Calgary engineer believes he's cracked the mysterious Voynich Manuscript

[Ahmet Ardıç]

@Ahmet
[Now you write again that the plants are not drawn realistically.] That is not true. In fact, most of them are drawn quite accurately.

I don't need a time machine to realise that you judge the drawings as fantasy to hide your ignorance and mistakes.

This example even raises the question of who drew from whom.
To be clear, most of the plant drawings correspond to the expectations of the time around 1400 and are mostly cassic. And your explanation of the bananas is pure nonsense.

Translated with You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. (free version)

Mr. Tentakulus,

When and where I had write "that the plants are not drawn realistically"? 

It is not my words and I never say that. 

Please can you show me where I was using exactly that same words in same order by generalizing this as "that the plants are not drawn realistically" ?


Some are similar, some are not. 

I wrote down my thoughts on why dissimilars might be dissimilar, and it was out of the question for me to generalize with the sentence you mentioned here.

Honestly, this type of behavior is very annoying to me. What right do you have to show my expressions differently?

If you are still having difficulty in understanding what you have read, then what is the point of presenting things that I did not express as if I expressed them? 

Is there a special purpose of sharing the expressions that I did not use in any of my previous comments by adding one more question, as if I had used them in the comments? Could you please tell all the readers about your purpose in passing false information here?

Please refer to my previous comments on this subject on the page at the link below. In the comment on this page below, I wrote with other comments in same sunject in same page:
 
"3- The author is a traveler. And she/he is not traveling together with the hundreds of plants she/he draws. Therefore, most of the time she/he must be drawing real plants as much as she/he can remember in his/her memory. Therefore, for some plant drawings, it may not partially coincide with the photographs we have. However, we think that she/he drew some other plants realistically and those are matching with the photographs we have."  
See this my opinion that is one of my many previous comments on this topic (is here): You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.


Here we read SAZAK, ŞALAK/SALAK and ZOLAK/ZULAK as the name of some of the plants. Did I say that the drawings made here are not similar? These are well drawn. But we cannot say that all of them are well drawn. For reading ŞALAK/SALAK, ZOLAK/ZULAK and SAZAK, refer to this page and remember again.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

I wrote it in the sense that the author may have drawn some plants as he/she remembers well in realistic way.  May be for some plants which he/she was not remember well not drawn in realistic way. And-or, he/she, may have drawn about some of his/her experimental expectation, and perhaps his/her ability to paint may not be good as we expect now.

I didn't put all the drawings in VM in same one pot.

Why are you twisting my statements?