Solve the Voynich to save the world

[RenegadeHealer]

But, from his comment You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., I understand he thinks the VMS is probably a hoax.

The problem with injunctions such as Bakker's (or Victor's) that it is not worth trying to decipher something because it is probably a hoax, or there isn't enough text for Shannon unicity, or whatever, is that such appeals universally fail to have any stopping power on the enthusiast. And why should they? If the existence of dozens or hundreds of equally plausible previous "decipherments" of a corpus fail to dissuade them, why should other considerations?

I don't read support for the hoax hyopthesis into Richard Sproat's blog comment that you linked, Marco. He appears to be referring to other people who support the hoax hypothesis, specifically people who recommend no further attempts at decipherment given the plausibility of the hoax hypothesis. The comment is neutral on Prof Sproat's personal opinion on the nature of the VMs. I'm guessing this is deliberate; just from a look at his webpage and CV, I think I can say with confidence that Prof Sproat places a high value on precise language, and chooses his words carefully.

I'm sure Richard Sproat does have an opinion on what the VMs is, whether or not it contains meaningful linguistic content, and if so, what it would take to decipher it. He may, however, be one of the many qualified people who don't care to get into this fray.