04-07-2026, 01:51 PM
Yeah, and I think in all kinds of theories, there are differences in how readily an individual will adjust their theory in the light of conflicting evidence. Both extremes are possible in the three kinds of theories we discussed.
1. Personal "idea", explanation for an observation:
"My theory is that the neighbor's dog is the one eating our flowers". -> video evidence of the mailman snacking on some tulips ->
High adaptability: "Oh my god, I am so sorry I blamed the dog, also the mailman is insane".
Low adaptability: "Well, the mailman must have gotten hungry after a long shift. But I'm sure it was the dog the other times!"
2. Voynich-style theories
High adaptability: "The radiocarbon dating rules out the Roger Bacon authorship theory".
Low adaptability: most Voynich theories, and that's the problem. Many people in Voynich circles have become one with their own solution.
3. Scientific theories should be adaptable, and they are in the long run. But of course, the strength of evidence is not always clear immediately, and individual scientists may not always be ready to adapt their views to new insights.
4. Conspiracy theories, religiously inspired theories... Flat earth, moonlanding is fake, the earth is 6000 years old... There is no hope here. All evidence to the contrary will be rejected or misinterpreted, goalposts moved, everything will be done to keep the theory standing.
The big problem with Voynich theories is that the solver feels like they are like (3), while in fact they are like (4).
[Note: at some point, my phone's autocorrect feature apparently has decided that "Voynich" should always be changed into "Voybich", perhaps because this is a typo I often make with my large fingers. Whenever I write "Voybich", this is not on purpose. I have deleted the suggestion from my keyboard's dictionary and hope it is gone for good.]
1. Personal "idea", explanation for an observation:
"My theory is that the neighbor's dog is the one eating our flowers". -> video evidence of the mailman snacking on some tulips ->
High adaptability: "Oh my god, I am so sorry I blamed the dog, also the mailman is insane".
Low adaptability: "Well, the mailman must have gotten hungry after a long shift. But I'm sure it was the dog the other times!"
2. Voynich-style theories
High adaptability: "The radiocarbon dating rules out the Roger Bacon authorship theory".
Low adaptability: most Voynich theories, and that's the problem. Many people in Voynich circles have become one with their own solution.
3. Scientific theories should be adaptable, and they are in the long run. But of course, the strength of evidence is not always clear immediately, and individual scientists may not always be ready to adapt their views to new insights.
4. Conspiracy theories, religiously inspired theories... Flat earth, moonlanding is fake, the earth is 6000 years old... There is no hope here. All evidence to the contrary will be rejected or misinterpreted, goalposts moved, everything will be done to keep the theory standing.
The big problem with Voynich theories is that the solver feels like they are like (3), while in fact they are like (4).
[Note: at some point, my phone's autocorrect feature apparently has decided that "Voynich" should always be changed into "Voybich", perhaps because this is a typo I often make with my large fingers. Whenever I write "Voybich", this is not on purpose. I have deleted the suggestion from my keyboard's dictionary and hope it is gone for good.]
![[+]](https://www.voynich.ninja/images/collapse_collapsed.png)