The Modern Forgery Hypothesis

[proto57]

What is the argument against the C14 dating? I mean, if you would fake it around 1910, why would you fake it the way that it tricks the C14 method?

I don't, and I think no one argues with the dating, in general. So I don't think it tricks the C14 method... that is probably not possible, and anyway, in Voynich's time it didn't exist, so he wouldn't have seen the need.

In my opinion, it is simpler than that: He just grabbed a stack of blank vellum, in his piles of stuff at his Florence location, because it looked old. For various reasons I believe he cut down "folio sized" sheets, and that he would have only needed three folios worth of it, at eight sheets per folio. There is, I think, evidence for this: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

And remember, the date of the parchment does not actually match the content applied to it... the writing and illustrations. Yes, this is claimed now, but before the dating results most experts gave far different dates. In my opinion, also, it is that dating that has been driving the identifications... I watched it happen, in fact. When the C14 came out, it was considered a shock, as it didn't match the predictions. Now it is said the age of the parchment DOES match the content! What changed? We learned the dating of the parchment... but no, Voynich, if he forged this, happened to grab parchment that was over a hundred and fifty years too old for what he applied to it... at first.