RE: The incredible unravelling of the Voynich Manuscript
-JKP- > 11-05-2020, 04:06 AM
Well, here we go again. I can't even get through a couple of paragraphs...
Weiler has misunderstood two common abbreviation symbols from Latin and is explaining them wrong.
The reverse-c character that means con/com is NOT (I repeat NOT NOT) the same character as a c-shape with a tail (s).
Weiler hasn't seen these in context, he is going only by Cappelli, so he doesn't understand that the reverse-c (with a big loop and sometimes a small one at the bottom and sometimes not) is the older version of y and is NOT the same as the abbreviation s (which sometimes represents c with tail (s) and sometimes represents e with tail—they often look the same, but can be distinguished by context).
I really don't want to sound unkind, but this is like someone scanning a book on how to play the guitar, and then (without having any practical experience with playing the guitar) thinks he can teach it to people who already know how to play the guitar. (or who don't, but either way, it's wrong).
It's cool that he's taking the time to to learn this stuff, many people offering "solutions" don't even get this far, but the saying, "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing," immediately comes to mind. He knows just enough to get himself into trouble and not enough to get it right. It's all incorrect.
He is spreading misinformation in virtually every paragraph and it really concerns me how quickly this kind of wrong information can spread through the Internet if no one steps up and points out that is it wrong.