Re: VMs: A cryptological assault on Strong's decryption...

[Rene Zandbergen <r_zandbergen@xxxxxxxxx>]

--- Nick Pelling <nickpelling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi everyone,
> 
> I've chatted with GC, and it seems I got Strong
> completely wrong. *sigh* :-(
> 
> I'll try and understand better how it is supposed to
> work & will post again 
> in a few days' time... wish me luck! :-o

Hi Nick,

I propose that we go down to the basics:

1) We have proposed solutions by Newbold, Child,
   Feely, Strong, Levitov and Stojko.
   We also have a non-solution from Gordon Rugg.
   At best, one of them can be right.

2) I am rather convinced that you don't believe
   that any of the above solutions is right. I
   certainly hold this same opinion.

3) If someone wants us to believe a particular
   solution, they'd better *convince* us. If the 
   majority of the Voynich community does not
   believe any particular solution, and wishes
   to pursue further analysis, it is the clearest 
   possible sign that point (2) above also applies
   for all those who know anything about
   the Voynich MS.

So why should anyone want to disprove the Strong
solution in particular? There's no need. It
is not any more credible than the other ones
listed above. The burden is on the one who wishes
to have us believe in it.

Cheers, Rene


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 
______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list