The Modern Forgery Hypothesis

[ioannestritemius]

In the comments below my blog post of September, 2015, "You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.", Thomas Ernst has posted a series of comments carefully explaining why the Latin of that letter (the one Voynich claimed to have found in the Voynich, of course) is problematic in ways that would never appear in a genuine letter of the (supposed) time, by the (supposed) authors.

and now....

Let me save everyone some time. Each and every last letter contained in PUG 555-568 pertaining to Kircher's supposed Prague correspondents, plus Beinecke 408A, is a modern forgery. Voynich did not just forge the world's favorite mystery book, but also the beloved "carteggio". I prefer plain English: correspondence. And plain truth: forgery. The only interesting question from here on is the following: what else did he forge? If the man forged "Medieval Alice in Wonderland" and a complete 14-volume set of 17th Century correspondence (I can only assume that the remaining letters in those volumes are forgeries too), he fabricated more. 
[...]

 And thank you for our brief time together. – Thomas Ernst.

Ah, that clarifies quite a bit.

The irony is excused. It is physical illness that made me write my previous comment. My presence on this planet is painful and limited. But I will gladly post a few more "points" if possible. No one has replied to my previous question about the diacritics. Diacritics are not the same as "spelling" or "abbreviations" or a good or a bad hair day. I thought I explained that. But all I received were superficial, illlogical, not to say polemic, and not detail-specific responses. That's not worth my limited energy.