How much work to write an enciphered manuscript v one with complex meaningless text?

[Davidsch]

Apart from the fact, that it is impossible, I still wonder,

what would be the ultimate goal and gratification in trying to prove that the text is meaningless?

If you prove it is meaningless then the question as to why and how the author produced meaningless text. Also then one wonder if the drawings are also meaningless.

So proving it meaningless would open the door to many other fascinating questions. Was it produced to make money as a "hoax"? Who was the author(s) that would make such a manuscript?

That is exactly my (philosophical and logical) point: 

 if you want to find the reason for the meaningless-ness, then what you are really doing is trying to find the meaning of the manuscript.

No longer can you say: the script is meaningless, if you've once found the reason for the creation or its use.
That is why I am repeating this question over-and-over again.

If the reason for our quest is not finding the use, what is it then? Finding the uselessness? 
There exists no such thing. Because that is a contradictio in terminus!!

If you say a given tool A is meaningless.  How will you ever be able to prove that?
And on the other hand, perhaps someone will find a new application for that tool, 
which proves in the future that the tool is in fact meaningful in the future.
The chance that it was useless in history, has at that moment decreased significantly.