22-05-2026, 05:02 PM
(22-05-2026, 03:00 PM)Jorge_Stolfi wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.But forgeries have a logic. To make the investment and risk worthwhile, the forger will try to maximize the attractiveness of the work to potential buyers. A painting forger will try to produce a fake that looks like a Rembrandt, a Pollock, a Van Gogh, or at least the work of some minor known painter; not the work of a pensioner who just watched a couple of Bob Ross videos....
And the VMS does not look at all like that. Its 240 pages are 240 missed opportunities to make the work more appealing to the alleged targets of the scam -- whether they were rich nobles, scholars, physicians, alchemists...
Jorge, you need to surface that sense of humor more often. You had me laughing at the Bob Ross analogy.
And, I could come up with some plausible but weak arguments debating your position but, honestly, I think you are correct. I have for many months had the internal argument with myself that nobody writes 30,000+ words of just gibberish, even as a hoax. I still have this hope, like I think most people have, that it has some meaning. But right now, I'm simply going where the numbers are leading me. And everything I keep seeing or discovering just adds to the copy/mutate theory. I'm secretly hoping that there is some mnemonic buried inside of it and I'm still actively searching for that evidence. So far, it's been typical Voynich elusive.
But, until I, or someone else can come up with a better solution, this one seems to work. It is not the explanation I was hoping for. And, I've had to "adapt" my theories about why it exists and how it came into existence to match what I'm finding. So, is the hoax theory plausible? I'd say yes. But, as you have pointed out, it's weakly plausible and fails to explain a lot.
Thanks for bashing me over the head with Bob.
But, you've inspired me with a new theory. The Voynich is just a, "happy little accident."

