No text, but a visual code

[Antonio García Jiménez]

Sorry JKP, I respect your opinions but I have not been convinced by any of your replies to my ten cartesian points.


The fact that it has been impossible to identify SOME of the plants might mean that some of them are not plants in the botanical sense...There's no guarantee the text is related to the drawings
  
    I would say that it is the opposite. Most of the plants have not been identified. And what does it mean that some may not be plants? You leave me speechless. Thinking that there is no guarantee that there is a relationship between script and drawings is a challenge to common sense 


    These kinds of straddles, combined glyphs, and embellished scripts are found in Greek and Latin

Decoratives scripts of course, but have you seen many big bridges between glyphs like those of the VM?

Maybe the inclined line is a coincidence. There are a number of Latin scripts that have inclined letters

   Have you seen many Latin scripts with three inclined lines in a row? Is it a coincidence that those three lines are seen in the imagery of the VM, especially on the clock of the Rosettes folio?

Only a few of the glyphs are unknown (t, p, and their benched versions). The rest of the glyphs are known and most of them are quite common.

   I would say that the rest of the glyphs maybe resemble known glyphs in shape but have another semantic value

You can't look at just the small circles and ignore what is around them. There are dots in front and letters and dots behind. Any explanation of the circles should take the whole pattern into consideration.

   The whole pattern of f70r1 is nine small circles followed not by letters but by other glyphs of the VM script. And the dots also represent the degrees of an sphere. This is one of the biggest clues against the linguistic theory of VM