Calgary engineer believes he's cracked the mysterious Voynich Manuscript

[Mark Knowles]

If someone who knows Old-Turkish does what you say, that will mean he/she will have already confirmed that the VMS was written in Turkish. Is not it?
So, even if any person does not translate it as like as same our translation, he/she will have approved our claim about that VMS written in Turkish language. In this case, can I say that you have accepted the Turkish content of VMS?

Dear Ahmet

I think you miss that people are exploring your hypothesis that the manuscript is written in old Turkish and what the logical consequences of your hypothesis are. That doesn't mean that they necessarily agree with your hypothesis just that to analyse that hypothesis they have to consider the implication of it being true.

I would argue that the methodology you apply could also be applied to many languages as other flawed theories are. When you give individual words many interpretations then it is easy to find an interpretation that appears to fit. This is just the same as Gerard Cheshire's theory.

Proving any Voynich translation theory is wrong is hard, the onus is on you to prove it is correct. It is true that people can demonstrate that an argument presented to show that the theory is correct, is flawed. Prove Gerard Cheshire's theory is wrong or the Hannig theory or the many other theories. The problem with these theories is that the arguments presented that they are correct are weak.

Best Wishes