[split] Voynich 2026 Conference QUESTIONS/COMMENTS

[eggyk]

That is a naive view of how science is done.  In reality, science usually advances only when a scientist notices some peculiar pattern in some data, invents a theory to explain it, becomes convinced that it is likely to be true, and works hard to find evidence that can convince others of it.  That is, conviction usually comes before the proof, not after it.

There is a big difference between trying to prove a theory is correct because you are convinced it is true, and trying to prove whether a theory is correct because you suspect it might be true.

The former assumes the end result before sufficient evidence and is highly susceptible to confirmation bias. The latter sets out to confirm or debunk their theory, open to a positive or negative result.