15-07-2026, 05:35 PM
(15-07-2026, 01:43 PM)JoJo_Jost wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(15-07-2026, 10:27 AM)Radim Dobeš wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It is not that simple. The plant corresponds to the text. When the text mentions lions, the root resembles a lion. When it mentions worms, there are worms in the root. When it speaks of a book, the leaves look like a book, and so on. The plant must match the text from the *Book of Enoch*. You saw a Venetian galley when the text spoke of sailors at sea. Let me ask you a question about a plant I haven't published yet. The text mentions a quiver of arrows and a spear with lightning bolts. Which folio of the Voynich Manuscript would you match with this text?
I see a plant and on the other picture a quiver of arrows there— not more. But I don't see any similarities that wouldn't require a huge and extraordinary amount of imagination. Given the freedom of interpretation, the plant could be anything—even an umbrella stuck in an umbrella stand, or decorative sugar sticks, or a fan holder, or fireworks.... I mean, really????
I admire your imagination, but that much imagination is a far cry from scientific proof. Then anything is possible—as I said, even two umbrellas stuck together:
I am not a scientist, so I am not bound by any scientific principles. I believe the scientific approach to investigating the Voynich Manuscript has reached its limits. Is it even possible nowadays to compile at least ten points regarding the manuscript on which scientists agree? I doubt it. It is also possible that the right scientists simply haven't gotten involved in the research yet. What would specialists in Ethiopian culture and magical scrolls say? What would scholars who study Enoch say? Unfortunately, no such experts are involved here.

