(08-09-2023, 07:04 AM)Jacinto Gimenez wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.what is wrong with this thinking process?
The experts performed the C14 test on the "vellum". The vellum is not paper, it is the skin of a dead animal, properly tanned and smoothed. Dating tells us when the ram/sheep/cow from which the skin was taken was born, but it tells us nothing about when someone wrote on that skin.Think: Years of the animal's life + Years the skin spent in the tanner's workshop until it was sold + Years the skin spent in the bookbinding workshops + Years the "virgin" manuscript spent in the friars' library storerooms + Years of travel from Europe to America + Years in the destiny depository .... Shall we continue? If we apply a little logic, that adds up to many years, I would say about 90 years more.
I'm afraid that the first component of your think sequence is incorrect -- C14 will date from the point of the animal's death. On the rest of your "Years" arguments, there's just no basis to think every one of them occurred, let alone that they would each take many years. That being said, it's not implausible that there was some length of time between the animal's death and the application of ink to vellum. I think we should lean heavily on experts in historical manuscripts and the practices of those times to explain what maximum time is feasible (and what amount of time was most likely). Your task would then be to build a case that the 90+ years, although unlikely, is still not beyond reasonable doubt.
Similar is the requirement for other aspects of your case. One needs to show not just that there are some loose connections, but that there is evidence that supports that the connection is designed (i.e. intentional) beyond a reasonable doubt.
I would challenge you to do the following. (In fact I think it is necessary, if you wish to be convincing). Show several pages of the manuscript with the original Voynichese mapped to your phonemes (at the individual symbol level), then mapped to Nahuatl (at the word level), then to English (at clause or sentence level). Ideally, these would be shown line-by-line with the four versions stacked.
This will either show strong evidence for your hypothesis, or else it will make it obvious to both yourself and others that it has no substance.