The Modern Forgery Hypothesis

[proto57]

Open wounds? Jesus Christ, Rich, did you also moderate a drama forum?

We have no intent to censor you. Your beliefs get a lot of exposure and reactions at Voynich Ninja, and I'm happy about that. But your theory is a personal one, just like Cvetka's Slovenian theory, Antonio's "visual code" theory, Ruby's Greek theory and so forth. These all challenge the currently dominant view that the manuscript is an unsolved medieval mystery.

I don't think the Flat Earth theory would get as much leeway on an astronomy discussion board as fringe theories do here. And it will stay that way. 

I won't comment on the Marci Wax thread since I was sick when that was going on and I haven't even caught up with everything yet. I am not going to read that and then judge after the facts. Let's just start with a clean slate again and make an effort to avoid long discussions about your theory in threads that started out about something else. (I know you are often not the 'instigator' ) 

If there are any further bleeding wounds, please PM me. These kinds of public spats don't reflect well on anyone involved.

Well that's nice... "drama"? And equating my Modern Forgery to the level of "Flat Earth" theories? Why do you feel a need to be so insulting? And by the way, needing to mock another person's strongly held ideas is not only a base tactic, but also a tacit admission they are not confident in their position. I have no need to mock or demean your belief in 1420 Genuine, by any means, and never do. I don't want to! And even if I did, I would know it is not right to do.

I choose to argue with facts and reasoning, because I am confident in my theory.

I've not attacked you, not once. And I'll point out that I am not the one who keeps bringing this up. I have not once, except when you, Rene, or Tavie do. And while doing it, you keep violating the exact same rule you accuse me of: Off topic posts. This is not a "chastise and insult a member thread", is it? It is now, apparently. What else is it you expect me to do, besides not challenge the genuine-centric posts the other threads, and to stay in here with my ideas? What more are you looking for?

And yes, Tavie's actions are the exact definition of censorship: My posts were removed from the ongoing conversation they applied to, and put somewhere else. That is just plain wrong on every level, and as amply pointed out, violates your own rules about topicality, ignores the posts using the information on the watermarks as evidence of genuine (which has a right to be there, as mine did), and so on. But still you bring it up in here... all of you did, so far... is it that you want me to change my mind, and tell you its OK and proper to do this?

"But your theory is a personal one...".

What is the point of that? Are you suggesting that the number of people who believe in a theory is an indication of its level of correctness? Consensus is not science. But it is not true that it has no adherents, it has a great many, inside and outside the general Voynich community. Some post under pseudonyms, as they see what happens for challenging the Paradigm. And also, in my experience, many people who share your paradigm are not aware of the many problems with the Voynich, the anachronisms and anomalies. They are led down the Primrose Path under the mistaken assumption that it is a proven genuine 15th century manuscript. Rene and Rafal, one or both, actually wrote that in the introduction to the Skinner Voynich book... that forgery was "disproven". That is not true, of course.

And your own YT video, countering my theory: It left out all of the counter facts to genuine, and misstated and edited the points OF my theory... which again resulted in a biased and skewed impression of my own work, and the problems with the Voynich. You even deleted at least one of my responses under the video, which challenged points you made in it! My theory does not need to leave out any of the points used to support genuine, while genuine relies on censoring counter points.

"These kinds of public spats don't reflect well on anyone involved."

No, they don't, I agree. But I remind you that 1) I didn't start it, it was your moderator, Tavie, who censored me, and deleted my posts from an appropriate thread, and moved them to another they didn't belong in, 2) I only complained about that, once, then dutifully obeyed, followed the rules, and went to the place she sent me, and 3) remained SILENT about it... no "spat", not a peep from me, until 4) you all keep coming in here, and riling things up, and 5) I ONLY respond to these intrusions, then go silent, again, as I will, again... until?

There were no "spats" in here, and would not be, but you keep starting them up again. Why? I'm "behaving", can't you guys leave well enough alone?