The Hidden Baconian Acrostics and Anagrams in the Shakespeare First Folio

[Eric Roberts]

1 hour ago, A Phoenix said:

MUCH  ADO ABOUT NOTHING

Two further anagrams of F BACON appear in Much Ado About Nothing:

                                                                                              doe you any em-

                                  bassage to the Pigmies, rather then hould three words

                                  conference, with this Harpy: you haue no employment

                                  for me?

                                                           F BACON

                                         Bor. Mas and my elbow itcht, I thought there would

                                  a scabbe follow.  

                                         Con. I will owe thee an answere for that, and now

                                        forward with thy tale.

                                                           F BACON

Shakespeares Comedies Histories, & Tragedies. Published according to the True Originall Copies (London: printed by Isaac Jaggard, and Ed. Blount, 1623), Comedies, pp. 106, 112

PAPER: https://www.academia.edu/106420304/The_Hidden_Baconian_Acrostics_and_Anagrams_in_the_Shakespeare_First_Folio

VIDEO: https://youtu.be/wTR_gqloCWs

1 MINUTE TRAILER: https://youtu.be/C_1ffdeMvy8

I can't believe they're all right at the front of each line, so you only have to read vertically to get the anagram. When it's pointed out, it seems almost too easy.

[A Phoenix]

Hi Eric,

Thank you for your unstinting support and generous appreciation. Our part in the process is only a small one. Virtually all of the credit for the acrostics and anagrams presented here is due to William Stone Booth and our own B'Hive superstar, Yann.  

[Eric Roberts]

1 hour ago, A Phoenix said:

Hi Eric,

Thank you for your unstinting support and generous appreciation. Our part in the process is only a small one. Virtually all of the credit for the acrostics and anagrams presented here is due to William Stone Booth and our own B'Hive superstar, Yann.  

As always, A P, you are the model of modesty. Your hard work leaves us all in the shade.

[A Phoenix]

Hi Eric,

As we always say, our journey on sirbacon.org/B'Hive is a collective one: Lawrence, Rob, Yann, Kate, Christie, and your good self, which we feel privileged and honoured to be a part of, in this combined quest to bring the Truth about the secret life and writings of the Great One to the rest of the world.   

[Eric Roberts]

Master Mason by royal appointment, Nicholas Stone (c.1586-1647), is presumed to be the sculptor of the alabaster statue of SFB in St Michael's Church, St Albans. In 1845 Henry Weekes made a full-size copy of the St Michael's statue, minus the hat, for the chapel of Trinity College, Cambridge. In fact there are many dissimilarities between the two statues. As an image of a man deep in thought, I much prefer Nicholas Stone's "Bacon" to Rodin's "Thinker".

[Eric Roberts]

10 minutes ago, Eric Roberts said:

Master Mason by royal appointment, Nicholas Stone (c.1586-1647), is presumed to be the sculptor of the alabaster statue of SFB in St Michael's Church, St Albans. In 1845 Henry Weekes made a full-size copy of the St Michael's statue, minus the hat, for the chapel of Trinity College, Cambridge. In fact there are many dissimilarities between the two statues. As an image of a man deep in thought, I much prefer Nicholas Stone's "Bacon" to Rodin's "Thinker".

As I understand it, no one knows exactly when the sculpture of Francis Bacon was installed in St Michael's Church. Even if it was carved posthumously, the idiosyncratic pose suggests that before he 'died' Francis Bacon himself may have sat for sketches by Nicholas Stone for his own funerary monument. It is such an unusual memorial, breaking all past conventions with its informality of posture. If the pose was predetermined by Lord Bacon, he couldn't have chosen a more psychologically meaningful representation of himself, in the sense that the body we see is vacant. The sitter's mind is far away. The tangible and intangible in one image.

