
What We Know About the Voynich Manuscript (2011) [pdf] - apsec112
http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W11-1511?notdup
======
kencausey
_Knight & Reddy on the Voynich, & the limits of statistical analysis…_

[http://www.ciphermysteries.com/2013/03/09/this-week-a-
talk-a...](http://www.ciphermysteries.com/2013/03/09/this-week-a-talk-at-
stanford-on-the-voynich-manuscript)

------
infinity0
I was under the impression that there was a fair bit of statistical evidence
for this being not-a-hoax, but this article showed that there was less than I
thought. Also, the explanation of why people thing this is not-a-hoax was
quite unsatisfactory, basically saying "one particular way of explaining this
as a hoax is not very convincing".

Why do people think this is not a hoax? "4OFCC89 4OFCC89 4OFC89 4OFC89 4OFCC89
E89." seems like something a 5 year old would make up. Also, the unrealistic
drawings.

~~~
acqq
I believe Gordon Rugg is on the right track:

[http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-mystery-of-
the...](http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-mystery-of-the-
voynic-2004-07/)

"SciAm, 2004: The Mystery of the Voynich Manuscript

New analysis of a famously cryptic medieval document suggests that it contains
nothing but gibberish"

He showed how easy were to produce new gibberish texts with the same
properties using the device of these times.

------
count
See also:
[https://www.nsa.gov/about/_files/cryptologic_heritage/public...](https://www.nsa.gov/about/_files/cryptologic_heritage/publications/misc/voynich_manuscript.pdf)

~~~
jonah
Good to see them working on something worthwhile.

------
lalalandland
Last thing I read bout it was in the Guardian:
[http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/feb/07/new-clue-
voynic...](http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/feb/07/new-clue-voynich-
manuscript-mystery)

They seem to think it has Mexican origin

