I am sorry, but I don't see the point in continuing this discussion.
There is clearly very strong, documented, historical evidence that the Marci letter found together with the Voynich MS has to be genuine. This evidence is almost entirely ignored, and the part that is represented at your blog is represented incorrectly.
Then arguments that supposedly support a fake are presented that are not more than speculation.
Voynich would not have done this, the Jesuits would not have allowed that, such-or-other is suspicious.
(Edit)
I am very skeptical that any response is likely to have any impact. But let's try another one.
If the Marci letter was a fake, written by Voynich, he would have written it on a plain and unfolded piece of paper.
So both a real Marci letter and a fake Marci letter would have started their life flat and unfolded.
So why would it be impossible for the real letter to end up folded as it is, while it would be possible for the fake letter?
I am sorry but that just makes no sense.
There is clearly very strong, documented, historical evidence that the Marci letter found together with the Voynich MS has to be genuine. This evidence is almost entirely ignored, and the part that is represented at your blog is represented incorrectly.
Then arguments that supposedly support a fake are presented that are not more than speculation.
Voynich would not have done this, the Jesuits would not have allowed that, such-or-other is suspicious.
(Edit)
I am very skeptical that any response is likely to have any impact. But let's try another one.
If the Marci letter was a fake, written by Voynich, he would have written it on a plain and unfolded piece of paper.
So both a real Marci letter and a fake Marci letter would have started their life flat and unfolded.
So why would it be impossible for the real letter to end up folded as it is, while it would be possible for the fake letter?
I am sorry but that just makes no sense.