A factor of ten
art
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_75 172 _196 _82 _199 _67 Forest of Arden
850 823 1024 917 1000 685 HLAS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Art Neuendorffer
John H
Perhaps the factor of ten reflects not merely the absolute quantity of
material posted, but also the volume of of poor quality postings
compared with good quality postings. JH
art
Less matter with no Art?
Art Neuendorffer
"A fool doth think he is wise,
but the wise man knows himself to be a fool."
nordicskiv2
In article
<1adabdf1-9ad8-424c...@o6g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,
art <acne...@gmail.com> wrote:
But Art -- that state of affairs is largely attributable to the
endlessly repetitive effusions of a single spamming moron who infests
h.l.a.s. but not Arden. The reason for his absence at Arden (as well
as the reason for the creation of "the corner" at the Fellowship
forum) is perhaps best characterized by the motto that encapsulates
the reason for Arden's founding: "More matter, with less Art."
nordicskiv2
<7baa2ef5-bb2c-4001...@a36g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
art <acne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> John H <herm...@picknowl.com.au> wrote:
>
> > Perhaps the factor of ten reflects not merely the absolute quantity of
> > material posted, but also the volume of of poor quality postings
> > compared with good quality postings. JH
> Less matter with no Art?
Not necessarily, Art. Some might prefer less Stritmatter and more
Strat-matter, while others might prefer the reVERse; howeVER, all are
agreed upon "no Art."
art
>>
>> Jan Feb _Mar Apr _May Jun
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 850 823 1024 917 1000 685 HLAS
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> But Art -- that state of affairs is largely attributable
> to the endlessly repetitive effusions of a single spamming
> moron who infests h.l.a.s. but not Arden.
Well, you are the top HLAS poster this month.
(And you have only posted once to FOA.)
> The reason for his absence at Arden (as well
> as the reason for the creation of "the corner" at the Fellowship
> forum) is perhaps best characterized by the motto that encapsulates
the reason for Arden's f[l]ound[er]ing: "More matter, with less Art."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Flounder* , v. i. [Cf. D. flodderen to flap, splash through mire, E.
flounce, v.i., and flounder the fish.] To fling the limbs and body, as
in making efforts to move; to struggle, as a horse in the mire, or as
a fish on land; to roll, toss, and tumble; to flounce.
"They have *floundered* on from blunder to blunder." - Sir W.
Hamilton.
Art Neuendorffer
elizabeth
> _75 172 _196 _82 _199 _67 Forest of Arden
> 850 823 1024 917 1000 685 HLAS
> Art Neuendorffer
The reason, Art, that FOA is going DOA is because
resident Strats and Oxfordians have no evidence to
post.
There's no way to (yawn) provoke a debate.
art
>>
>> Jan Feb _Mar Apr _May Jun
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _75 172 _196 _82 _199 _67 Forest of Arden
>> 850 823 1024 917 1000 685 HLAS
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> The reason, Art, that FOA is going DOA is because
> resident Strats and Oxfordians have no evidence to post.
Farey is neither Strat nor Oxfordian.
> There's no way to (yawn) provoke a debate.
Why, woman, I doth bestride the authorship world
Like a Colossus, and you petty antiStrats
Walk under my huge legs and peep about
To find yourselves dishonorably Dave's.
Art Neuendorffer
elizabeth
> >art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Jan Feb _Mar Apr _May Jun
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> _75 172 _196 _82 _199 _67 Forest of Arden
> >> 850 823 1024 917 1000 685 HLAS
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> elizabeth <messageform...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > The reason, Art, that FOA is going DOA is because
> > resident Strats and Oxfordians have no evidence to post.
>
> Farey is neither Strat nor Oxfordian.
I believe that Farey has expressed his uncertainty
about whether or not Bacon was using the
pseudonym "M. LeDoux." Farey's discovery
of the trunk in the Anthony Bacon Collection
at Lambeth Palace, a trunk which contained
Bacon's books including books that were
sources for the Shakespeare works, is a marvelous
find, it would have made headlines had the trunk
contained some relic of Shaksper's.
I remember all the excitement when excavators
in London dug up Shaksper's bong.