[A Phoenix]

                                            JULIUS CAESAR

Moving from the Shakespeare English history plays to his classical Roman history tragedy The Life and death of Julius Caesar our supreme philosopher-poet adroitly inserts several of his secret signatures in the form of the anagrams BACON and F BACON:    

                             Mur.  But what trade art thou? Answer me directly.

                             Cob.  A Trade Sir, that I hope I may vse, with a safe

                        Conscience, which is indeed Sir, a Mender of bad soules.

                                                          BACON

                                    Nor ayre-less Dungeon, nor strong Linkes of Iron,

                                    Can be retentiue to the strength of spirit:

                                    But Life, being wearie of these worldly Barres,                 

                                                          BACON

                                       But for supporting robbers, shall we now

                                       Contaminate our fingers with base bribes,

                                       And sell the mighty space of our large honours

                                       For so much trash as may be grasped thus?                                                

                                                          F BACO

Shakespeares Comedies Histories, & Tragedies. Published according to the True Originall Copies (London: printed by Isaac Jaggard, and Edward Blount, 1623), Tragedies, pp. 109, 113, 124; William Stone Booth, Subtle Shining Secrecies (Boston: Walter H. Baker, 1925), p. 242; Kenneth R. Patton, Setting The Record Straight: An Expose of Stratfordian Anti-Baconian Tactics The Vindication Of William Stone Booth. A Detailed Critical Analysis of Chapter IX: The String Cipher of William Stone Booth In Elizebeth S. and William F. Friedman’s The Shakespearean Ciphers Examined (San Diego, California: 2000), p. 64

PAPER: https://www.academia.edu/106420304/The_Hidden_Baconian_Acrostics_and_Anagrams_in_the_Shakespeare_First_Folio

VIDEO: https://youtu.be/wTR_gqloCWs

1 MINUTE TRAILER: https://youtu.be/C_1ffdeMvy8

[A Phoenix]

HAMLET

The incomparable tragedy of Hamlet whose central figure is a disguised dramatic portrait of its concealed author also inserts an anagram of F BACON:

                                       Costly thy habit as thy purse can buy;

                                       But not expressed in fancie; rich, not gawdie;

                                       For the Apparell oft proclaimes the man,

                                       And they in France of the best rank and station,

                                                           F BACON.

Shakespeares Comedies Histories, & Tragedies. Published according to the True Originall Copies (London: printed by Isaac Jaggard, and Edward Blount, 1623), Tragedies, p. 156. See A. Phoenix, ‘Francis Bacon And His Earliest Shakespeare Play Hamlet A Tudor Family Tragedy’, (2021), pp. 1-109

PAPER: https://www.academia.edu/106420304/The_Hidden_Baconian_Acrostics_and_Anagrams_in_the_Shakespeare_First_Folio

VIDEO: https://youtu.be/wTR_gqloCWs

1 MINUTE TRAILER: https://youtu.be/C_1ffdeMvy8

[A Phoenix]

MEASURE FOR MEASURE

The complex Shakespeare play Measure for Measure has at its heart the God-like Rosicrucian figure of Duke Vincentio one akin to Prospero in The Tempest. He is seen by many Shakespeare scholars as a surrogate of the poet-dramatist himself made in his own image. Or put another way the secretive, complex and enigmatic character of Duke Vincentio, who adopts multiple masks, disguises and identities in Measure for Measure represents Shakespeare, that is to say the true author of the play Bacon, who outside of the play, also adopts multiple identities and disguises behind his living masks, including the pseudonym of Shakespeare. Marked by our concealed author with his anagram F BACON:  

