The incredible unravelling of the Voynich Manuscript

[RenegadeHealer]

Now I quickly looked through the main points, but it needs time to see into this theory more carefully. I understand the idea, but unfortunately don't know Greek to judge about correctness of the obtained sentences or phrases. I didn't try Greek in interpretations, besides some labels. 
I hope my inspiration won't end quickly this time and will make tries again with another approaches. The main thing is not to succumb to dissappointment.

Keep in mind that Geoffrey's lack of knowledge of Greek was a main point brought against him. I recall him being unable to counter this point to everyone's satisfaction. Although the conversation remained polite and civil, I recall feeling a general tone of disrespect for his perceived hesitation in admitting this fact. The way Geoffrey's theory wrapped up made me cringe, because it was well-thought-out theory that actually attempted to address the statistical anomalies of Voynichese. But I think it's fair to say that he got told pretty hard by ChenZheChina and MarcoP, and didn't take this as gracefully as he could have, which really hurt his credibility.

I think the reason Geoffrey's thread provoked such a strong reaction in me is because I relate to him. I naturally think and write more like an artist than a scientist. Learning to stick to facts only, using precise and unadorned language, and to always submit humbly and gracefully to a fair factual challenge, are things that had to be trained into me, and still don't come naturally to me. Geoffrey is a talented writer and an intelligent man whose writing I enjoyed reading. I'm not sure how much he realized that he was selling his idea to a number of experts who are unimpressed with beautiful writing, and give points only for new facts brought to light. I've even found that in highly scientific circles, speaking or writing "too beautifully" makes people suspicious of me, even if the facts I'm arguing are solid. I suspect that flowery prose automatically puts a lot of scientists on guard for intellectual dishonesty. At the very least, it can elicit a "Get to the point, I don't have time for this meandering drivel." kind of reception.

TL;DR, there's a lot of friction between VMs theorists who think like artists, and those who think like scientists. It's a shame that the two styles of thinking and perceiving repel each other so often, because they both have something valuable to contribute.