The Fraudulent Friedmans

[Light-of-Truth]

Friedmans' words (see above posts):

"Getting a correct solution…is not a question of opinion, but a question of proof…he must in addition be able to show others that it is the right one…[it] must be unbiased, systematic and logicallly sound; it must be free from appeals to insight, clear of guesswork, and should avoid imponderables like the plague; in a word, it must be scientific."

They drive me batty. They knew this is what the Strats (and whoever, whatever else) wanted. And also knew and possibly hoped Baconians would analyze their work. This fraudulent statement has been on my mind since I read it early this morning.

OK, sure. Scientifically it has to be so. Funny thing is the ciphers are not science! They are communication!

I'll prove the above 100% wrong right now. 😉

Side note first, I wrote this today, a poem? For someone...

Before I can talk very much about the Shakespeare Authorship question,
A few things should be said right away by me to be totally honest.
Confession; I believe I know who wrote Shakespeare.

 

Took a few minutes, I tweaked the lines for another few minutes. Not perfection, but I like the number counts and even though not stated I leave my intention. I don't know that anyone will see it, might be that nobody will care. I don't know. But I left one more mark for the future.

Maybe somebody will see what seems overt to me, and might see if there are relative clues besides.

What did the Friedmans say? Well, the above three lines I wrote up real quick would not be considered a "real" cipher?

I say this, about that...

I wrote that innocent looking short poem to share a message for anyone who has eyes to see. There is a definite single solution, on more than one level. If anyone gets what I said, they hit it. There may be people who try and get it wrong, but for anyone who sees and gets it, they nailed it 100%. I was successful in my goals.

I can prove I wrote it. I have my Word doc with revisions saved with time stamps. I can be brave and speak up and say, "Yes, I said...blah blah blah...in cipher!" Too bad Bacon couldn't do that.

I can say to anyone, I left a cipher that has this message, for we who care on whatever level. If someone says in public, "I got it! This is it!" and it is correct, I'll say, "They nailed it!"

Is that science?

I just proved an intentional valid cipher with a definite single message is not restricted to the fraudulent and conflicting statements made by the experts who were supposed to be the last Stratfordian word on the cipher matter.

If they read this now, I don't think they'd be impressed. "Yea, DUH, Baconians will never buy this poop we are writing. But the Strats will love it!"

Who knew they'd be dead and decades would pass while they were like the most important anti-Baconian Strat evidence in that fragile house of cards.

 

 

Edited July 10, 2022 by Light-of-Truth

[A Phoenix]

THAT CRYPTOLOGY IS A 'SCIENCE' THE FRAUDULENT FRIEDMANS KNEW TO BE UNTRUE AND FALSE.

[A Phoenix]

IN A EARLIER WORK CLASSIFIED BY THE NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY (NSA) WILLIAM FRIEDMAN GAVE AN HONEST ANALYSIS OF THE PRINCIPLES OF DECIPHERING.

[A Phoenix]

THE FLEXIBILITY OF MIND REQUIRED FOR DECIPHEREMENT AS EXPLAINED BY WILLIAM FRIEDMAN.

[A Phoenix]

THE BACON SIMPLE AND KAY CIPHER SYSTEMS.

[A Phoenix]

AN ILLUSTRATION OF THE SIMPLE CIPHER SYSTEM FROM THE CRYPTOMENYTICES (1624) PUBLISHED SHORTLY AFTER THE 1623 SHAKESPEARE FIRST FOLIO WITH A FRONTISPIECE DEPICTING FRANCIS BACON GIVING HIS LITERARY MASK ONE OF HIS SHAKESPEARE PLAYS.

[A Phoenix]

AN ILLUSTRATION OF BACON'S SIMPLE CIPHER SYSTEM.

[A Phoenix]

AN ILLUSTRATION OF BACON'S KAY CIPHER SYSTEM.

[Light-of-Truth]

I just stumbled on a fun article about the Friedmans:

https://www.cabinetmagazine.org/issues/40/sherman.php

I'll put money on that there is a cipher in these four lines at the top of this image:

 

[Allisnum2er]

Rob, I am a bit suspicious !

If there is a cipher in these four lines it is probably a scam ! 😁

[Allisnum2er]

Rob, You'r right !  It seems to have two type of letters E ,T, B, N , F, I ...  using the same principle that the one explained on the page in order to differenciate the "a" and "b" with a kind of a "bud" on top and or the bottom of certains letters .

[A Phoenix]

THE BACON SIMPLE AND KAY CIPHER SYSTEMS IN THE SHAKESPEAREAN CIPHERS EXAMINED.

[A Phoenix]

THE SECRET CIPHER SIGNATURE OF FRANCIS BACON'S ROSICRUCIAN BROTHERHOOD IN THE SHAKESPEARE FIRST FOLIO.

[A Phoenix]

THE SECRET ROSICRUCIAN CIPHER SIGNATURE IN THE POEM BY BEN JONSON.

[A Phoenix]

THE SECRET ROSICRUCIAN CIPHER SIGNATURE ON THE DEDICATION TO THE THEN GRAND MASTER OF ENGLAND WILLIAM HERBERT EARL OF PEMBROKE.

Edited July 14, 2022 by A Phoenix

[A Phoenix]

THE SECRET ROSICRUCIAN CIPHER SIGNATURE ON THE SECOND DEDICATION PAGE TO THE THEN GRAND MASTER OF ENGLAND WILLIAM HERBERT EARL OF PEMBROKE.

[A Phoenix]

THE SUBJECT OF ACROSTICS AND ANAGRAMS IN THE SHAKESPEARE WORKS.

[A Phoenix]

DEFINITION OF AN ACROSTIC.

[A Phoenix]

THE PRESENCE OF AN ACROSTIC MUST BE TAKEN AS CONCLUSIVE OF AUTHORSHIP.

[Light-of-Truth]

See how they validate acrostics as being "conclusive"!

Yet they only offer a few methods, as if they were rule makers on the technique. Acrostics are huge in Shakespeare, including the Sonnets. Bacon is a theme that comes up even within the Fraudman made up rules.

Yet they do say, "they [acrostics] must be taken as conclusive."

Strange to laugh and be frustrated at the same time. Like with Ben Jonson praising the Stratfool Willy "Swan" while in code actually praising his very close friend Bacon who he actually helped produce the First Folio.

🙁🙂

 

 

Edited July 17, 2022 by Light-of-Truth

[A Phoenix]

ANAGRAMS AND THE FRAUDULENT FRIEDMANS.

[A Phoenix]

MODERN SCHOLARSHIP AND ANAGRAMS IN THE SHAKESPEARE PLAYS.

[A Phoenix]

CONCEALED ANAGRAMMATIC DEVICES IN THE SHAKESPEARE WORKS.

[A Phoenix]

SHAKESPEARE THE GREATEST POET AND ANAGRAMMATIST.

[A Phoenix]

THE GREATEST LITERARY CRYPTOGRAPHER BACON-SHAKESPEARE.