                                (As I subscribe not that, nor any other,

                                 But in the losse of question) that you, his Sister,

                                 Finding your selfe desir’d of such a person,

                                 Whose creadit with the Iudge, or owne great place,

                                 Could fetch your Brother from the Manacles

                                 Of the all-binding-Law: and that there were

                                 No earthly meane to saue him, but that either                                       

                                                          F BACON

Shakespeares Comedies Histories, & Tragedies. Published according to the True Originall Copies (London: printed by Isaac Jaggard, and Edward Blount, 1623), Comedies, p 69; Edward D. Johnson, Shakespearian Acrostics (Birmingham: Cornish Brothers Ltd, 1942), p. 22. For the play see A. Phoenix, ‘Francis Bacon, The God-Like Rosicrucian Figure Of Duke Vincentio, And The Unpublished Speeches Of Lord Keeper Sir Nicholas Bacon, In Measure For Measure, (2021), pp. 1-48

PAPER: https://www.academia.edu/106420304/The_Hidden_Baconian_Acrostics_and_Anagrams_in_the_Shakespeare_First_Folio

VIDEO: https://youtu.be/wTR_gqloCWs

1 MINUTE TRAILER: https://youtu.be/C_1ffdeMvy8

[Eric Roberts]

22 minutes ago, A Phoenix said:

                                            JULIUS CAESAR

Moving from the Shakespeare English history plays to his classical Roman history tragedy The Life and death of Julius Caesar our supreme philosopher-poet adroitly inserts several of his secret signatures in the form of the anagrams BACON and F BACON:    

                             Mur.  But what trade art thou? Answer me directly.

                             Cob.  A Trade Sir, that I hope I may vse, with a safe

                        Conscience, which is indeed Sir, a Mender of bad soules.

                                                          BACON

                                    Nor ayre-less Dungeon, nor strong Linkes of Iron,

                                    Can be retentiue to the strength of spirit:

                                    But Life, being wearie of these worldly Barres,                 

                                                          BACON

                                       But for supporting robbers, shall we now

                                       Contaminate our fingers with base bribes,

                                       And sell the mighty space of our large honours

                                       For so much trash as may be grasped thus?                                                

                                                          F BACO

Shakespeares Comedies Histories, & Tragedies. Published according to the True Originall Copies (London: printed by Isaac Jaggard, and Edward Blount, 1623), Tragedies, pp. 109, 113, 124; William Stone Booth, Subtle Shining Secrecies (Boston: Walter H. Baker, 1925), p. 242; Kenneth R. Patton, Setting The Record Straight: An Expose of Stratfordian Anti-Baconian Tactics The Vindication Of William Stone Booth. A Detailed Critical Analysis of Chapter IX: The String Cipher of William Stone Booth In Elizebeth S. and William F. Friedman’s The Shakespearean Ciphers Examined (San Diego, California: 2000), p. 64

PAPER: https://www.academia.edu/106420304/The_Hidden_Baconian_Acrostics_and_Anagrams_in_the_Shakespeare_First_Folio

VIDEO: https://youtu.be/wTR_gqloCWs

1 MINUTE TRAILER: https://youtu.be/C_1ffdeMvy8

It's as if he is trademarking or copyrighting his work for posterity. Prominently and repeatedly.

Edited September 19 by Eric Roberts

[Eric Roberts]

23 minutes ago, A Phoenix said:

HAMLET

The incomparable tragedy of Hamlet whose central figure is a disguised dramatic portrait of its concealed author also inserts an anagram of F BACON:

                                       Costly thy habit as thy purse can buy;

                                       But not expressed in fancie; rich, not gawdie;

                                       For the Apparell oft proclaimes the man,

                                       And they in France of the best rank and station,

                                                           F BACON.

Shakespeares Comedies Histories, & Tragedies. Published according to the True Originall Copies (London: printed by Isaac Jaggard, and Edward Blount, 1623), Tragedies, p. 156. See A. Phoenix, ‘Francis Bacon And His Earliest Shakespeare Play Hamlet A Tudor Family Tragedy’, (2021), pp. 1-109

PAPER: https://www.academia.edu/106420304/The_Hidden_Baconian_Acrostics_and_Anagrams_in_the_Shakespeare_First_Folio

VIDEO: https://youtu.be/wTR_gqloCWs

1 MINUTE TRAILER: https://youtu.be/C_1ffdeMvy8

Unmistakeable. Thanks A Phoenix!

