Tisquesa,
Apart from the problematic issue of one researcher saying that what everyone above them in the thread has said is "invented" - which could be taken to mean that everyone is a liar (something which is considered a comment infra.dig. among scholars), it has to be kept in mind that each person represents one person's views.
The book by Mary d'Imperio is not without its flaws, errors, and assertions which later research has denied.
Of course you should read it, as you should read anything and everything you feel is of interest or help to you. But do remember that it is now half-a-century out of date on a lot of things, including many of its initial premises.
There are many people - and some of them experienced and formally qualified cryptologists and linguists - who do not believe the text is in cipher.
Wilfrid Voynich died in 1931.
And while rene's website presents the people and ideas that he thinks are worth recording, and I find it very helpful for the biographies, especially, no one book or one person's website or blog is the "Voynich gospel".
The proof, of course, is that we are still referring to work done in the 1940s or 1960s, work which ended with no translation, and no better knowledge of what the manuscript is about.
So newcomers do have a real potential to change the tired old inconclusive arguments.
Best of luck.
Rene,
Might I suggest that when you wish to offer personal remarks about other members of the forum, or say that your own opinion about something differs from theirs, that you preface your remark with a phrase which makes it clear that you are speaking as just one researcher ... e.g. "In my opinion, everything that every one else has said is invented".
That way it is clear that the statement is only one researcher's opinions of everyone else, not any statement of objective fact.
But perhaps it is not my place, but the moderators, to offer such advice. If so, apologies to the moderators and they are welcome to remove this comment.
Apart from the problematic issue of one researcher saying that what everyone above them in the thread has said is "invented" - which could be taken to mean that everyone is a liar (something which is considered a comment infra.dig. among scholars), it has to be kept in mind that each person represents one person's views.
The book by Mary d'Imperio is not without its flaws, errors, and assertions which later research has denied.
Of course you should read it, as you should read anything and everything you feel is of interest or help to you. But do remember that it is now half-a-century out of date on a lot of things, including many of its initial premises.
There are many people - and some of them experienced and formally qualified cryptologists and linguists - who do not believe the text is in cipher.
Wilfrid Voynich died in 1931.
And while rene's website presents the people and ideas that he thinks are worth recording, and I find it very helpful for the biographies, especially, no one book or one person's website or blog is the "Voynich gospel".
The proof, of course, is that we are still referring to work done in the 1940s or 1960s, work which ended with no translation, and no better knowledge of what the manuscript is about.
So newcomers do have a real potential to change the tired old inconclusive arguments.
Best of luck.
Rene,
Might I suggest that when you wish to offer personal remarks about other members of the forum, or say that your own opinion about something differs from theirs, that you preface your remark with a phrase which makes it clear that you are speaking as just one researcher ... e.g. "In my opinion, everything that every one else has said is invented".
That way it is clear that the statement is only one researcher's opinions of everyone else, not any statement of objective fact.
But perhaps it is not my place, but the moderators, to offer such advice. If so, apologies to the moderators and they are welcome to remove this comment.