[split] Voynich 2026 Conference QUESTIONS/COMMENTS

[bi3mw]

Based on my own experience, I would say that, fortunately, Voynich research often begins with an open-ended question rather than a theory. Then, researchers look for the appropriate methods to answer the question at hand. The result can go either way and may even raise new questions. To stick with the example of the neighbor’s dog, one would formulate a question without any preconceived speculation (“Who is eating my flowers?”). Video surveillance (the method) then provides a result (it was the mailman) . So it’s not at all necessary to suspect the dog (theory/idea) in order to take action. A “theorist” would simply ignore the video camera’s result and instead write a detailed treatise about dogs eating flowers and the fact that the neighbor, after all, has a dog. “It was the dog” ultimately becomes the axiom upon which every argument is based. The fact that, at a certain point, one ought to know better no longer matters. This is precisely why ready-made Voynich theories are often very tiresome.