[Eric Roberts]

24 minutes ago, A Phoenix said:

MEASURE FOR MEASURE

The complex Shakespeare play Measure for Measure has at its heart the God-like Rosicrucian figure of Duke Vincentio one akin to Prospero in The Tempest. He is seen by many Shakespeare scholars as a surrogate of the poet-dramatist himself made in his own image. Or put another way the secretive, complex and enigmatic character of Duke Vincentio, who adopts multiple masks, disguises and identities in Measure for Measure represents Shakespeare, that is to say the true author of the play Bacon, who outside of the play, also adopts multiple identities and disguises behind his living masks, including the pseudonym of Shakespeare. Marked by our concealed author with his anagram F BACON:  

                                (As I subscribe not that, nor any other,

                                 But in the losse of question) that you, his Sister,

                                 Finding your selfe desir’d of such a person,

                                 Whose creadit with the Iudge, or owne great place,

                                 Could fetch your Brother from the Manacles

                                 Of the all-binding-Law: and that there were

                                 No earthly meane to saue him, but that either                                       

                                                          F BACON

Shakespeares Comedies Histories, & Tragedies. Published according to the True Originall Copies (London: printed by Isaac Jaggard, and Edward Blount, 1623), Comedies, p 69; Edward D. Johnson, Shakespearian Acrostics (Birmingham: Cornish Brothers Ltd, 1942), p. 22. For the play see A. Phoenix, ‘Francis Bacon, The God-Like Rosicrucian Figure Of Duke Vincentio, And The Unpublished Speeches Of Lord Keeper Sir Nicholas Bacon, In Measure For Measure, (2021), pp. 1-48

PAPER: https://www.academia.edu/106420304/The_Hidden_Baconian_Acrostics_and_Anagrams_in_the_Shakespeare_First_Folio

VIDEO: https://youtu.be/wTR_gqloCWs

1 MINUTE TRAILER: https://youtu.be/C_1ffdeMvy8

I used to be a sceptic when it came to Baconian anagrams, but not any more.

[A Phoenix]

Hi Eric,

I think all intelligent people rightly start off being sceptical-this is undoubtedly a good thing. And equally, those with rigorous, fair, balanced and open minds, when faced with numerous examples which diminishes and then effectively eliminates the possibility of coincidence and chance, accept the possibility, probability or even certainty that they are intentional and by design. The Shakespeare First Folio contains a wide range and diversity of secret Baconian signatures (acrostics, anagrams, codes, ciphers, headpieces and tailpieces, etc) of varying weight and strength which cumulatively in my view places Lord Bacon's authorship of the Shakespeare works beyond all reasonable doubt.   

[Light-of-Truth]

2 hours ago, A Phoenix said:

The Shakespeare First Folio contains a wide range and diversity of secret Baconian signatures (acrostics, anagrams, codes, ciphers, headpieces and tailpieces, etc) of varying weight and strength which cumulatively in my view places Lord Bacon's authorship of the Shakespeare works beyond all reasonable doubt.   

Below is one from Shakespeare's Sonnets that also gives a strong hint on the number 33. In Sonnet 14 we find where the first full line of Day 33 begins on Line 9 of the Sonnet:

https://www.light-of-truth.com/pyramid-GMT.php#Sonnet014

The first two lines of Day 33 are with an obvious BACON suggestion:

But from thine eies my knowledge I deriue,
And constant stars in them I read such art

If we look more carefully we'll find just a little bit more using the first 6 letters of the first line and the first 5 letters of the second line:

But from thine eies my knowledge I deriue,
And constant stars in them I read such art

From those 11 letters we can discover F BACON TUDOR

Now lets look at the first four lines of Day 33 which contains 33 words and we can see another BACON:

But from thine eies my knowledge I deriue,
And constant stars in them I read such art
As truth and beautie shal together thriue
If from thy selfe, to store thou wouldst conuert:

Those are the last four lines of the 1609 page:

 

 

[A Phoenix]

Hi Rob,

Masterclass. Brilliant.

