Home > Science > Anomalies and Alternative Science > Voynich Manuscript > Opposing Views
Over the years, countless different interpretations of the (notoriously unreadable) Voynich Manuscript have been proposed. Here are some websites outlining a few of them.
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/esp_ciencia_manuscrito04.htm
Dennis Stallings' summary (and criticism) of Leo Levitov's Cathar/Endura/Isis hypothesis
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-mystery-of-the-voynic-2004-07/
New analysis by Gordon Rugg of a famously cryptic medieval document suggests that it contains nothing but gibberish. [Full article requires payment]
http://hoaxes.org/archive/permalink/the_voynich_manuscript/
Museum of Hoaxes article.
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/esp_ciencia_manuscrito02.htm
Jim Finn's theory that the Voynich Manuscript is an "end-times" warning written in Hebrew
http://chrisblogforever.blogspot.com/2009/10/voynich-manuscript-solved.html
Chris Parry's 2003 assertion that the manuscript is a 15th/16th century fake, written in a pretend foreign language
http://www.santa-coloma.net/voynich_drebbel/voynich.html
Richard SantaColoma's hypothesis connecting the Voynich Manuscript to Cornelius Drebbel.
Home > Science > Anomalies and Alternative Science > Voynich Manuscript > Opposing Views
Thanks to DMOZ, which built a great web directory for nearly two decades and freely shared it with the web. About us