SAC hits 4,000 !

[Arthur Neuendorffer]

--------------------------------------
https://doubtaboutwill.org/

Declaration of Reasonable Doubt About the Identity of William Shakespeare

*VERifiED* signatories: 4001
-------------------------------------

[Arthur Neuendorffer]

Post by Arthur Neuendorffer
--------------------------------------
https://doubtaboutwill.org/
Declaration of Reasonable Doubt About the Identity of William Shakespeare
*VERifiED* signatories: 4001
-------------------------------------

[nordicskiv2]

Post by Arthur Neuendorffer
https://doubtaboutwill.org/
Declaration of Reasonable Doubt About the Identity of William Shakespeare
*VERifiED* signatories: 4001
-------------------------------------

Many of the "VERified signatories" are quite...uh...eccentric, Art. As Dave Kathman put it,

"Check out the last page of signatories, which contains these self-
descriptions:

'Teacher/student of kabbalah and western esoteric tradition; member of
Bacon Society for 27 years.'

'My doctorate in language and learning was inspired by the Bard. How
could he only have had one bed!'

'English teacher, author of "Shake-speare's Tombe 'Epigramma'," in
GAMES magazine, February 1998'

'I may one day be notable for being one of two determined female
scientists who exposed the most truth about 9/11. See
http://shoes4industry.blogspot.com'

[Do check out that link, Art: it's paranoia on steroids! You and the most demented of your coreligionists will love it!]

'Voice Teacher, The Juilliard [sic] School (fired from); Tisch School of the
Arts (NYU) (fired from). I still have my smelly cooter.'

'A student of Shakespeare for 45 years, I've studied the entire body
of work and favor De Vere or Bacon. After so long, what's in a name?'

'Painter, former set designer. Working on theory of "falsified history
of humankind" that fits well with doubts about authorship.'

The whole thing is amusing but also sad. So much time and effort
wasted."
-------------------------------------------------
One might add a few other amusing self-descriptions of a few or the signatories:

"Actor and M.A. in Cosmology and Divination with particular reference to the shamanic aspects of drama"

"Layperson, avid reader - Will was Amelia Bassano Lanyer"

"Schollar [sic] of Law"

"Granddaughter of Barbara Crowley"

"Descendant of Bacon Family. My Shaksper page: http://www.baconlinks.com/VVILL/BaconShaker.html"

"Esteemed fellow"

"My former wife had doubts about Willie the Shake, as she called the bard."

"Master theatre shoemaker (early retirement)"

"I did not write the Shake-speare documents, nor do I know of anyone who may have written them."

[There's one authorship candidate who can be eliminated!]

"I find it incredible [sic] Italan [sic] and Spanish knowledges [sic] from a man never travelling [sic] out of England."

[An English stylist of your own stripe, Art!]

"Former Chair and Professor of Neurology, Technical University Munich. My German Wikipedia authorship article has been erased."

"I believe Sir Francis Bacon, William Shakespeare and The Arden family were all related and had a common ancestry!"

[We really must do a better job of safeguarding the secrets of the Bloodline!]

"Possessor of some logical faculties"

[He's claiming to have an unfair advantage over you, Art!]

"Justice of the Peace for Oxfordian/Stratfordian marriages"

"I believe the Elizabethan pronunciations of 'bard' and 'baud' were curiously similar."

"BA, English literature, Shakespeare aficianado [sic]"

"There is a lot of doubt. I also show in my book 'Jane Austen - a New Revelation' that there are great doubts about the authorship of Jane Austen"

"My mother with a master's degree in English literature had doubts."

"There is no doubt."

[A VERy odd sentiment for a signatory of a Declaration of Reasonable Doubt!]

"Creator of Light-of-Truth.com, and the theory that Francis Bacon was born as William Tudor"

"NLP practitioner accredited supervised i.q level of 136. Ive [sic] been most certain for several years now that William Shakspere and the author are 2 seperate entiti [sic]"

And the above are only from roughly the first third of the list of signatories! There is much more comedy to be mined, but you'll have to pursue it on your own, Art.
------------------------------------------------------------
Back when the Declaration reached the 3,000 signature mark (some years ago now), I posted the following:

"However, the remarks of the signatories do afford some
welcome amusement in places. They exhibit the familiar
hallmarks of the anti-Stratfordian 'movement,' ranging
from borderline paranoia ('Keeping Shakespeare's identity
as it is only benefits those who make money off of it')
to formidable erudition ('Electrical Engineer. I studied
'Macbeth' as part the English Literature course of the
University of London General Certificate of Education,
1972') to eccentricity ('Campionist. Originator of the
theory/website contending that St. Edmund Campion S.J.
is the author of the works of Shakespeare') to expertise
('Longtime amateur decanter and student of forensic
conspiracy') to appeal to authority ('My college English
professor has doubts about Mr. Shakspeare'; 'My mother
raised me on this theory, so I support the research.') to
wishful thinking ('Book coming out next summer -- may soon
be famous author?!') to unassailable reasoning ('There
must be evidence out there, we need to look to determine
one way or another'; 'If the man from Stratford was the
author of Shakespeare's works, why didn't he partake in
the translation of King James' version of the Bible?';
'I have always wondered how he could write so well and not
be able to write at all.') to an inability to write in
English ('...a Will sceptic for sure, and recognise strong
circumstantial evidence for de Vere, but no concrete yet.';
'As a student I find the truth to be essential, for most
papers give analogies of the writers [sic] life experiences
and how they may have attributed [sic] to the piece(s).") to
a religious conviction ('I hold that the true author of the
works, to the exclusion of all others, is, and only can be,
Edward, 17th Earl of Oxford.") to inscrutability ('I believe
that Will's ability to hold a generic quality of passion
towards all of his subjects shows a parallel to an ability to
be studying non-attachment.'; 'I'm too young to be in
college!!') to slapstick ('The high school graduation gift
in our family was the Complete Works of William Shakespeare,
and I want to know if I should have asked for a car instead.')
-- and most of these gems come from only the first few pages
of signatories!"

"The declaration has the great virtue of making one aware of
amusing books and web pages that were obscure enough to have
escaped one's attention. I especially commend to the attention
of connoisseurs of crank conspiracy theories and of offbeat
reasoning the following:

<http://www.thegreatpesher.com>
<http://www.shakespeareunmasked.com>
<http://www.sirbacon.org/links/carrquixote.html>
<http://www.cappella.demon.co.uk/examine/voyage.html>
<http://www.authorsden.com/visit/viewwork.asp?AuthorID=348>"
--------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, Art, the list of "VERified signatories" (and even the *academic* ones!) has included luminaries such as Profesor Voluntad San Juan Sacudón de Lanza, whose given name, Voluntad, means "will" and whose surname, Sacudón de Lanza, means "shaking of a spear", a self-proclaimed retired Shakespeare scholar ("Profesor demeritus") who by his own account resides in Vado de Estrata ("Ford of Strat") and signed on or around April 1.

But keep slogging, Art -- 4,000 signatories is around 0.000000005 percent of the world's population! The Declaration might eventually enjoy success approaching that of the Amazon sales rank of Mr. Streitz's book!

[Arthur Neuendorffer]

REALLY!!! No comment about this:

http://youtu.be/u2aw0mez19I

Art Neuenberger

[nordicskiv2]

Post by Arthur Neuendorffer
http://youtu.be/u2aw0mez19I

Why should I comment on that, Art? You didn't comment on anything in my post.

Besides, I'm not charged by the Grand Master with responding to the idiotic crap of *eVERy* demented moron who takes to the internet; I'm only responsible for rebutting the idiotic crap of a *particular* demented moron.

But there is little point in posting any commentary in any case, Art -- the video is barking mad idiotic crap from start to finish. Indeed, one can tell that it is barking mad within the first few minutes, where he claims to have "proved" his absurd contentions *mathematically*; like you and "Dr." Faker, he hasn't the *remotest idea* what constitutes a mathematical proof.

HoweVER, the surest sign that it is barking mad is that he refers to a well known demented moron as a scholar. Amusingly, he also repeats oVER and oVER: "If I'm right about that, then..." If frogs had wings, then they could fly!

Post by Arthur Neuendorffer
Art Neuenberger (aka Noonedafter)

[Arthur Neuendorffer]

Post by Arthur Neuendorffer
http://youtu.be/u2aw0mez19I

----------------------------------------------------
Lea wrote: << Why should I comment on that, Art?
You didn't comment on anything in my post.>>

But you keep posting the same lame objections oVER & oVER & oVER & oVER!

This Waugh video is totally new:
http://youtu.be/u2aw0mez19I

Lea wrote:
<<Besides, I'm not charged by the Grand Master with responding to the idiotic crap of *eVERy* demented moron who takes to the internet; I'm only responsible for rebutting the idiotic crap of a *particular* demented moron.>>

Waugh isn't just *ANY* DM; he's the VERy sort of person the Grand
Master wants to keep me away from by encouraging me to respond
to your same lame objections oVER & oVER & oVER & oVER!
----------------------------------------------------
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Waugh

<<Alexander Waugh (born 1963) is an English eccentric, businessman, writer, critic, journalist, composer, cartoonist, record producer and television presenter. He is the grandson of [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evelyn_Waugh]Evelyn Waugh[/url], the eldest son of [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auberon_Waugh]Auberon Waugh[/url], and the brother of Daisy Waugh. Alexander Waugh was the chief opera critic of the Mail on Sunday (1990–91) and of The Evening Standard (1991-1996). His books on music include Classical Music: A New Way of Listening (1995) and Opera: A New Way of Listening (1996). He reviews non-fiction books for the British press and has contributed cartoons to The Literary Review and The Daily Telegraph.