There's an extant letter in which Bacon writes
that he has lost some papers on the Continent
(he may have specified Italy), but he's elated
to find that the materials had unexpectedly
arrived, so he's now preparing to take up where
he left off.
I don't know if it's the same trunk or not.
> > There's no way to (yawn) provoke a debate.
>
> Why, woman, I doth bestride the authorship world
> Like a Colossus, and you petty antiStrats
> Walk under my huge legs and peep about
> To find yourselves dishonorably Dave's.
>
> Art Neuendorffer
I maintain that I have always been honorably
not Dave's.
Locally, a thirteen year old boy crammed sparklers
into a fruit jar and lit them. The shrapnel hit houses
half way down the block. The thirteen-year old boy
and his friends were taken to the hospital.
nordicskiv2
<09459e62-1c30-4c49...@o6g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,
art <acne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Jan Feb _Mar Apr _May Jun
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> –-------
> >> _75 172 _196 _82 _199 _67 Forest of Arden
> >> 850 823 1024 917 1000 685 HLAS
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> elizabeth <messageform...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > The reason, Art, that FOA is going DOA is because
> > resident Strats and Oxfordians have no evidence to post.
> Farey is neither Strat nor Oxfordian.
More to the point, he is actually sane, a rarity in the anti-
Stratfordian world.
> > There's no way to (yawn) provoke a debate.
> Why, woman, I doth bestride the authorship world
"I doth"? Is English your native tongue, Art?
> Like a Colossus,
One of the Seven Blunders of the World?
> and you petty antiStrats
> Walk under my huge legs and peep about
> To find yourselves dishonorably Dave's.
Don't you mean "To find you're dissed by honorable Groves," Art?
But I'm surprised at you, Art -- you neglected the other references
to the Colossus, in _Troilus and Cressida_ and in _1 Henry IV_.
> Art Neuendorffer
art
>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 850 823 1024 917 1000 685 HLAS
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>> elizabeth <messageform...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>> The reason, Art, that FOA is going DOA is because
>>> resident Strats and Oxfordians have no evidence
>>> to post.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> More to the point, he is actually sane,
> a rarity in the anti-Stratfordian world.
Then why is he so certain that Marlowe wrote Shakespeare?
>>> There's no way to (yawn) provoke a debate.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Why, woman, I do bestride the authorship world
>> Like a Colossus,
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> One of the Seven Blunders of the World?
And "with my legs as far asunder as I conveniently could."
. Two Rhodes DIVERgEd in a wood, and I —
. I took the 'one less traveled' by,
. And that has made all the difference.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> and you petty antiStrats
>> Walk under my huge legs and peep about
>> To find yourselves dishonorably Dave's.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Don't you mean "To find you're dissed by honorable Groves," Art?
More likely: "Pissed by honorable Art."
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> But I'm surprised at you, Art -- you neglected the other references
> to the Colossus, in _Troilus and Cressida_ and in _1 Henry IV_.
-------------------------------------------------------
Colossus, n.; pl. L. Colossi, E. Colossuses.
Any man or beast *of gigantic size*
-------------------------------------------------------
Fear me with a wEaVER's beam:
-------------------------------------------------------
Jonathan Swift » Gulliver's Travels » Chapter 3
<<Two days after this adventure, the emperor, having ordered that part
of his army which quarters in and about his metropolis, to be in
readiness, took a fancy of *DIVERting* himself in a VERy singular
manner. He desired I would stand like a *Colossus* , with my legs as
far asunder as I conveniently could. He then commanded his general
(who was an old experienced leader, and a great patron of mine) to
draw up the troops in close order, and march them under me; the foot
by twenty-four abreast, and the horse by sixteen, with drums beating,
colours flying, and pikes advanced. This body consisted of three
thousand foot, and a thousand horse. His majesty gave orders, upon
pain of death, that EVERy soldier in his march should obsERVE the
strictest decency with regard to my person; which howEVER could not
prevent some of the younger officers from turning up their eyes as
they passed under me: and, to confess the *TRUTH* , my breeches were
at that time in so ill a condition, that they afforded some
opportunities for laughter and admiration.>>
-------------------------------------------------------
<<The Colossus: computer used by Alan Turing at Bletchley Park, UK
during the Second World War to crack the "Tunny" cipher produced by
the Lorenz SZ 40 and SZ 42 machines. Colossus was a semi-fixed-program
vacuum tube calculator that could read 5,000 characters per second,
and could carry out 100 Boolean calculations at any one time.>>
-------------------------------------------------------
Art Neuendorffer
ignoto
>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Jan Feb _Mar Apr _May Jun
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------�-------
>>> _75 172 _196 _82 _199 _67 Forest of Arden
>>> 850 823 1024 917 1000 685 HLAS
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------�-------
> elizabeth <messageform...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> The reason, Art, that FOA is going DOA is because
>> resident Strats and Oxfordians have no evidence to post.
