The Modern Forgery Hypothesis

[proto57]

Good God, this thread is still active? I would've expected it to die down by now.

... "expected", or hoped? 

The thing that I've learned, Philpp, is that whether people want to admit it or not, they have a nagging sense that modern forgery is a very real possibility. This is why the interest. Other theories are not considered remotely as possible as this one, so they get much less interest and attention.

Others, may think that there is nothing to Modern Forgery. It sounds like you may feel that way. That with a simple examination of the pros and cons, it will be easily dismissed. So they drop in in order to "get my mind right", like the Sheriff said to Hud.

I used to think so, too, by the way. I believed all the commonly stated counters to it being a modern forgery, but saw some things that concerned me. So I critically examined each one, and one by one they fell. And that also may be part of the interest here... I see many new people who don't know my arguments, or the basis for them, and they say things like, "But don't you know about A, B, or C?". Not realizing that I also looked at A, and B, and C... maybe even in 2009, or 2013, or 2019, whatever. I've done the digging, found the sources, and can give factually based responses... either differing opinions or facts that people didn't know... to these concerns.

And for old timers, too. Many may have dismissed Modern Forgery long ago, but usually not because they read the best arguments for it, but more because they retreated from the discussion, and have ignored it, assuming it is impossible without even knowing. This forum thread has been great for that... a place for newcomers and old timers like me to see those best arguments, and what the counters to them really are.

That that is also of interest. I think the "dirty little secret" is that many people do actually wonder if the Voynich is real or not, old or not. They want to be convinced it is real, but really are not certain it is. So they want to see the arguments pro and con. It is interesting to them, no matter what they come away thinking about it. And if they go away still thinking the Voynich 1420 and genuine, then at least they will be more informed, and know the arguments against their own theory. Maybe it will help some sharpen their own personal theories better, or come up with new ones.

It is good for me, too, and interesting to me. I've learned a lot from this thread, myself. It has honed my hypothesis by seeing some of the best arguments against it. Basically, it is a win-win for everyone, I think. And I thank Koen for creating it, actually. In the beginning I thought it was a way of isolating the concept of modern forgery, but it has turned out to be a major asset for everyone. For one thing, when I was arguing my theory outside this thread, I had to restrain many points I felt pertainent. The answers I gave, even though pared down, were still unwanted in those other threads. This dedicated thread gives me the opportunity to express completely and honestly how I see Modern Forgery, and that has been another reason it is a help to me and everyone.

But Philipp, probably the best reason of all for this thread, and the interest in it, is that it is totally, 100% voluntary whether or not you read it, or participate, yourself.

Rich