[Article] A possible generating algorithm of the Voynich manuscript

[ReneZ]

The problem is not with the statistics or the existence of patterns.

The problem is with the suggestion that these patterns are the result of a conscious effort by the author(s) to create these patterns, i.e. the auto-copying hypothesis ('intentional').

These patterns are not so pronounced that explaining them can explain the whole text. It just explains a fraction of the text. The possibility that they are a side effect of some other process is not really addressed ('unintentional'). I am not aware of any evidence that speaks in favour of the intentional option, over the unintentional option.

The network of words with their edit distances only shows the existing words.
One has to imagine that inside this network there is a much denser network of other words, also with edit distance one (1) to the existing words, that do not occur in the text.

Effectively, the network of existing words consists of very specific 'paths' through this denser network, and I find it hard to believe that this network of paths is just the result of chance.

There is far more planning and system in the MS text than this.