Rosettes and Revelations Pt.1: The Holy City - Koen Gheuens and Cary Rapaport

[Mark Knowles]

It is extremely rare in the world of Voynich theories to see people reacting positively to negative criticism.
The people who are capable of that tend not to propose unverifiable statements in the first place.

I suppose it depends what you mean by "unverifable statements".

If you mean statements that it would probably be impossible ever to verify such as whether the author of the Voynich had a good relationship with his/her mother.

If you mean statements that are not yet verified or be proven to be true. In this respect if people did that then this forum would almost be empty of comment. I don't think there is anything wrong with making proposals that are as yet unproven to be true; in fact I think it is vital that people propose theories. I am not of the camp that believes that the fewer theories proposed the better. I think theories and ideas need to be put out there and examined and processed such that we can move towards trying to verify them or not. Again, I think this is a very important methodological question. I view almost all statements about the Voynich manuscript that people make as being probabilistic some may have low probability and some may have high probability of being true. So I don't feel that we can neatly split statements into fact and speculation.