Calgary engineer believes he's cracked the mysterious Voynich Manuscript

[Ahmet Ardıç]

This is getting embarrassing now. You're not crushing anybody with your linguistic knowledge, and least of all actual linguists. The walls of text aren't obscuring the weaknesses in your arguments but amplifying them.

None of the Turkologist linguists who can speak Turkish language and who have studied our work have been able to say that the content is not in Turkish, and they will not be able to say so in the future. On the contrary, some Turkish language experts themselves began to say that the texts contained Turkish. In other words, although the developments in this direction are progressing slowly, the process is developing in a positive way.

I think I have answered all the specific questions asked about what appear to be weaknesses in our study. If there are areas that are not understood, we explain them separately if there are specific questions to be given.

I don't know if there are questions or weaknesses that you think are still unanswered.

Could you please list of the weaknesses and/or unanswered ATA study arguments?

If you are going to list the questions that have been given before and have found the answer, it would be better if you could write clearly and in specific content about at which point the answer given before was not considered satisfactory.


At this point, let's leave personal opinions aside and talk about the way, methods, and evidence used by linguistics only.

Thanks