>
> Farey is neither Strat nor Oxfordian.
>
>> There's no way to (yawn) provoke a debate.
>
> Why, woman, I doth bestride the authorship world
> Like a Colossus,
One of the "Seven Blunders of the World", perhaps?
Peter Farey
Art Neuendorffer wrote:
>
> David L.Webb wrote:
> >
> > Art Neuendorffer wrote:
> > >
> > > Elizabeth Weir wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The reason, Art, that FOA is going DOA is because
> > > > resident Strats and Oxfordians have no evidence
> > > > to post.
> > >
> >
> > a rarity in the anti-Stratfordian world.
How very kind.
> Then why is he so certain that Marlowe wrote Shakespeare?
I am not 'certain'. However, I believe that it explains what
appear to be the facts better than any other 'Shakespeare
authorship' theory does. The next issue of *The Oxfordian*
might help you to understand why.
Peter F.
<pet...@rey.prestel.co.uk>
<http://www2.prestel.co.uk/rey/index.htm>
Peter Farey
"elizabeth" wote:
>
> I believe that Farey has expressed his uncertainty
> about whether or not Bacon was using the pseudonym
> "M. LeDoux."
I have never heard it suggested that "M. LeDoux" was a
pseudonym for Bacon. As far as I know, the only person
whose identity that name has been thought to conceal is
Christopher Marlowe.
The only uncertainty I recall expressing is whether the
things listed as being contained in 'le coffre de Mr le
Douz' belonged to him (as Dolly Wraight and I thought
originally) or to Anthony Bacon. (MS.656 f.184r/v)
> Farey's discovery of the trunk in the Anthony Bacon
> Collection at Lambeth Palace, a trunk which contained
> Bacon's books including books that were sources for the
> Shakespeare works, is a marvelous find, it would have
> made headlines had the trunk contained some relic of
> Shaksper's.
What I found was a list (different to the one mentioned
above) entitled "Cathologue des liures de Mr le Douz".
It listed books in Latin, Italian, French and Spanish,
several of which were known to have been used as sources
by Shakespeare, and which (by the price noted against
each of them) Anthony Bacon seemed to have bought from
Le Doux. (MS.655 ff.185r/v, 186)
> I remember all the excitement when excavators
> in London dug up Shaksper's bong.
His what?
> There's an extant letter in which Bacon writes
> that he has lost some papers on the Continent
> (he may have specified Italy), but he's elated
> to find that the materials had unexpectedly
> arrived, so he's now preparing to take up where
> he left off.
>
> I don't know if it's the same trunk or not.
By 'Bacon', I take it that you mean Anthony. If what
you say is true, this has the potential to be very int-
eresting indeed. I hesitate to ask, but is there any
chance of you providing some further information
which might help me to locate this letter?
art
>
>>>>> The reason, Art, that FOA is going DOA is because
>>>>> resident Strats and Oxfordians have no evidence
>>>>> to post.
>
>
>>>> Farey is neither Strat nor Oxfordian.
>
>
>>> More to the point, he is actually sane,
>>> a rarity in the anti-Stratfordian world.
>
> How very kind.
Little more than Lynne (and less than kind).
> Art Neuendorffer wrote:
>>
>> Then why is he so certain that Marlowe wrote Shakespeare?
