Who is the author of VM?

[Mark Knowles]

Rene generally avoids stating theories, which means he is rarely criticised on the basis of those theories, which is convenient; if you rarely stick your head above the parapet then you are unlikely to get shot down. 

I have a lot of respect for those few who have been studying Voynichese for many years and have somehow managed not to fall into the giant trap at the start of the Voynich labyrinth, and also somehow the sneakier traps lying after it. I would like - but without much hope - to be like them in the future!  Many public theories so far seem to share the same trait of their supporting evidence being inversely proportionate to their owner's degree of certainty.  Not joining them doesn't seem to me to signify cowardice.

If you say nothing then your voice is not worth having. Science progresses by people stating theories which are subsequently supported or overturned. Not stating theories is frequently the same as saying nothing. Following or stating a hypothesis is a bold and important part of the process.

And if you are a person cautious about stating hypotheses then when you do choose to state a hypothesis about the manuscript one would expect it to be a good one.

Many public theories so far seem to share the same trait of their supporting evidence being inversely proportionate to their owner's degree of certainty.  Not joining them doesn't seem to me to signify cowardice.

Exactly. As soon as someone becomes too convinced of their own theory, it feels to me like they are trying desperately to sell me some bogus product. Why dig a trench somewhere based on insufficient evidence?

But Rene's own theories when he states them like this one have scant amount of supporting evidence.