Jump to content

Jake_Roberts

Members
  • Posts

    24
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Jake_Roberts last won the day on February 5

Jake_Roberts had the most liked content!

About Jake_Roberts

  • Birthday January 20

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Jake_Roberts's Achievements

Explorer

Explorer (4/14)

  • Collaborator
  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later
  • Reacting Well
  • First Post

Recent Badges

23

Reputation

  1. Excellent Work, Eric. This is extremely helpful!
  2. Casseopia = Virgin Queen? How about the Virgin Mary? As for "I am Prince Francis Bacon," how does that conflict with my discovery? Though I would say the way it appears to be "constructed" is a bit suspect, the resulting message only confirms my discoveries...
  3. I use the same meaning of explicit as everyone else. The cipher texts I've decrypted clearly state Bacon's true heritage. And all of these links are wonderful work, but they are not going to change the facts. Sorry all.
  4. Ryan, your book just came yesterday, and it looks great! I hope to dive into it soon.
  5. Thank you both for your responses. Please understand my purpose was not to offend anyone, and I will most certainly be sure to couch my language by using the phrase "in my opinion" in the future. I didn't do that because I was hoping to encourage other Baconians to look at my material. But I do take exception to the bare assertion that my statement is false, and that the fact is only supported by "tiny scraps" of cipher evidence (slanted language). It isn't. Unfortunately the format of my podcast doesn't allow to lay out all of the evidence I've accrued. That's why I've been writing this series of books. I do not make these statements lightly, nor out of ignorance of the information you both cited and all of the "reasons" why people erroneously believe Elizabeth was his mother, most of which are based on the fallacy of logic called "hypothesis contrary to fact." It would be EXTREMELY irresponsible of me to not be aware of these things before making the statement I made. Likewise, it would be illogical (and poor scholarship) to dismiss my work as "false" without examining the data I've collected. Unlike Donnelly, Potts and all the rest, I actually used scientifically sound decryption methods to make this discovery. I found a "document" written by Sir Francis Bacon stating his mother is Mary, Queen of Scots, and his father is Francis II. I knew the moment I made this discovery that people would not like it. But for me, it's not an issue of faith or dogma, but science. It's a matter of pursuing the truth. Frankly, until anyone is able to analyze my work and point out a major flaw in the processes, or produce their own set of documents that explicitly state Elizabeth I was his mother, then my opinion remains unchanged. However, that would require actually looking at the information. Ignoring it or dismissing it without any consideration will not make it go away. I'll be discussing the flaws of the Prince Tudor Theory during my Ghosts of Bacon podcast tomorrow at 7 pm EST for anyone who is interested. Again, thank you both for taking the time to write your responses.
  6. It seems that the rumor that came from the court of Catherine de Medici, that Francis II was incapable of having children, was a lie. The victors write history, and Catherine de Medici and Elizabeth I were the victors. I layout the evidence in my book The Holy Trinity Decryption and on my podcast: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCILs-xzXfRsPHq05or1Sx4w. Unfortunately, the Prince Tudor theory originally is based on faulty "cipher" evidence.
  7. I'm all in (for Bitter Bock Beer AND Bring Bacon Back). That is amazing news - congratulations! I'm very happy to hear about the interest in the publishing world also. I'm currently working on my second book The Ghosts of Bacon and always looking for a better deal. πŸ™‚
  8. Love this, Ryan. The cover does look great!
