Expert Opinion

[Hermes777]

The Voynich is little different to a crime scene. The forensic people come in and take all the measurements, compile the stats, take fingerprints, etc. These are experts in their (narrow and specific) fields. But it is the Detective - a generalist - who must asess that evidence, and the circumstantial evidence, and all the factors not covered by forensics, and keep an overview of the entire case. If a profile of the culprit is required, the Detective might consult a criminal psychologist - an expert. And so on. Experts are people you consult. But as Detectives and juries know, their opinion can be wrong (or partial), or unimportant in the wider context. It always takes a generalist to bring the whole case together.

In Voynich Studies there is an abundance of statistics, and it has had the attention of many experts, and much good work has been done, but the quality of Voynich generalists is miserably low - there is a lack of (non-experts) who are able to assess, weigh and prioritize all the evidence and bring together an overall picture of the case. This is the current situation. More experts need consulting, certainly, more forensic and statistical studies, but there is a huge amount of data already and very few people capable of stepping back and assessing what it all means.