07-04-2024, 03:24 PM
(07-04-2024, 02:59 PM)proto57 wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I'm not telling you what to do, I'm telling you both what I try to do, and what I see in others, when trying to determine the value of their input... for my own use, my own purposes. If I don't see consistent standards applied, or a uniform context to explain their opinions, then I value it less. It is less useful to me, I mean. I believe that the overall style, ability, accuracy, and yes, features, of the cat and the ram are not easily dismiss-able, and plausibly suggest the two artists may be the same. And I come to that opinion through a consistent application of a standard: That the Voynich artist was a very poor artist, and that they were both purposefully and unavoidably inaccurate in representations of items they often used as influences and suggestions, items which they then altered in form to some degree, so that inarguable identification would always be elusive, thus insulating themselves from identification and possible detection. And they did this under an overall context which explains these observations: They were a forger with poor artistic skills, and lacking in a care or understanding of human and animal anatomy and botany.
Why is it important to you to prove that the Voynich Manuscript is a fake? Why not just walk away?