03-04-2024, 05:59 PM
(25-03-2024, 06:30 PM)Koen G wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Well to me this seems to be about how we rely on experts. It is not because someone has any PhD, that they can be relied upon to assess a medieval artefact.
Certain herbal traditions stray very far from botanical reality. In these cases, asking the opinion of a botanist may be counterproductive.
I also don't think Rich should cherry pick from their findings. He likes that they said the plants are American, but he doesn't like that they did so in the framework of their Mexican theory.
Again though, why would the European Voynich put so many American plants in his forgery?
Well yes, considering one's PhD, the area of study it covers, or the lack of one, are also reasons one may choose to use or lose a particular expert or their opinion. But I have to say that thinking the use of an expert in botany is "counterproductive" is a new one to me. The Voynich has plants, botanists study and identify plants. I would say that rejecting their input without consideration makes little sense... it is to me exactly the sort of testimony we should be seeking.
About my "cherry picking" findings: Fair, as I've said, while pointing out that to a vast degree, I and my modern forgery theory needs to reject very little as compared to 1420. I accept, in fact, virtually all of it. But that brings me to another point from my post:
Quote:"So then, anyone who believes the Voynich is genuine, and circa-1420, must reject all those 14 pre-C14 experts who said the manuscript was anything BUT 1420. But I do not reject them. I actually agree with virtually all their observations. The thing to realize here is- the reason my seemingly hypocritical belief that the Voynich is a circa 1910 forgery, while the experts did not- is simply because these opinions were not about, nor considering, whether or not the Voynich is a forgery. These experts were looking at the style and content, and then giving their expert opinions as to when and where that style and content most likely originated from. These were not forgery experts, they were art historians, linguists, scholars of the history of the herbal tradition, of iconography, cipher, codeology, palaeography, and so on."
Yes I did answer your question, "... why would the European Voynich put so many American plants in his forgery?", with my opinion on that, in my previous comment above.