New Post: "I Do Listen to the Experts. Do YOU?"

[proto57]

You have sort of "switched gears" here, and now reintroduced another argument for the disregarding of experts: Is this one or that one "enough" of an expert, or the right type of expertise, or experienced enough, or had enough familiarity with the Voynich, etc.. Which is fine, really, but not pertinent to the point of my accepting their dating, and yet coming to different conclusions as to what their disparity of opinion tells us.

I also note you went to the "low hanging fruit" of the case of poor Romaine Newbold, and avoid the less vulnerable reputations of Panofsky, O'Neil, Singer, and so on. But I would say that, despite his being led astray by various provably and proven incorrect ideas about the Voynich, he did have a respectable reputation before that, if a somewhat tarnished on after his Voynich fiasco.

We can always find some nugget of gold in even the worst collection of clap trap. I don't agree with you, I mean, that it must be all or nothing, when it comes to anyone's opinion. One risks "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" if we do.

But

I have not "switched gears" as you put it. I have said all along that you don't listen to the people you call "experts"...

Well of course anyone can access my actual word on this issue, what I actually do, and my reasoning behind doing it... and then judge the veracity of your statement as they choose.