The incompatibility of Voynichese with natural human language

[Davidsch]

The text in the VMS seems to be constructed around a system.  
If we could translate that system into human communication, we can say that it is a language.

I would say that perhaps the text is not constructed around a system, but by a system ( unknown so far ). The idea of an early planned language ( Friedman ) I consider to be daring, but possible. Hildegard von Bingen has shown it to a certain extent with her Lingua Ignota (including syllable extensions, adding sibilants and the invention of whole words).

If one criterion for language is intentional communication, then "demarcations" like Lingua Ignota do not fulfil this criterion. This would also apply to the VMS. So whether such creations are to be called language in the strict sense of the word can be disputed.

edit: The fact that in Lingua Ignota letters are replaced by an imaginary alphabet is not really relevant. The method is so simple that it should be seen more as a "cover-up" than a serious attempt at encryption.

Yes, but now you are going to use English interpretations of grammar and words; the general contents of what I wrote is hopefully expressed correctly;

it is not about what is and what isn't a language, it is about the difference between proving when something IS a human language and when it IS NOT which is difficult.
As you mention one, there are many different ways of communication, some are considered, and some not. But finally this is a matter of agreement: when is Pluto a star and when not?

That can be avoided al together by finding the system applied.