Calgary engineer believes he's cracked the mysterious Voynich Manuscript

[Ahmet Ardıç]

You're telling me, "None of this is helping your Voynich Manuscript case." Even this sentence of yours tells us that you went to the task of giving memorized answer without reading what was written. We already wrote earlier that these have nothing to do with Voynich. So we have no such claim.

[You are missing the point here.  Read the start of this thread and see how your theory that Voynichese was Turkish was received with interest and unusual good-will...and now see how it has ended up with you pushing all sorts of nationalistic fringe theories about Sumerian being Turkish, Hittite being Turkish, Etruscan being Turkish while simultaneously projecting this kind of behaviour onto us and implying we are actively or passively part of some western academic conspiracy for the sake of Proto-Indo-European.  I am tired of the assumptions you project onto me about what I "want" Sumerian, Hittite, Etruscan or Voynichese to be whenever I reply to you.

This is the problem with nationalism. You disagreed with me on the other thread that nationalism was a problem.  Well, this thread shows why.  When it is clear your work is motivated by nationalism, you will no longer be seen as objective, nor taken seriously.]

Dear Tavie,

This is the second time this topic comes up on this page and I have answered it before, but I think it was not understood or read.

Should I thank you for saying "Received ATA team theory with interest and unusual good-will?" Thank you for such a welcome, however it would be better to treat all coherent theories or claims with equal interest.

Here we present information about our own research, which is incomplete yet but has very positive early results. Whether this is met with "unusual-good-will" or not is probably related to your view of our theory.

The most frequently asked question to us on this page and on social media was how Turks could write such a book while using the Arabic alphabet. As we go into the details of the alphabet, it is necessary to give some examples so that the situation can be understood well. For example, we show that Etruscan Runic signs and Gok-Turk Runic inscriptions in Asia are highly similar in visual-drawing types. Moreover, some of them are read in the same phonetic value. There is a time difference of thousands of years between them. Also, the geographies are different.

The Gök Türk inscriptions are mostly on the obelisks, but they are scattered all over Asia in numbers expressed in thousands. Today, most of them are illegible due to natural wear. Since these are written on stones, it is not possible to determine their age in the laboratory environment. Based on the natural erosion of these inscriptions, such as rain and wind, there have been researchers who claimed that some of them may be older than 2000 thousand or 3000 thousand years. However, the ages of some of the inscriptions, which have relatively little natural wear and are therefore characterized as more recent, are known because they are read.

The "Kül Tigin Inscription" was written in 732, and the "Bilge Kagan Inscription" was written in 735. They were read by the Danish linguist Vilhelm Thomsen in 1893 with the help of the Russian Turcologist Vasili Radlof. If I remember correctly, on 15 December 1893, these readings were explained to the scientific world in an article and a statement at the Royal Danish Academy of Sciences.

So far everything is normal. However, in the 129 years that have passed, the possibility of a connection between the Etruscan Runic signs and the Gok Turk Runic inscriptions/signs ignored by European academies., which are in great overlap. But, they have almost never been brought up in the linguistic circles and academies of modern Europe, as far as I know.

Hundreds of our researchers have written about these kind of issues, especially starting in 1930 and after. They read most of the Runic inscriptions in Europe, including the Etruscan inscriptions, in Turkish. What they had in common was that they published alphabet transcriptions that allowed them to read the same signs with the same sound values. Thus, although they limited themselves in the field of reading, they realized these readings. In doing so, they did not read the same sign with different sound values in different words, but in the same phonetic formats that they presented in their transcriptions. However, since 1930, the books and articles written by them have not been published by European universities or translated into European languages.

Meanwhile, numerous claims that many cultures, such as "Etruscan, are PIE cultures", have been repeated many times in Europe and around the world. While these were being done, despite the fact that there were those who showed opposite views and evidence in our country, these evidences and articles were ignored, and in a word, the perception that these were produced only because of Turkish nationalism spread.

We are not writing about Turkish nation or people here. We write on subjects such as Turkish and Turkic languages and inscriptions. We are not the first to say that the Etruscan people were a Turkic-speaking people. We are not the first to say that the language of Sumerian, Hittite, Hatti or some other ancient civilizations was Turkic. We don't just talk, we show evidence.

What does it have to do with the Voynich manuscript?

While I was explaining the example of our ATA transcription, I stated that we benefited from the books of some researchers and linguists, whose writing about some Runic indicators seen in Europe. If we did not take advantage of this papers, making ATA alphabet transcription would not be possible for sure.


The Etruscan people were a Turkic-speaking people and use very similar Runic scripts.

There are extensive studies and articles written about civilizations such as Sumer, Eti, Hatti, Etruscan. Such Turkishness nationalism claims are minimum 100 years old issue. But, this is not a problem for us.

We have never written about the nationality of the authors of VM. Because of we do not care about her/his nationality. We are writing about the language she/he uses and the alphabet in the book.

When I opened a membership account as a reader at the British Library in London in 2018, I understood from the questions on the registration form given to me that this library is curious and wants to know about my nationality and color.

In fact, people with nationalist ideas often accuse others of nationalism. People without feelings of nationalism care less whether an approach is nationalistic or not.

I think what I've written and the evidence I've shown shakes up your entrenched misconceptions and old knowledge that you thought was absolutely true. Or we may be holding you an intellectual or mental mirror without realizing it.

Frankly, it doesn't matter if you show us a "unusual good-will" approach or not, and I don't care. I'd appreciate it if you didn't include the distinction in your head, whether negative or positive. There is no nationalist approach. There is a case of expressing realistic ideas based on evidence. This can only disturb those who have ideas that do not coincide with the existing stereotyped thought in their head.

Thanks