27-01-2026, 02:36 AM
(This post was last modified: 27-01-2026, 02:37 AM by Bluetoes101.)
(25-01-2026, 02:52 AM)MHTamdgidi_(Behrooz) wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Ok, Bluetoes101, ..
I also don't like "I'm 5000 years old so I'm smart" as a credential. So that side is totally valid to me.
However, I didn't comment on anyone's intent and so I'll skip over that. But to start with the vellum, stains, binding, margin, worm holes, fading and red ink staining do not look real.
Secondly, I understand (from past projects) what Voynich text usually does. Voynich text is not entirely predictable, but if you have a whole page of it about 85% of it falls into "normal Voynich stuff" (The entropy is what it is for a reason, the text is somewhat predictable). You do not have 80% of the page being rogue in regards to structural consistency with "words".. on top of completely made up glyph shapes.
Adding all this together tells people who have spent a long time with the manuscript that what they are looking at is not authentic.
I can break this down into a scientifically acceptable observation, I guess, but is it really worth it?
Dissecting this (for example).. I mean, do we really need to?