[RoyalCraftiness]

2 hours ago, Light-of-Truth said:

Below is one from Shakespeare's Sonnets that also gives a strong hint on the number 33. In Sonnet 14 we find where the first full line of Day 33 begins on Line 9 of the Sonnet:

https://www.light-of-truth.com/pyramid-GMT.php#Sonnet014

The first two lines of Day 33 are with an obvious BACON suggestion:

But from thine eies my knowledge I deriue,
And constant stars in them I read such art

If we look more carefully we'll find just a little bit more using the first 6 letters of the first line and the first 5 letters of the second line:

But from thine eies my knowledge I deriue,
And constant stars in them I read such art

From those 11 letters we can discover F BACON TUDOR

Now lets look at the first four lines of Day 33 which contains 33 words and we can see another BACON:

But from thine eies my knowledge I deriue,
And constant stars in them I read such art
As truth and beautie shal together thriue
If from thy selfe, to store thou wouldst conuert:

Those are the last four lines of the 1609 page:

 

 

 

At the end of line 32 and 33 do we see "i e devere"? Is 33 from the rounded 100/3? Does Bacon see himself as 1/3 of anything, or particularly associated with one aspect of a trinity (holy spirit)? Are there three musketeers here? I notice that there is "Ant in proximity to "Con". Anthony Bacon right?

Of the three, who is the keen observer of the stars (DeVere?), who is the poet (Anthony/DeVere?) and who is the man whose name has become significant with observation (Francis)?

I'm a bit at a loss as to what name suggestion (of these three) we should expect to see show up most often in any text. Over at the Stackexchange someone has written code to produce a table of frequency for bigrams. That is to say, how often we will find one letter immediately adjacent to another. The text used was the dictionary. 

With the letter C there is the highest frequency with O. With O there is the highest frequency with N. That probably should not surprise us since "con" is one of the most common prefixes. We can notice that both occasions in the passage use words that do in fact start with "con". B for its part is often enough associated with A. A , in any bigram, is very high in frequency in the English language. One can expect that it is going to be almost as common as the vowels E and O. So there is often an A very handy.

"An" is obviously very high too here, making an Anthony suggestion more statistically likely than a Francis one. "N" likes to travel with "T".

The case for poor old Ed Devere showing up is probably worse. "Ed" is plastered all over the place and "er" is also super common. We should take note that the word, or prefix, "ever" really gets the Oxfordians excited, as in the case of the "everlasting poet."

I guess a reasonable suggestion would be to ask how many days have a B A CON suggestion in them? With that, one could determine how likely it is that any day would work if it had been designated the 33rd day in pyramid. At that point we would have to determine what is unlikely enough to impress.

I make no judgement of the suggestion. I am trying to offer empirical tools to evaluate if we are seeing anything special. It can possibly explain why people are producing Bacon in so many places where they do look. It may not be rare at all. I would wager no one has tested all the days in your pyramid. Maybe that could be examined to see what frequencies come out. Based on this table I suspect that Ed Devere may be he most common, but who knows because V is not terribly common. "Very" might prop up the frequency.

 

 

 

Edited September 19 by RoyalCraftiness

[Light-of-Truth]

7 minutes ago, RoyalCraftiness said:

Does Bacon see himself as 1/3 of anything, or particularly associated with one aspect of a trinity (holy spirit)?

I would venture an educated guess that Bacon would relate his name to 33 since it adds up to 33 in the Simple code used at the time. 😉

If I were Bacon, I'd leave my name in the exact same place.

Interesting question if Bacon would consider himself a 1/3 of something. Thanks for asking:

Francis Bacon - William Tudor - William Shakespeare

[Light-of-Truth]

26 minutes ago, RoyalCraftiness said:

Does Bacon see himself as 1/3 of anything, or particularly associated with one aspect of a trinity (holy spirit)? Are there three musketeers here?