Waugh is an advocate of the Oxfordian theory, the belief that Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford wrote the works of William Shakespeare. He claims to have found surreptitious allusions embedded in 16th- and 17th-century works revealing that the name "William Shakespeare" was a pseudonym used by Oxford to write the Shakespeare oeuvre.>>
----------------------------------------------------
Lea wrote:
<<But there is little point in posting any commentary in any case, Art -- the video is barking mad idiotic crap from start to finish. Indeed, one can tell that it is barking mad within the first few minutes, where he claims to have "proved" his absurd contentions *mathematically*; like you and "Dr." Faker, he hasn't the *remotest idea* what constitutes a mathematical proof.>>

I, personally, have nEVER claimed to have *proved* anything.

I merely look for interesting cipher *possibilities*.
----------------------------------------------------
Lea wrote:
<<HoweVER, the surest sign that it is barking mad is that
he refers to a well known demented moron as a scholar.>>

I always appreciate the rare shoutout.
----------------------------------------------------
Lea wrote:
<<Amusingly, he also repeats oVER and oVER:
"If I'm right about that, then...">>
----------------------------------------------------
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causality#Contrasted_with_conditionals

<<The ordinary indicative conditional has somewhat more structure than the material conditional. The sentence:

"If Shakespeare of Stratford-on-Avon did not write Macbeth, then someone else did."

intuitively seems to be true, even though there is no straightforward causal relation in this hypothetical situation between Shakespeare's not writing Macbeth and someone else's actually writing it.>>
------------------------------------------------------------
Lea wrote: <<If frogs had wings, then they could fly!>>
--------------------------------------------------------
<<Out of a Ducal Coronet,
. a *BOAR'S HEAD* and neck, between wings.>>
. -- LUCEY HERALDRY
.
<<Within the great hall is a fine bay window filled with
armorial stained glass bearing the arms of the Lucy family;
white pike or 'luces' on a crimson ground and cross crosslets
. as well as the winged *BOAR'S HEAD* crest.>>
---------------------------------------
. EVERy Man Out of His Humour
.
. Uneducated rustic [Puntavolo] purchasing a crest:
. <<Boar without a head, rampant.>>
.
. "Not without mustarde"
-----------------------------------------------------
Art Neuendorffer

[nordicskiv2]

Post by nordicskiv2

Post by Arthur Neuendorffer
http://youtu.be/u2aw0mez19I

----------------------------------------------------
Lea wrote: << Why should I comment on that, Art?
You didn't comment on anything in my post.>>
But you keep posting the same lame objections oVER & oVER & oVER & oVER!

That's because you neVER have any *answer* to my objections, Art -- I refute your nonsense conclusively, but you keep posting it oVER and oVER and oVER and oVER and oVER and oVER!

For example, I conclusively refuted your idiotic claim that _тæрин_ is Russian for "youth" -- this was an idiotic claim for at least three reasons: (1) The word contains a letter that does not occur in the Russian alphabet; (2) The words for "youth" in Russian are VERy well known to anyone who knows Russian, and VERy easy to look up for anyone *literate* who does not know Russian; and (3) Your *own source* clearly identified the word as Ossetian, *not* Russian! Yet you posted this idiocy repeatedly, *after* it had been conclusively refuted!

As another example, I refuted your idiotic assertion that Coleridge wrote Wordsworth's poem "The Idiot Boy" -- yet h.l.a.s.'s own Idiot Boy repeated this nonsense as well oVER and oVER and oVER, *after* it had been refuted!

I have also pointed out that countless of your supposed "anagrams" are not in fact anagrams (although I still have not diagnosed whether your inability to detect anagrams arises from your inability to read, your inability to count, or both), and that countless of your supposed "equidistant letter sequences" are not in fact equidistant letter sequences, yet you keep posting the *same idiotic crap* oVER and oVER and oVER and oVER and oVER and oVER and oVER and oVER, forcing one to add senile dementia to the list of your deficits, Art.

Post by nordicskiv2
http://youtu.be/u2aw0mez19I
<<Besides, I'm not charged by the Grand Master with responding to the
idiotic crap of *eVERy* demented moron who takes to the internet; I'm
only responsible for rebutting the idiotic crap of a *particular*
demented moron.>>
Waugh isn't just *ANY* DM;

Then you *do* consider him a demented moron, Art? That's a welcome concession -- I have long realized that you are too intelligent to believe the outlandish rubbish that you post, and that you are just trolling (although Waugh is apparently completely fooled by your act!).

Post by nordicskiv2
he's the VERy sort of person the Grand
Master wants to keep me away from by encouraging me to respond
to your same lame objections oVER & oVER & oVER & oVER!

