The Modern Forgery Hypothesis

[proto57]

Hi Rafal: A few points about what you wrote ...

It would be nice for me if you check my solution of Rohonc Codex once. Just please remember that the type of solution I propose (logographic writing) means that the solution may be not only just right or wrong but also let's say 80% right.
It's not the case that once you get values for letters then you can read any word. You get the meaning of each word in standalone process from the context and other clues. So some words may be right while other may be wrong. As you may guess the most unsure are hapax legomena, words that appear only once and you cannot see them in different contexts.

I promise I will take a look at your solution of the Rohonc Codex as soon as possible. I am interested in seeing it.

As for Voynich Manuscript I believe that we cannot say that fake is just a fake. If I understand your position correctly you claim that it is 20th century fake of Wilfrid Voynich. And I am close to opinion that it is a fake of some anonymous 15th century German charlatan and his team. Such opinions aren't compatible, they involve accepting and not accepting different things as "truth".

You know it is a funny thing about that... thinking it may be an old fake/hoax/forgery, but not a modern one. The number of people who do believe this possible is surprising. I only just recently discovered a close friend in Germany feels this the most probable answer... I didn't know that. But the thing is, really, that means they have actually accepted maybe 80% or 90% of my hypothesis, that relating to content, and only rejected the timing. 

Personally- and don't tell anyone this- but I think the reason can be mostly be summed up in that indefensible and undefinable sense that "It just looks fake". Old or new, it does not look very real. Maybe that does not describe your feelings, but I suspect it happens a lot. People are told it is "just like" this or that other Medieval manuscript, but its really like, "It does? No, it looks like a load of...". 

Sorry if I sounded impolite at moments. It wasn't my intention and English is not my native language.

No problem as to the tone of your comments to me, I didn't think they were all that bad. Believe me, I've had some pretty awful things said to me, and about me, you need thick armor to challenge cherished beliefs, and directly to the believers! But I think it is important, because as I often say, people should know the whole story so they can make up their own minds. Whether or not they agree with me. I've seen people spend decades on this problem, and a few friends die during that time. Life it precious, we should at least go into it with open eyes, so we can decide how to spend it.

This is always why I separate what I find out that is factual, and make it very clear what is my opinions only, based on those facts. I never want to mislead anyone. I don't think that it is fair to mislead people, or hide information what would help them make a truly informed decision, and so pointing out when others do these things is a major influence on my efforts.