The Voynich Manuscript as an Iberian-African Voyage Record

[rikforto]

When I looked at the EVA translation, one thing that I don't understand is, why K and T should be different Symbols. Isnt it obvious, that it is the same? If you make analysis of the EVA translation it shows you that there is an extrem K <-> T substitution in words. So there are a lot of words that exchange K for T or vice versa. First I thought thats a homophonic substitution, but it is just the same word in the original document, just one time transcribed into T and the other time into a K. How can someone use this EVA transcript to analyse anything?

This is easier so I will start here. EVA-k has no loop on the left side and EVA-t has it. It's important to understand that all the EVA transcription is claiming is that those two variants exist and you can usually recognize them. And, in the great many cases most people agree which is which, but with any transcription choice you will find some instances where the judgement of the community divides. It is not claiming that those variants are different letters in the manuscript, and indeed there's good evidence EVA-a and EVA-y might be variants of each other. If you want to analyze EVA-k and EVA-t as the same---you are not the first person to suggest this---it's as easy as replacing all the "t" in the transcript with "k" and they will be the same. Had they been transcribed as the same, those of us who believe the difference is likely significant would have to redo the transcript. 

To your bigger question about how to get more recognition for this idea, it needs more convincing proof. Before I offer some ideas how you might provide that, I am going to ask: Did an LLM play a role in generating this hypothesis and have you checked to make sure everything it said is verifiable? I see some signs that there may be some hallucinations here.