But you *don't* respond to my objections, Art -- which, incidentally, are not "lame", as the examples above (and many others) make clear.

Incidentally, Art, Waugh is *by no means* the VERy sort of person whom the Grand Master wishes to keep you away from -- on the contrary! In fact, the Grand Master positively chortles with mirth when an Oxfordian as clueless as Waugh (and there are VERy few of those indeed!) is taken in by your crackpot cryptography: it's even better than if Waugh turned out to be an alien abduction proponent or a flat-earther.

Most of the saner Oxfordians (the term is of course relative) regard you as either demented or as an idiot (not that the two possibilities are mutually exclusive), so the Grand Master is cheered by the existence of an outlier so far out on the lunatic fringe that he views you as a "scholar"!

Post by nordicskiv2
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Waugh
<<Alexander Waugh (born 1963) is an English eccentric,

Enough said!

Post by nordicskiv2
[...]
<<But there is little point in posting any commentary in any case, Art --
the video is barking mad idiotic crap from start to finish. Indeed, one
can tell that it is barking mad within the first few minutes, where he
claims to have "proved" his absurd contentions *mathematically*; like
you and "Dr." Faker, he hasn't the *remotest idea* what constitutes a
mathematical proof.>>
I, personally, have nEVER claimed to have *proved* anything.

You claim to have "verified mathematically" some of your contentions, Art -- for someone who confuses a sample mean of a random variable with its expected value, or who thinks (usual disclaimer) that the number 19 is remarkable as both the sum of two consecutive integers and the difference of their squares, this is hilarious!

Post by nordicskiv2
I merely look for interesting cipher *possibilities*.
----------------------------------------------------
<<HoweVER, the surest sign that it is barking mad is that
he refers to a well known demented moron as a scholar.>>
I always appreciate the rare shoutout [sic].

But Art -- you are *always* getting shutout! Such an occurrence, far from being rare, is the norm! Your score thus far, after many years of haplessly promoting Hermetic horse manure, is still VERy close to zero!

Post by nordicskiv2
"If I'm right about that, then...">>
----------------------------------------------------
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causality#Contrasted_with_conditionals
<<The ordinary indicative conditional has somewhat more structure than the
"If Shakespeare of Stratford-on-Avon did not write Macbeth, then someone else did."
intuitively seems to be true, even though there is no straightforward
causal relation in this hypothetical situation between Shakespeare's not
writing Macbeth and someone else's actually writing it.>>
------------------------------------------------------------
Lea wrote: <<If frogs had wings, then they could fly!>>
--------------------------------------------------------
<<Out of a Ducal Coronet,
. a *BOAR'S HEAD* and neck, between wings.>>

Huh? A boar has *nothing* to do with a frog, Art, apart from the fact that -- although this is doubtless news to you -- neither one has wings, and neither can fly.

Post by nordicskiv2
. -- LUCEY HERALDRY

Do you know how Oxford's offense against Orazio Cogno is like Shakespeare's offense against Lucy, Art? It would make another great parallel to add to that idiotic table of parallels between the two men that you used to post oVER and oVER and oVER and oVER and oVER and oVER and oVER and oVER and oVER and oVER!

Post by nordicskiv2
<<Within the great hall is a fine bay window filled with
armorial stained glass bearing the arms of the Lucy family;
white pike or 'luces' on a crimson ground and cross crosslets
. as well as the winged *BOAR'S HEAD* crest.>>
---------------------------------------
. EVERy Man Out of His Humour
.
. <<Boar without a head, rampant.>>
.
. "Not without mustarde"

But Art -- "Not without mustarde" is an anagram of

"Oh...um...Art N.'s outwitted"

-- not that that result is at all unusual or difficult to attain.

Post by nordicskiv2
-----------------------------------------------------
Art Neuendorffer (aka Noonedafter)

[Arthur Neuendorffer]

Post by nordicskiv2

Post by Arthur Neuendorffer
http://youtu.be/u2aw0mez19I

----------------------------------------------------
Lea wrote: << Why should I comment on that, Art?
You didn't comment on anything in my post.>>
But you keep posting the same lame objections oVER & oVER & oVER & oVER!

That's because you neVER have any *answer* to my objections, Art --

Your primary objections
(about things that I actually DO post oVER & oVER & oVER)

are:

1) my near-ELS's aren't ELS's and
2) my near-anagrams aren't anagrams
.............................................
Like I give a shit!

