The Voynich Manuscript: Understanding the Untranslatable with Lisa Fagin Davis

[bi3mw]

@Torsten: From a meta-level perspective, I understand that your “autocopier” theory isn’t compatible with Lisa Fagin Davis’s views. But with all due respect, that shouldn’t lead you to repeatedly confront her with nitpicking. It certainly matters whether, for example, you’re speaking about the VMS to a broad audience in a podcast or writing a scholarly article. Your claim that her statements do not reflect the current state of Voynich research raises the question of who defines this standard and what exactly this supposed standard refers to. I would be rather cautious with such statements, as they could give rise to the suspicion that one is indirectly referring to one’s own theory, which is to be elevated to the status of a standard, so to speak, through the back door. From such a position, anything that does not conform to it is then subject to a standard of accuracy that can never be met per se—at least not in “casual” communication about the VMS. However, such communication should remain possible, even here in the forums (including for men and women with specialized expertise).