Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they challenge the specific theories presented in the reading passage.

According to the passage, A very mysterious manuscript has been discovered which was written in the past centuries, but it is written in a codified way and the scientist have not been able to decrypt it. The passage presents us with three hypotheses about the context of the manuscript and its origin. The lecture, however, states that none of the theories mentioned in the passage are correct and that they are controversial. The first idea is that this manuscript is a set of sophisticated codes representing magical or scientific information. Anthony Ascham, who was a sixteenth-century botanist has been suggested as the author of this mysterious piece because the pictures of medicinal plants in his book published in 1550 resemble the ones available in the manuscript. The professor opposes this idea by pointing out that Ascham was indeed an ordinary scientist and he wasn't able to develop such an intricate system of scripting. Also, his book contains simple botanical terms and even if he could, he didn't need to bother himself with making such a complex scripting system. The other theory is that this manuscript might be the work of a sixteenth-century fraud, Edward Kelley, which made money by pretending to have magical powers. The professor suggests that the creator of this book has put a lot of effort into making such a cryptography system. And that the people from that era were easy to fool since there was a lack of information among them and also they were too superstitial. This amount of effort was just not necessary to deceive such simple minds. The last hypothesis states that this manuscript belongs to the discoverer, Wilfrid M. Voynich himself. Since he has enough knowledge to fake an ancient manuscript. His motivation to do so could be to get credit for finding such an old artifact. The lecture says that scientists have already dated the material used to write the manuscript back to four hundred years ago. And that he wasn't able in any way to get a four-hundred-year-old ink to write the manuscript, even if he had enough knowledge to do so.