Post by nordicskiv2
http://youtu.be/u2aw0mez19I
<<Besides, I'm not charged by the Grand Master with responding to the
idiotic crap of *eVERy* demented moron who takes to the internet; I'm
only responsible for rebutting the idiotic crap of a *particular*
demented moron.>>
Waugh isn't just *ANY* DM;

Then you *do* consider him a demented moron, Art?
-------------------------------------
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Waugh

<<Alexander Evelyn Michael Waugh (born 1963) was educated at Taunton School, the University of Manchester and the University of Surrey, where he gained degrees in Music [e.g., Doctor of Music degree (D.M.)]. Alexander Waugh was the chief opera critic of the Mail on Sunday (1990–91) and of The Evening Standard (1991-1996). His books on music include Classical Music: A New Way of Listening (1995) and Opera: A New Way of Listening (1996).>>
-------------------------------------

Post by nordicskiv2
he's the VERy sort of person the Grand
Master wants to keep me away from by encouraging me to respond
to your same lame objections oVER & oVER & oVER & oVER!

Lea wrote:

<<But you *don't* respond to my objections, Art>>

Like I give a shit!

Lea wrote:

<<Incidentally, Art, Waugh is *by no means* the VERy sort of person whom the Grand Master wishes to keep you away from -- on the contrary! In fact, the Grand Master positively chortles with mirth when an Oxfordian as clueless as Waugh (and there are VERy few of those indeed!) is taken in by your crackpot cryptography.>>

That's Waugh not Wabe! And if Alexander Waugh wore a tophat
then he would look a lot more like the Bellman's Banker:
-------------------------------------------------
The Hunting of the Snark : By Lewis Carroll
Fit the First : The Landing

https://tinyurl.com/y87frcxz

"Just the place for a Snark!" the Bellman cried,
As he landed his crew with care;
Supporting each man on the top of the tide
By a finger entwined in his hair.

"Just the place for a Snark! I have said it twice:
That alone should encourage the crew.
Just the place for a Snark! I have said it thrice:
What I tell you three times is true."
-------------------------------------------------
The Grand Master to Webb:

`And has thou slain the Neuferwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!
He *chortled* in his joy.
-------------------------------------------------
Lea wrote:

<<Most of the saner Oxfordians regard you as either demented or as an idiot (not that the two possibilities are mutually exclusive), so the Grand Master is cheered by the existence of an outlier so far out on the lunatic fringe that he views you as a "scholar"!>>

Circular reasoning!

Post by nordicskiv2
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Waugh
<<Alexander Waugh (born 1963) is an English eccentric,

Enough said!
---------------------------------------------------
https://www.etymonline.com/word/eccentric

eccentric (adj.) 1550s, from Middle French eccentrique and directly from Medieval Latin eccentricus. Of persons, figurative sense of "odd, whimsical" first recorded 1620s. "Eccentric is applied to acts which are the effects of tastes, prejudices, judgments, etc., not merely different from those of ordinary people, but largely unaccountable and often irregular ...">>
---------------------------------------------------

Post by nordicskiv2
<<But there is little point in posting any commentary in any case, Art --
the video is barking mad idiotic crap from start to finish. Indeed, one
can tell that it is barking mad within the first few minutes, where he
claims to have "proved" his absurd contentions *mathematically*; like
you and "Dr." Faker, he hasn't the *remotest idea* what constitutes a
mathematical proof.>>
I, personally, have nEVER claimed to have *proved* anything.

-------------------------------------------------
Lea wrote:

<<You claim to have "verified mathematically" some of your contentions, Art -- for someone who confuses a sample mean of a random variable with its expected value, or who thinks (usual disclaimer) that the number 19 is remarkable as both the sum of two consecutive integers and the difference of their squares, this is hilarious!
-----------------------------­--------------------------------------------
_Did ADAM & Eve Have Navels?_ by Martin GARDNER

"[19] is equal to 10^2 - 9^2."
------------------------------------------­-----------------------------
"Thou, old ADAM's likeness, Get to dress this GARDEN."
- Richard II., III. 4.

"There is no ancient gentlemen, but GARDENERS, ditchers,
and grave-makers; they hold up ADAM's profession."
- The Clown in "Hamlet," v. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------
| > | > JAMES I: 46th REX DEUS/PRIORY of SION generation
| > | > http://www.hials.no/~hy/_gen/j/index.htm#s46b
| > | > -------------------------------------------------------
| > | > (The King James & only the King James version):
| > | > Psalm 46
| > | > "SHAKE" is the 46th word from the beginning,
| > | > and "SPEAR" is the 46th word from the end.
---------------------------------------------------------------
David L. Webb <***@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:

| > | I've already pointed out to you that this is false, Art,
| > | as Martin Gardner, has pointed out; as I already said,
| > | "In Richard TaVERner's 1539 VERsion of Psalm 46,
| > | 'shake' & 'spear' are in *precisely* the same positions.
| > | HoweVER, one would scarcely expect
| > | ***@comicass.nut
| > | to have VERified his idiotic claims about matters of fact."
| > | Are you completely senile, Art?
| > | Or are you just oblivious to facts?
---------------------------------------------------------------

Post by nordicskiv2
| When someone accurately posts Taverner's Psalm 46
| with "SHAKE" the 46th word from the beginning,
| and "SPEAR" the 46th word from the end
| I'll be happy to acknowledge an error.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Post by nordicskiv2
I've just had a look at the text on EEBO
(Early English Books Online) and while "spere" is 47 words from
the end (not counting "Selah"), Taverner has "shooke" rather
than "shake" and it's actually 57 words from the beginning.
Also, for some reason, he numbers the psalm 45.