From Sonnet 105 I hear Bacon describe his three identities ultimately being just one:

Faire,kinde,and true,is all my argument,
Faire,kinde and true,varrying to other words,
And in this change is my inuention spent,
Three theams in one,which wondrous scope affords.
   Faire,kinde,and true,haue often liu'd alone.
   Which three till now,neuer kept seate in one.

[RoyalCraftiness]

8 minutes ago, Light-of-Truth said:

From Sonnet 105 I hear Bacon describe his three identities ultimately being just one:

Faire,kinde,and true,is all my argument,
Faire,kinde and true,varrying to other words,
And in this change is my inuention spent,
Three theams in one,which wondrous scope affords.
   Faire,kinde,and true,haue often liu'd alone.
   Which three till now,neuer kept seate in one.

You are trying to establish that Bacon is the person in question, no? That cannot be done by giving "evidence" which requires us to accept that Bacon has written something in the first place. From elsewhere you must have convinced yourself, but it cannot be from this. Anyway, I feel you are pushing me now. I'd rather read in response to the bigram chart so we could assess its usefulness.  You've reacted defensively by pouring on more of the same stuff that begs for acceptance. I won't be swayed by that to not consider the empirical evidence. I honestly wonder how common the B A CON occurrence is. 

Telling a story in "threes" is the most common type of story telling. 3:1, 2:1 and 3:2 are Nature's preferences. The Sonnets may be about a love tringle. We know Bacon was in one, but it is unclear to me if the man even knew love/Eros that well. The scientific type are often strangers to it. They tend to form relationships with facts better.

[Light-of-Truth]

41 minutes ago, RoyalCraftiness said:

The case for poor old Ed Devere showing up is probably worse. "Ed" is plastered all over the place and "er" is also super common. We should take note that the word, or prefix, "ever" really gets the Oxfordian's excited, as in the case of the "everlasting poet."

Alan Green promotes an Oxie-version of a calendar in the Sonnets and also a Pyramid design. I'm honored that the Oxie's obviously had him try to outdo my Pyramid design. But watching his attempts left me nauseous and chuckling a little because he did his best and I am sure he knew how ridiculous they were, yet Oxie's love them anyway.

Green is a master of pretending to be so smart nobody can understand him which allows him to talk nonsense as if it is real. But its not hard to see through.

CJ, if you haven't watched, you'd enjoy for sure. He won't be talking over your head at all. LOL

https://tobeornottobe.org/the-sonnets/

 

[Light-of-Truth]

2 minutes ago, RoyalCraftiness said:

You've reacted defensively by pouring on more of the same stuff that begs for acceptance. I won't be swayed by that to not consider the empirical evidence. I honestly wonder how common the B A CON occurrence is.

A. Phoenix is sharing many of the known BACON anagrams/acrostics. The best ones have proper context that supports the name appearances. Often there are number hints as well. Random accidental occurrences happen as well, of course.

4 minutes ago, RoyalCraftiness said:

Telling a story in "threes" is the most common type of story telling. 3:1, 2:1 and 3:2 are Nature's preferences. The Sonnets may be about a love tringle. We know Bacon was in one, but it is unclear to me if the man even knew love/Eros that well. The scientific type are often strangers to it. They tend to form relationships with facts better.

In his youth, Bacon was in love with Queen Marguerite of Navarre. In the theory that Bacon was born a Prince to be a King, she would have been a great mother to his son so that he would become William Tudor I. But it never happened.

Love for Bacon was tricky, again in the Prince Tudor theory. If he accidentally bore a child he would ruin Dee's master plan. It is a sad story. So he stayed single until it was clear he would not be King of England, in the Prince Tudor theory. At least in my own personal concept of the theory.

Of Marriage and Single Life is an interesting essay by Bacon.

