same climatic conditions as sections of Italy where these kinds of plants might be found. But it is not Meso-America.

For reasons unknown, you seem to have some type of hangup against the Americas. I think you should revisit the arguments for American plants. Some of those arguments can be found in the following paper (40 pages) from Purdue University:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

..

NO I DON'T HAVE A HANGUP AGAINST THE AMERICAS. I included the Americas in every phase of my plant research. Also Africa, East Asia. I ALWAYS searched the entire globe.

And I've already read those papers. I've read most of what VMS researchers have written about plants. It's garbage research. Poor scholarship.


The Bonolobus chloranthus picture? That's an ATYPICAL picture of the plant. It usually doesn't look like that. They cherry-picked an atypical picture of the plant TO FIT THEIR THEORY. They did NOT include the European plant that looks more like the VMS plant than their example. BAD SCHOLARSHIP.

The Philodendron mexicanum? They picked it to fit their theory. There are a DOZEN European plants that ALSO look like this drawing and they didn't include them. BAD SCHOLARSHIP.


BAD RESEARCH.

When I told you that there is a pocket in the U.S. where the climatic conditions are similar to a region in Italy, I was not putting down the Americas. I was INFORMING you that there are places on the planet where some of the same plants are found or CLOSE LOOK-ALIKES are found.

I have written blogs about the Janick/Talbert/Tucker research. Maybe you should read them before you trust their "evidence" and their conclusions:

Janick/Tucker misinterpretation of medieval characters: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Janick/Tucker questionable interpretation of animal drawings: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Talbert/Tucker questionable identification of plants (tunnel-vision): You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Janick/Tucker HIGHLY questionable identification of fish: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.


They're not doing honest research. They are choosing examples that fit their theory and ignoring the ones that contradict their theory.

BAD SCHOLARSHIP.