"Peter Farey" <pete...@rey.prestel.co.uk> wrote:
>
> I am not 'certain'. However, I believe that it explains what
> appear to be the facts better than any other 'Shakespeare
> authorship' theory does. The next issue of *The Oxfordian*
> might help you to understand why.
*The Oxfordian* no less!
http://www.shakespeare-oxford.com/?page_id=90
(Did you ever read my own article in *The Marlovian* ?
http://www.marlovian.com/newsletter/ )
For those of us who just can't wait
(and are not quite ready to fork over $25)
would you mind giving us a short summary, Peter?
Art Neuendorffer
Maev
>
> "elizabeth" wote:
>
> What I found was a list (different to the one mentioned
> above) entitled "Cathologue des liures de Mr le Douz".
> It listed books in Latin, Italian, French and Spanish,
> several of which were known to have been used as sources
> by Shakespeare, and which (by the price noted against
> each of them) Anthony Bacon seemed to have bought from
> Le Doux. (MS.655 ff.185r/v, 186)
>
>
> > that he has lost some papers on the Continent
> > (he may have specified Italy), but he's elated
> > to find that the materials had unexpectedly
> > arrived, so he's now preparing to take up where
> > he left off.
>
> > I don't know if it's the same trunk or not.
>
> By 'Bacon', I take it that you mean Anthony. If what
> you say is true, this has the potential to be very int-
> eresting indeed. I hesitate to ask, but is there any
> chance of you providing some further information
> which might help me to locate this letter?
````````````````````````````
This is a quote on a similar topic -
(quote, excerpts)
in the summer of 1582, at which time Francis Bacon was studying law in
Gray's Inn,
while Anthony was travelling in France in search of political
intelligence and was in close correspondence with Nicholas Faunt,
a secretary of Sir Francis Walsingham's, who had spent the previous
year in France, Germany, Switzerland, and the north of Italy, on the
same errand;
and was now living about the English Court, studying affairs at home,
and collecting and arranging the observations which he had made
abroad,
'having already recovered all his writings and books which he had left
behind him in Italy and in Frankfort' (see Birch's 'Memoirs,' I. 24),
and it is remembered that if this paper belonged to Anthony Bacon, it
would naturally descend at his death to Francis and so remain among
his manuscripts, where it is supposed to have been found.
http://www.hiddenmysteries.com/freebook/bacon/bacon4.html
nordicskiv2
<dfeea662-b17f-4139...@32g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,
art <acne...@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
> >>>> Farey is neither Strat nor Oxfordian.
> >> David L.Webb wrote:
> >
> >>> More to the point, he is actually sane,
> >>> a rarity in the anti-Stratfordian world.
> > How very kind.
> Little more than Lynne
Why are you bringing Lynne into this, Art? At least she knows what
a primary source *is*, and has read a few -- that's more than one can
say of the bumbling "A source is a source/Of course, of course"
approach of certain of her less acute coreligionists.
> (and less than kind).
Certainly it is kind, Art -- indeed, I regard Peter as a sort of
honorary Stratfordian, just as I regard lacksanity as an honorary anti-
Stratfordian.
And I don't see how you can deny that sanity is a rarity among anti-
Stratfordians based upon the evidence available from this newsgroup,
Art -- after all, h.l.a.s. anti-Stratfordians have (among many other
comic claims) championed "ether theory" as an alternative to special
relativity (while simultaneously claiming that the latter theory was
"plagerized [sic],") claimed that AIDS is "a hoax," dismissed the
Apollo lunar landing as a crude NASA-fabricated hoax, boasted of
having "solved" Fermat's Last Theorem, rhapsodized about the
(nonexistent) Franck Organ Symphony, asserted that "vier" means "four"
in Spanish, extolled certain supposedly marvelous properties of the
number nineteen that are in fact shared by all odd natural numbers,
championed the "aquatic apes" theory of primate evolution, insisted
that John Edward does talk to the dead, pronounced the "Ray Mignot"
sonnet genuine, affirmed that Old English was still spoken as late as
the nineteenth century in some shires (and on the Moon in the
twentieth century), promulgated the insane word-salad of a paranoid
schizophrenic as "history for grownups," announced (in a forum with
international readership) the supposed death of a distinguished
scholar because another man a quarter century younger who shares the
same surname and given name (but not the same middle initial, age,
place of residence, or profession) perished, pronounced the
impossibility of "decent" literature from South America, warned of the
peril of the imminent Mexican "reconquista" of the American southwest,
lovingly restored to the text of _Hamlet_ the missing instances of
flatulence, situated Caxton chronologically as Shakespeare's
contemporary, and offered "exegeses" of Shakespeare's sonnets as
records of a royal crapping competition -- moreover, *each* of
"Buckeye Pete," Paul Streitz, Paul Crowley, Little Willie, Richard
Kennedy, "Dr." Faker, Stephanie Caruana, Okay Fine, gangleri, and
Elizabeth Weird deserves an entire paragraph to himself or herself at
the length of the above! See
for a most entertaining summary.