[RoyalCraftiness]

2 minutes ago, Light-of-Truth said:

Alan Green promotes an Oxie-version of a calendar in the Sonnets and also a Pyramid design. I'm honored that the Oxie's obviously had him try to outdo my Pyramid design. But watching his attempts left me nauseous and chuckling a little because he did his best and I am sure he knew how ridiculous they were, yet Oxie's love them anyway.

Green is a master of pretending to be so smart nobody can understand him which allows him to talk nonsense as if it is real. But its not hard to see through.

CJ, if you haven't watched, you'd enjoy for sure. He won't be talking over your head at all. LOL

https://tobeornottobe.org/the-sonnets/

 

I've criticized his videos on Youtube. To his credit, he has publicly walked back some things he has promoted which were unreasonable when they were shown to be unreasonable by his most ardent critics. It is not a game of who is right. It is a game of knowing if there is even a need or have an opinion. Just because there are conflicting opinions does not mean that one side is onto the truth. The two side are essentially trying to find a way to suggest that Shakespeare did not write Shakespeare, and for that there is no proof. If there was we'd not have the need to have all this fun trying to convince the masses. I dislike it when things get determined by faction building. It will favor the best magicians. The political of who wrote Shakespeare really does not add to our lives. The works stands for itself. It is a rip off of the Greek and Roman works to emphasize some Greek mathematical ideas. Congratulations to whoever did it and to whoever passed it on as theirs.

[Light-of-Truth]

58 minutes ago, RoyalCraftiness said:

I've criticized his videos on Youtube. To his credit, he has publicly walked back some things he has promoted which were unreasonable when they were shown to be unreasonable by his most ardent critics. It is not a game of who is right. It is a game of knowing if there is even a need or have an opinion. Just because there are conflicting opinions does not mean that one side is onto the truth. The two side are essentially trying to find a way to suggest that Shakespeare did not write Shakespeare, and for that there is no proof. If there was we'd not have the need to have all this fun trying to convince the masses. I dislike it when things get determined by faction building. It will favor the best magicians. The political of who wrote Shakespeare really does not add to our lives. The works stands for itself. It is a rip off of the Greek and Roman works to emphasize some Greek mathematical ideas. Congratulations to whoever did it and to whoever passed it on as theirs.

You've made it clear that you don't see any importance in what we are so passionate about. I suppose any passion that gives people motivation to research and seek answers may not be important in the black and white world you might be living in. Yet do you seem to have some passion regarding Bacon and a place in Nova Scotia that some geometry and astronomy hint at.

I admit I am following a path of discovery in my own way. The theory I have seen unfold has always been changing as I learn, yet the core ideas hold together. Am I pursuing Truth with an end in mind? Yes, I am. Is that the best way to find out the Truth? Maybe not. Do I give a hoot about whether I am being perfect or not? Absolutely not. Why? Because I enjoy what I do and I enjoy reading what others are doing on the same path.

Weather is another passion, and like many of amateur weather predictors, we take stabs at using what we know to figure tomorrow's weather.

Sometimes I like to cook something to eat. I rarely use a recipe and just wing it based on my hunches and experience. My wife uses recipes and stresses out if one thing has to be changed or is missing. Everybody finds their bliss in different ways.

CJ, you enjoy trying to quiet other people's passions doing what you see as not important. If that is your passion, follow it to your bliss.

Stratfordians have been defending the Willy of Avon position passionately knowing they have to create or make up their evidence. Oxies are passionate about their Looney concept and borrow a lot of ideas from Baconians. We Baconians have the most evidence and we are passionate about our work. I think one thing that all of us who find Shakespeare Authorship important is we have a passion for our candidates. I am aware most of the world does not care who wrote Shakespeare. We few who do, really care a lot.