-------------------------------------------------------------
(Richard TaVERner's 1539 VERsion):

Psalm *45*
"*SHOOKE*" is the *57*th word from the beginning,
and "SPERE" is the *47*th word from the end.
---------------------------------------------------------------
(The King James & only the King James version):

Psalm *46*
"SHAKE" is the *46*th word from the beginning,
and "SPEAR" is the *46*th word from the end.
--------------------------------------------------------------
JAMES I: *46*th
REX DEUS/PRIORY of SION generation:
http://www.hials.no/~hy/_gen/j/index.htm#s46b
---------------------------------------------------------
SHAKE SPEAR JAMES I 46,
---------------------------------------------------------
mountains in Mary Queen of Scots 45,
the sunder; James V 44,
though he James IV 43,
troubled, burneth James III 42,
be the James II 41,
and chariot Joan Beaufort 40,
roar in Margaret Holland 39,

thereof the Joan PLANTAGENET 38,
b. 29 Sep 1328

waters fire. EDMUND Of Woodstock 37,
the Be Edward I (Longshanks) 36,
Though still, Henry III 35,

sea; and KING JOHN 34,
the know HENRY II 33,

of that Matilda 32,
midst I Edith 31,
------------------------------------------------------------

Post by nordicskiv2
I merely look for interesting cipher *possibilities*.
----------------------------------------------------
<<HoweVER, the surest sign that it is barking mad is that
he refers to a well known demented moron as a scholar.>>
I always appreciate the rare shoutout [sic].

-------------------------------------------------
Lea wrote: <<But Art -- you are *always* getting shutout!

Makes me appreciate:
http://youtu.be/u2aw0mez19I even more!

Post by nordicskiv2
"If I'm right about that, then...">>
----------------------------------------------------
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causality#Contrasted_with_conditionals
<<The ordinary indicative conditional has somewhat more structure than the
"If Shakespeare of Stratford-on-Avon did not write Macbeth, then someone
else did."
intuitively seems to be true, even though there is no straightforward
causal relation in this hypothetical situation between Shakespeare's not
writing Macbeth and someone else's actually writing it.>>
------------------------------------------------------------
Lea wrote: <<If frogs had wings, then they could fly!>>
--------------------------------------------------------
<<Out of a Ducal Coronet,
. a *BOAR'S HEAD* and neck, between wings.>>

-------------------------------------------------
Lea wrote:

<<Huh? A boar has *nothing* to do with a frog, Art.>>

So, where exactly did you learn english, Dave?
----------------------------------------------------------
From the movie Wayne's World:

Cassandra: Yeah, and if a frog had wings, it wouldn't bump its ass when it hopped.

Wayne: Where exactly did you learn english?

Cassandra: College. And the Police Academy movies.

A modified form appears in the first season of the Drew Carey Show:

Drew: "hey, if a frog had wings... we'd still be screwed, but wouldn't it be cool?"
----------------------------------------------------------

Post by nordicskiv2
. -- LUCEY HERALDRY
<<Within the great hall is a fine bay window filled with
armorial stained glass bearing the arms of the Lucy family;
white pike or 'luces' on a crimson ground and cross crosslets
. as well as the winged *BOAR'S HEAD* crest.>>
---------------------------------------
. EVERy Man Out of His Humour
.
. <<Boar without a head, rampant.>>
.
. "Not without mustarde"

-------------------------------------------------
Lea wrote:

<<But Art -- "Not without mustarde" is an anagram of

"Oh...um...Art N.'s outwitted" >>

[ INPNC = 4/21 ]
-----------------------------------------------------
Art Neuendorffer

[nordicskiv2]

Post by nordicskiv2

Post by nordicskiv2

Post by Arthur Neuendorffer
http://youtu.be/u2aw0mez19I

----------------------------------------------------
Lea wrote: << Why should I comment on that, Art?
You didn't comment on anything in my post.>>
But you keep posting the same lame objections oVER & oVER & oVER & oVER!

That's because you neVER have any *answer* to my objections, Art --
Your primary objections
(about things that I actually DO post oVER & oVER & oVER)

Why do you do that, Art? Senile dementia?

Post by nordicskiv2
1) my near-ELS's aren't ELS's and

They aren't, Art. Many are not even close.

Post by nordicskiv2
2) my near-anagrams aren't anagrams

They aren't, Art. Many are not even close.

Post by nordicskiv2
.............................................
Like I give a shit!

But you *do*, Art -- eVERy time you post to h.l.a.s.! Your posts are best characterized as dumps, and not as mere core dumps any longer.

