I may very well be part of a minority here, but I am not all that much into 'image comparisons' or perhaps rather: 'image analysis'.
Certainly, the illustrations in the Voynich MS are extremely interesting, mainly because they are unusual or even unique. It is also possible and interesting to see similarities between some Voynich MS illustrations and illustrations in other manuscripts. Here, good hits are quite rare.
But I am not a fan of too much speculation.
While the winds diagram comparison of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and the Oxford MS is striking, I would never argue that this means there is a connection between these two specific books. The same holds true for me between the cosmos illustration and the Oresme copy of "De Caelo".
Also, for me there is an enormous difference between "looks similar" and "is meant to represent".
It would be different if we had some analysis from people with a real background and experience in this area, but those cases are extremely rare.
Certainly, the illustrations in the Voynich MS are extremely interesting, mainly because they are unusual or even unique. It is also possible and interesting to see similarities between some Voynich MS illustrations and illustrations in other manuscripts. Here, good hits are quite rare.
But I am not a fan of too much speculation.
While the winds diagram comparison of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. and the Oxford MS is striking, I would never argue that this means there is a connection between these two specific books. The same holds true for me between the cosmos illustration and the Oresme copy of "De Caelo".
Also, for me there is an enormous difference between "looks similar" and "is meant to represent".
It would be different if we had some analysis from people with a real background and experience in this area, but those cases are extremely rare.