Jerry Garcia about the Grateful Dead:

 

[RoyalCraftiness]

No, not really. It's like I said before. I am more interested in debunking ideas and seeing what can be conserved and what cannot be. In the end I would wish it to all be explained away, but I understand that it cannot. The uncertainty in it all allows for various suggestions to have a life. I don't have any regarding the Shakespeare authorship. I will always come off as the natural enemy of people with suggestions in that arena if I attempt to debunk those. I'm happy not publicly doing that if it helps you promote your theories by casting a net. I do find that I offer some things that may be of use to people with an eye for narrative creation. I can't dismiss that Bacon may have been tickled by Kepler and Andrea, and I cannot fail to see that there are things about the actual colonization scheme that have a counterpart in terrestrial and celestial navigation.

I don't want OI associated with Shakespeare or Bacon if it is not. It's a Morris/Philips endeavor as far as the historical record shows. I must stay open to the fact that these men ay have been operating with certain beliefs about Bacon. What they show may be related to what they believe What they believe need not be true. There's a lot to try and disprove that will not easily be disproved. I'm interested because it has been suggested by Amundsen, Dawkins and others. If I could pry that away from them I would be very happy. I don't have to be left holding anything. Simple explanations would delight me.

[Light-of-Truth]

1 hour ago, RoyalCraftiness said:

I will always come off as the natural enemy of people with suggestions in that arena if I attempt to debunk those. I'm happy not publicly doing that if it helps you promote your theories by casting a net.

In a weird way I think you help me support my theories as it motivates me to speak my mind to an audience that might even be only myself at times. If someone reads the B'Hive forums it is because they are likely curious or already involved in the Baconian community. You present yourself as a "not very fun" kind of guy. I don't think of you as an enemy, and I try to not have enemies at all. You and I share personal and even intimate personal communications about what we are going through with our family and life in private, so I feel like I am getting to know you a little. I enjoy our friendship even though you are the public B'Hive antagonist on many days.

We do have lurkers who are Strats and Oxies, and Marlovians, and etc. They may enjoy you picking at us, but they fear you more than we do. I've suggested to others that you may be more Baconian than we know and you are merely attempting to help us get ready for the attacks by the total clueless masses who have nothing but ignorance to base their arguments. We can practice with someone who is not an idiot. LOL

I have said that, not lying.

Yet, maybe you are just a grouchy old fart sitting at his computer with his spoiled but certainly beautiful cat in his lap frustrated that we have so much momentum on this movement you despise. 😉

I am a fan of Peter Dawkins for sure. Amundsen I have not heard from for 20 years or so, and I may be a fan, but have questioned some of his theories. You are well aware A Phoenix is today's most prolific researcher and presenter of Baconian evidence and I am doing what I can to help support them. Most of us who are involved are very excited about their work and total dedication. I appreciate what they have time to do and they are blowing the walls off anything ever done before for the Baconian argument. We all know you want to critique their work and you make some good points. Again, for me it opens the dialog for Deeper understanding.

Lately your main focus has been that the Authorship debate is not important. That is a very weak position because it is so important to so many of us on all fronts. Your strong stance about "proof" is valid, I get it. We have evidence piled up like the mighty Rocky Mountain range, yet still missing the one single proof that will change the world. A Phoenix will likely find it. If not, me, Yann, Kate, or another Baconian will. We are close, and maybe you know it. Christie who has always been one of our "counter-balance" members shared how there is a point where even without a smoking gun enough evidence can indeed prove a case.

We are not trying to disprove Willy was Shakespeare because the only proof is a name on the plays that doesn't even make a perfect fit with Will Shakspur. There has never ever been any proof Willy of Avon wrote anything at all. Scholars acknowledge that authors used pen names back then, and they used ciphers as signatures. That is not being debated as far as I know. That has been proven. Ben Jonson is one who offers proof of anagrams. We are definitely seeking to prove Bacon was Shakespeare, with an end in mind. We are on that path with pleasure enjoying every moment we make yet another discovery.

Thank you for another opportunity for me to share a rant, CJ. 🙂