This is so hilarious, I thought you posted it as a joke!
First, it is totally and patently untrue! Shame on you for posting a lie, with no evidence whatsoever! In fact, the opposite is true. The reason that there are so many Byzantine Manuscripts is because the Greeks retained their language, and many monks devoted their lives to copying the texts. And other scribes copied their copies. And the next generation, other scribes copied the copies of the manuscripts, with each generation of manuscripts picking up errors - intentional and unintentional. Greek scribes loved to embellish the texts. But wait, I already posted a whole bunch about that already.
In actual fact, it is the earliest copies that were lost and only recently discovered. The KJV translation committee had only 7 very bad versions of the Greek, and mostly relied on Erasmus' translation of the Bible from Greek, in 1516 which he admitted was faulty. The Catholic Church would not allow him to follow the earlier manuscripts, because there were things in Jerome's Latin version they wanted kept in to reinforce Catholic doctrine. And until the the mid 19th century the Byzantine (or Texts Receptus) manuscripts were considered to be the standard. However, extensive study of this manuscripts convinced scholars they were a later conflation, and they lost their primacy to "eclectic" scholarly editions, like Nestle-Aland and United Bible Societies Greek texts.
Lower Text Criticism has some basic principles.
External Criteria
1. Favour the older manuscripts. Closer to the date of the original inspired writings is better than later conflated manuscripts. Through carbon dating and other methods they are able to date ancient manuscripts. Comparison with early church father's quotes of the NT also help to establish the words that were there in the originals, and not added later. (And words not in the early church fathers' quotes were likely added later.
2. Favour the reading that is supported by the majority of texts. "Manuscripts must be weighted, not counted" however. This means that 50 medieval Byzantine manuscripts that all rely on the same 10th century exemplar should be counted as one, in light of their common origin.
3. Favour the reading that is best attested across various families of manuscripts. Over time various streams of text transmission developed. Within these streams (delineated by geography) flowed manuscripts with similar patterns of variants. So the disputed readings are best represented by a broad swath of the 4 transmission streams or families:
a. Alexandrian
b. Caesarian
c. Western
d. Byzantine.
Internal Criteria
1. Favour the reading that best fits the literary context. This holds true as a general rule, but can have exceptions.
2. Favour the reading that best corresponds with writings by the same NT author. Authors have stylistic patterns and theological motifs. Although sometimes authors can be unpredictable, perhaps because of use of an amanuensis (ancient secretary.
3. Favour the reading that best explains the origin of the other variants. Similar to a detective story, it is sometimes possible to reconstruct a series of mistakes that all flow from a scribal alteration of the original or early reading.
4. Favour the shorter reading. As texts were often lengthened or clarified, the shorter reading should be preferred.
5. Favour the more difficult reading. Often the more difficult reading should be favoured as later additions are attempts to "fix" a perceived problem. The criterion can not be applied in isolation, from the other principles mentioned above, but scribes, when not making mistakes of hearing or sight, were prone to smooth out difficulties rather than introduce them.
God has left us so many manuscripts of such high quality, that even in places where there are variants in the manuscripts, we can reach a high level of certainty as to what the original autographs said. And while God has not seen fit to preserve the original autographs go the NT, he has preserved ALL the words of the original authors in the many manuscripts that have come down to us.*
* Going Deeper with New Testament Greek: An Intermediate Study of the Grammar and Syntax of the New Testament, by Kostenberger, Merkle and Plummer. pas 24-28
"When one examines the variations between the Greek text behind the KJV (the Textus Receptus) and the Greek text behind modern translations, it is discovered that the vast majority of variations are so trivial as to not even be translatable (the most common is the moveable nu, which is akin to the difference between "who" and "whom!) . . . When one compares the number of variations that are found in the various MSS with the actual variations between the Textus Receptus and the best Greek witnesses, it is found that these two are remarkably similar. There are over 400,000 textual variants among NT MSS. But the differences between the Textus Receptus and texts based on the best Greek witnesses number about 5000 -- and most of these are untranslatable differences! In other words, over 98% of the time, the Textus Receptus and the standard critical editions agree." Daniel Wallace
"At present, we have more than 6,000 manuscript copies of the Greek New Testament or portions thereof. No other work of Greek literature can boast of such numbers. Homer's Iliad, the greatest of all Greek classical works, is extant in about 650 manuscripts; and Euripides' tragedies exist in about 330 manuscripts. The numbers on all the other works of Greek literature are far less. Furthermore, it must be said that the amount of time between the original composition and the next surviving manuscript is far less for the New Testament than for any other work in Greek literature. The lapse for most classical Greek works is about eight hundred to a thousand years; whereas the lapse for many books in the New Testament is around one hundred years. Because of the abundant wealth of manuscripts and because several of the manuscripts are dated in the early centuries of the church, New Testament textual scholars have a great advantage over classical textual scholars. The New Testament scholars have the resources to reconstruct the original text of the New Testament with great accuracy, and they have produced some excellent editions of the Greek New Testament."Finally, it must be said that, although there are certainly differences in many of the New Testament manuscripts, not one fundamental doctrine of the Christian faith rests on a disputed reading. Frederic Kenyon, a renowned paleographer and textual critic, affirmed this when he said, 'The Christian can take the whole Bible in his hand and say without fear or hesitation that he holds in it the true Word of God, handed down without essential loss from generation to generation throughout the centuries.' " -- Philip W. Comfort, The Complete Guide to Bible Versions, (Wheaton, Illinois: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc.) 1991."
New Testament Textual Criticism | Theopedia