An Artificial Construction

[oshfdk]

In conclusion, I don't think that @dashtofsk tables prove that Voynichese is not a natural language.  Not at all.  One may even argue that they are evidence that it is...

You of course can choose how to interpret evidence. One thing to note, your suggestion of splitting pinyin by any main vowel is at odds with what I intended and mixing many different B together dilutes the signal. The below is 6 charts, one is the same pinyin file split by 'i', then two samples of Latin, one sample of the modern English, the Voynich MS and the pinyin split by a class of characters, as you suggested. Color coding assigns values of 0.1 and below to red, values of 10.0 and above to green, and log linearly interpolates in between.

If we only compare the first five charts, Voynich is an absolute clear outlier among Chinese, Latin and English. If we add the pinyin split that you proposed at the lower right corner, it still looks closer to other languages to me, but this can be argued either way, however it is not important at all, because for any single central character or sequence B (like k used in Voynichese), as in the pinyin example in the upper left corner, the distinction between a natural language and Voynichese is very clear.