+- The Voynich Ninja (https://www.voynich.ninja)
+-- Forum: Voynich Research (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-27.html)
+--- Forum: Voynich Talk (https://www.voynich.ninja/forum-6.html)
+--- Thread: New Post: "I Do Listen to the Experts. Do YOU?" (/thread-4213.html)
RE: New Post: "I Do Listen to the Experts. Do YOU?" - proto57 - 03-04-2024
Thank you for all the interesting and well-thought responses and questions. As always, I appreciate and value these discussions. I'm going to go through all of them, and try to respond to most of them.
(23-03-2024, 09:06 PM)Mark Knowles wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I think the problem comes with the use of the term "experts". There is nobody who really definitively can be called an "expert" on the Voynich manuscript. You are precisely an example of the point that it is difficult to find a consensus on any aspect of the Voynich manuscript. Take the Rosettes Folio and we have many different ideas what this page represents.
I think you are completely wrong about it being a modern hoax, but I think the chance of me or any evidence persuading you otherwise is very slim.
True on the "use of the term 'experts'", and that is one of my points in the blog post: That we all... myself included... tend to decide who is the right expert, or not, or "enough" of an expert, or if an expert at all. The point being, that... and this is human nature... to select those references which concur with our own biases, with our preconceptions, our hopes, or beliefs... whatever. The second point is the over-riding one: It is ironic to me, when being told that I "don't listen to the experts", that I actually listen to far more of them than virtually anyone else... well, anyone without a forgery theory. The very nature of the wide range of varying observations is easily explained by forgery, and therefore they must be winnowed down drastically to fit any other narrative, especially "circa 1420 European Cipher Herbal", as it had practically no supporters before the C14. So the "problem" you cite is an accurate one, but far less of a problem for holders of a modern forgery theory.
As for "persuading" me otherwise, I also pointed out in my post that I've actually been persuaded several times, and moved through two major, and many smaller, hypothesis. I think this is proof that I am quite "persuadable": It is just that, so far, the issues I've raised which support my modern forgery hypothesis are not close to being satisfactorily explained to me. But, should I be shown why they are not problems (anachronisms and anomalies), I have no problem with moving to some other hypothesis, including 1420.
RE: New Post: "I Do Listen to the Experts. Do YOU?" - Mark Knowles - 03-04-2024
RE: New Post: "I Do Listen to the Experts. Do YOU?" - proto57 - 03-04-2024
RE: New Post: "I Do Listen to the Experts. Do YOU?" - proto57 - 03-04-2024
RE: New Post: "I Do Listen to the Experts. Do YOU?" - asteckley - 03-04-2024
RE: New Post: "I Do Listen to the Experts. Do YOU?" - proto57 - 03-04-2024
RE: New Post: "I Do Listen to the Experts. Do YOU?" - Mark Knowles - 03-04-2024
RE: New Post: "I Do Listen to the Experts. Do YOU?" - proto57 - 03-04-2024
RE: New Post: "I Do Listen to the Experts. Do YOU?" - proto57 - 03-04-2024
RE: New Post: "I Do Listen to the Experts. Do YOU?" - Aga Tentakulus - 04-04-2024