Imagine waking up tomorrow with the solution to the Voynich Manuscript.

[rikforto]

Sorry, but that is not correct.  History is full of examples where practically all the experts in a field rejected what was in fact a correct and ground-breaking discovery/solution/invention.

If we exclude the situations where the idea was initially presented without any good evidence, then I think these are mostly fictionalized accounts for better drama. At least, every time I look up the details of a similar story it turns out there were both supporters and opponents from get go, just the opponents were more vocal and authoritative. But this doesn't make as good a movie plot as "one person against the whole world", so this alternative narrative gets boosted. I don't know of an instance where a well presented idea with substantial evidence got universally rejected.

Linear B is a good example of how a lay identification doesn't always meet academic standards. A major line of objection accepted the translation to a degree I think most people in this audience would think was agreement, but contested if it was specifically Mycenean Greek and if all the translations based on the assumption it was were correct and appropriate. It took a substantial amount of back and forth by experts to resolve those questions, in this case largely in Ventris's favor but with much more sophisticated arguments than he was making.

Given the dialectical difficulties being thrown up by the Zodiac names, there's every possibility we get this sort of detailed (and admirable! no shade on Ventris here!) sketch from a lay person, but some expert in rare 14th Century German dialects whips it into a shape that other experts can accept