New Blog post: "Mysterious Steganography"- a Damning Observation

[proto57]

Of all the scripts that Kircher, Baresch, and their contemporaries would (1) have had access to and (2) considered unknown or unintelligible, most had become known and intelligible by Wilfrid Voynich's time.  On that basis, any script characterized in their seventeenth-century correspondence as unknown or unintelligible has a high probability of corresponding to some script that was known and intelligible in the 1910s -- and a low probability of corresponding to one that still wasn't.

Is that a fair summary?

Thank you, pfeaster, and yes I think... if I understand your rephrasing properly.... is a correct assessment of my point. Or, the first part of it. The second part would be that, since, any such script "... would have a low probability of corresponding to one that wasn't", the more likely conclusion is that any such "1910 script unknown to the 17th century and still unknown" would have to be invented in 1910, as no real one would still exist.

But maybe I mangled that? I hope that is clear.

Rich.