Post by nordicskiv2

Post by nordicskiv2
http://youtu.be/u2aw0mez19I

Novelty in and of itself is not a virtue, Art. For example, your idea that a man traveling from Yale to New York City would board a nonstop flight from Boston (which is *farther* from Yale then New York City is -- and in the wrong direction!) to Los Angeles is nothing if not novel. It is also idiotic.

Post by nordicskiv2

Post by nordicskiv2
<<Besides, I'm not charged by the Grand Master with responding to the
idiotic crap of *eVERy* demented moron who takes to the internet; I'm
only responsible for rebutting the idiotic crap of a *particular*
demented moron.>>
Waugh isn't just *ANY* DM;

Then you *do* consider him a demented moron, Art?
-------------------------------------
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Waugh
<<Alexander Evelyn Michael Waugh (born 1963) was educated at Taunton
School, the University of Manchester and the University of Surrey,
where he gained degrees in Music [e.g., Doctor of Music degree (D.M.)].
Alexander Waugh was the chief opera critic of the Mail on Sunday (1990–91)
and of The Evening Standard (1991-1996). His books on music include
Classical Music: A New Way of Listening (1995) and Opera: A New Way of
Listening (1996).>>

You didn't address what I wrote, Art. You said above: "Waugh isn't just *ANY* D[emented] M[oron...]". Then you *do* consider him a demented moron, Art? Please confirm. I'll grant that isn't just *any* -- he's really one of a kind!

Post by nordicskiv2

Post by nordicskiv2
he's the VERy sort of person the Grand
Master wants to keep me away from by encouraging me to respond
to your same lame objections oVER & oVER & oVER & oVER!

<<But you *don't* respond to my objections, Art>>
Like I give a shit!

But you *do*, Art -- eVERy time you post to h.l.a.s.! Your posts are best characterized as dumps, and not as mere core dumps any longer.

Post by nordicskiv2
<<Incidentally, Art, Waugh is *by no means* the VERy sort of person whom
the Grand Master wishes to keep you away from -- on the contrary! In
fact, the Grand Master positively chortles with mirth when an Oxfordian
as clueless as Waugh (and there are VERy few of those indeed!) is taken
in by your crackpot cryptography.>>
That's Waugh not Wabe! And if Alexander Waugh wore a tophat [sic]

Is English your native tongue, Art?

Post by nordicskiv2
-------------------------------------------------
The Hunting of the Snark : By Lewis Carroll
Fit the First : The Landing
https://tinyurl.com/y87frcxz
"Just the place for a Snark!" the Bellman cried,
As he landed his crew with care;
Supporting each man on the top of the tide
By a finger entwined in his hair.
That alone should encourage the crew.
What I tell you three times is true."
-------------------------------------------------
`And has [sic] thou slain

Is English your native tongue, Art? [Hint: VER.B.S. in English must be correctly conjugated, Art.]

Post by nordicskiv2
the Neuferwock?

The Neufer-wack? Of course not, Art! Nobody -- least of all the Grand Master -- would wish any harm to come to a harmless wack who, by his own illustrious example, does such a superlative job of making anti-Stratfordians look like lunatics and/or idiots!

Post by nordicskiv2
[...]
<<Most of the saner Oxfordians regard you as either demented or as an
idiot (not that the two possibilities are mutually exclusive), so the
Grand Master is cheered by the existence of an outlier so far out on
the lunatic fringe that he views you as a "scholar"!>>
Circular reasoning!

Huh? What you are gibbering about now, Art?

Post by nordicskiv2

Post by nordicskiv2
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Waugh
<<Alexander Waugh (born 1963) is an English eccentric,

Enough said!
---------------------------------------------------
https://www.etymonline.com/word/eccentric
eccentric (adj.) 1550s, from Middle French eccentrique and directly
from Medieval Latin eccentricus. Of persons, figurative sense of
"odd, whimsical" first recorded 1620s. "Eccentric is applied to acts
which are the effects of tastes, prejudices, judgments, etc., not
merely different from those of ordinary people, but largely
unaccountable and often irregular ...">>

You're definitely unaccountable, Art, if not irregular. Someone who suffers from what in Spanish is called _verborrea_ (probably from the habitual but inadvisable consumption of Ox-Lax) really should not be called "irregular".

Post by nordicskiv2

Post by nordicskiv2
<<But there is little point in posting any commentary in any case, Art --
the video is barking mad idiotic crap from start to finish. Indeed, one
can tell that it is barking mad within the first few minutes, where he
claims to have "proved" his absurd contentions *mathematically*; like
you and "Dr." Faker, he hasn't the *remotest idea* what constitutes a
mathematical proof.>>
I, personally, have nEVER claimed to have *proved* anything.