  9. Hi all. Basically, I need help. One of the things I've been trying to accomplish with my own research is to encourage others to actually apply the use of Francis Bacon's ciphers in various ways. To do this, I've encouraged others to search in his known or suspected works for traces of Biliteral, Simple, Reverse, Kaye, Fourfold and Short Ciphers. A few people have asked me to put together a primer of sorts, that would show others how to do just that. Is this something that would interest you? Also, I'm willing to do a series of classes demonstrating what I've been able to do so far, completely free of charge. At this point, I've found cipher messages not just within the plaque of Shakespeare's Funerary Monument, but also the Sonnets, 1611 KJB, portraits, maps and the Fama Fraternitatis. There is so much to be done and it extends beyond identifying the occasional acrostic or Bacon signature of 33. The use of these methods yields actual messages and hitherto unknown truths (such as the identity of the Fair Youth, Dark Lady and Rival Poet).
  10. Unfortunately, most people read what has been written about the Friedman's analysis, and not their analysis. Go to any online encyclopedia and it will state that the Friedman's demonstrated that Bacon didn't write Shakespeare, when in fact, they say no such thing. They (correctly) demonstrated that the writers who claimed they had decrypted ciphers in the First Folio had zero scientific evidence to support their claims. They did not definitively state that ciphers weren't present, nor did they render an opinion regarding authorship. They simply disproved the claims made by Donnelly, Potts and others. William and Elizabeth Friedman went on to provide advice on how to proceed when looking for cipher evidence, advice that unfortunately few Baconians have followed. They actually tell us how to use scientific means during cryptanalysis. Unfortunately, many Baconians hold onto the belief in the work of Donnelly, Potts, et. al. because they want the Baconian version of the Prince Tudor theory to be correct, imo. Not trying to offend anyone, but I tend to believe the foremost experts of cryptology of the time. Using their recommendations allowed me to decrypt the plaque of Shakespeare's Funerary Monument and it's multiple messages.
  11. It's value in Simple Cipher is 287, the sum of the letters of "Fra. Rosi Crosse" in Kaye Cipher. In Reverse Cipher, it's 388, which can be read as 38 and 8, TT and H in Simple, and representative of the quadruple Tau, TTTT, the signature of Anthony Bacon. (The Fourfold Cipher value of TTTT is 91, Anthony in Simple). Francis used TTT (67 in Fourfold, "Francis" in Simple). In Kaye Cipher, the value is 677, which can be read as 67 and 7, "Francis" and "G" in Simple Cipher. They used the letter G to represent the name "Bacon" as the value of G in Kaye Cipher is 33, "Bacon" in Simple. πŸ™‚
  12. Would you believe that Sir Francis Bacon believed that his "best alias" was actually someone other than William Shake-speare? I didn't either until I read his own words. In my book The Holy Trinity Decryption, I explain how I decrypted the cipher texts (plural) on the plaque adorning the Shakespeare Funerary Monument in Holy Trinity Church in Stratford-upon-Avon. Not only do the messages explicitly state that Francis Bacon wrote the works attributed to the Stratford actor, the main message he wanted to be seen states that he was indeed the son of a king and queen - Francis II of France and Mary, Queen of Scots. Not the answer that those of us who always favored the Prince Tudor Theory (myself included) want to see, but none-the-less the truth.
  13. Sorry, LoT - I haven't been able to spend a lot of time on the interwebs, other than promoting my book. πŸ˜‰ In answer to your question - yes, Mary was not welcome in England OR France. The animosity Catherine de Medici had for her is well documented, and her return to Scotland and England (especially with an heir) would have been very unwelcome. The negotiation of her return is well documented, but the child would not be mentioned - history is written by the winners, and Catherine and Elizabeth were the winners. As a part of the negotiations, she was forced to place her son with the people Elizabeth would trust most - Sir Nicholas and Lady Anne Bacon. As for all of the evidence for Francis being Elizabeth's son, all of it also supports Mary as mother. Funny you mention the Sonnets. In my next book, I'll be explaining the identity of the Fair Youth and Dark Lady.. πŸ™‚
  14. Hi Ryan, I'll announce your book on my podcast tonight at 7 pm EST - The Ghosts of Bacon. - Jake
  15. HI All. I want to remind everyone that I do a bi-monthly podcast called "The Ghosts of Bacon" every-other Sunday at 7pm EST. Tonight I'll be discussing cipher signatures ant their uses.
×
×
  • Create New...