-------------------------------------------------
<<You claim to have "verified mathematically" some of your contentions,
Art -- for someone who confuses a sample mean of a random variable with
its expected value, or who thinks (usual disclaimer) that the number
19 is remarkable as both the sum of two consecutive integers and the
difference of their squares, this is hilarious!
-----------------------------­--------------------------------------------
_Did ADAM & Eve Have Navels?_ by Martin GARDNER
"[19] is equal to 10^2 - 9^2."

Martin, like Tom Reedy, often engaged in joking that is *way* oVER your head, Art.

[Lunatic logorrhea snipped]

Post by nordicskiv2
| > | > JAMES I: 46th REX DEUS/PRIORY of SION generation
| > | > http://www.hials.no/~hy/_gen/j/index.htm#s46b

"Modulen ble ikke funnet"

That link doesn't work, Art. It's just as well, since it was barking mad nonsense in the first place.

Post by nordicskiv2
| > | > -------------------------------------------------------
| > | > Psalm 46
| > | > "SHAKE" is the 46th word from the beginning,
| > | > and "SPEAR" is the 46th word from the end.
---------------------------------------------------------------
| > | I've already pointed out to you that this is false, Art,
| > | as Martin Gardner, has pointed out; as I already said,
| > | "In Richard TaVERner's 1539 VERsion of Psalm 46,
| > | 'shake' & 'spear' are in *precisely* the same positions.
| > | HoweVER, one would scarcely expect
| > | to have VERified his idiotic claims about matters of fact."
| > | Are you completely senile, Art?
| > | Or are you just oblivious to facts?
---------------------------------------------------------------

Post by nordicskiv2
| When someone accurately posts Taverner's Psalm 46
| with "SHAKE" the 46th word from the beginning,
| and "SPEAR" the 46th word from the end
| I'll be happy to acknowledge an error.

That's why I said that your score thus far was *almost* zero, Art -- the score is, roughly, Grand Master: 1,000,000,000,000,000,000; Noonedafter: 1.

Post by nordicskiv2
JAMES I: *46*th
http://www.hials.no/~hy/_gen/j/index.htm#s46b

"Modulen ble ikke funnet"

That link doesn't work, Art. It's just as well, since it was barking mad nonsense in the first place.

[Hermetic horse manure snipped]

Post by nordicskiv2

Post by nordicskiv2
I merely look for interesting cipher *possibilities*.
----------------------------------------------------
<<HoweVER, the surest sign that it is barking mad is that
he refers to a well known demented moron as a scholar.>>
I always appreciate the rare shoutout [sic].

-------------------------------------------------
Lea wrote: <<But Art -- you are *always* getting shutout!

See above, Art: Grand Master: 1,000,000,000,000,000,000; Noonedafter: 1.

Post by nordicskiv2
http://youtu.be/u2aw0mez19I

It's barking mad from start to finish, Art!

Post by nordicskiv2
even more!

Post by nordicskiv2
"If I'm right about that, then...">>
----------------------------------------------------
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causality#Contrasted_with_conditionals
<<The ordinary indicative conditional has somewhat more structure than the
"If Shakespeare of Stratford-on-Avon did not write Macbeth, then someone
else did."
intuitively seems to be true, even though there is no straightforward
causal relation in this hypothetical situation between Shakespeare's not
writing Macbeth and someone else's actually writing it.>>
------------------------------------------------------------
Lea wrote: <<If frogs had wings, then they could fly!>>
--------------------------------------------------------
<<Out of a Ducal Coronet,
. a *BOAR'S HEAD* and neck, between wings.>>

-------------------------------------------------
<<Huh? A boar has *nothing* to do with a frog, Art.>>
So, where exactly did you learn english [sic], Dave?

Not at George Mason Elementary, Art -- fortunately. But George Mason Elementary can't really be held responsible for your failure to learn English (or any other tongue, for that matter), Art -- there are a few inherently ineducable pupils upon whom Dick, Jane, and Spot impose excessive demands.

[Asinine anthologizing snipped]

Post by nordicskiv2
----------------------------------------------------------

Post by nordicskiv2
. -- LUCEY HERALDRY
<<Within the great hall is a fine bay window filled with
armorial stained glass bearing the arms of the Lucy family;
white pike or 'luces' on a crimson ground and cross crosslets
. as well as the winged *BOAR'S HEAD* crest.>>
---------------------------------------
. EVERy Man Out of His Humour
.
. <<Boar without a head, rampant.>>
.
. "Not without mustarde"

-------------------------------------------------
<<But Art -- "Not without mustarde" is an anagram of
"Oh...um...Art N.'s outwitted" >>
[ INPNC = 4/21 ]

But Art -- the INPNC (subsequently renamed the INIPNC) is idiotic *and* imbecilic, as befits a criterion developed by an uneducated rustic.

Post by nordicskiv2
-----------------------------------------------------
Art Neuendorffer (aka Noonedafter)