When one adds the nuttiness of other anti-Stratfordians who do not
participate in h.l.a.s. (those who jump upon the Woolsack in
Parliament shouting "Treason!", those who identify various modern
European nations as the lost tribes of Israel, those who "research"
history by means of seances, the crank Baconian ciphermongers of
yesteryear, etc.), the case for the scarcity of sanity among anti-
Stratfordians becomes stronger still. Peter is a noteworthy exception
indeed.
> > Art Neuendorffer wrote:
> >>
> >> Then why is he so certain that Marlowe wrote Shakespeare?
Certain?! I've neVER heard Peter express the certainty that is the
hallmark of cranks like Crowley and Elizabeth Weird. Rather, he has
worked out a scenario that intrigues him, which he has explored
further and offered as a possibility. Moreover, Peter, unlike a great
many anti-Stratfordians, is not immune to correction, and he does not
deny readily verifiable facts or dismiss all evidence that doesn't
support a particular pet monomaniacal _idée fixe_ as forgeries or
Masonic fakes.
> "Peter Farey" <pete...@rey.prestel.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > I am not 'certain'. However, I believe that it explains what
> > appear to be the facts better than any other 'Shakespeare
> > authorship' theory does. The next issue of *The Oxfordian*
> > might help you to understand why.
> *The Oxfordian* no less!
> http://www.shakespeare-oxford.com/?page_id=90
Indeed, it seems a pity that Peter didn't place his article in a
venue that enjoys both wider circulation and a better reputation for
sound scholarship; but perhaps he was in a hurry to get it into print.
> (Did you ever read my own article in *The Marlovian* ?
> http://www.marlovian.com/newsletter/ )
*You* wrote an article that appeared in _The Marlovian_, Art??!!
In which issue did it appear? At any rate, any article of yours
dealing with authorship seems very unlikely to be vulnerable to the
criticism leveled at the only other published paper of yours of which
I am aware, Art (Crone and Neuendorffer, 1988).
> For those of us who just can't wait
> (and are not quite ready to fork over
Fork ol' Ver? He's already forked, Art.
> $25)
Did you eVER hear of a library, Art. What?! Do you mean to say
that even elite university research libraries with very extensive
journal collections don't subscribe to _The Oxfordian_, Art??! I'm
shocked -- shocked! Perhaps you could borrow Lynne's copy? Or Dr.
Stritmatter's? Or Marty Hyatt's? Or Nina Green's?
> would you mind giving us a short summary, Peter?
For those of us who just can't wait (and are not quite ready to
waste time rummaging around online) would you mind giving us a short
summary of your article in _The Marlovian_, Art? Better still, could
you include the precise reference so that those of us who harbor
morbid curiosity can try to look it up?
> Art Neuendorffer
art
>>>> David L.Webb wrote:
>
>>>>> More to the point, he is actually sane,
>>>>> a rarity in the anti-Stratfordian world.
>> Peter wrote:
>>> How very kind.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Little more than Lynne
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Why are you bringing Lynne into this, Art?
She rhymes with "kin" and is not always "kind."
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> (and less than kind).
>>> Art Neuendorffer wrote:
>
>>>> Then why is he so certain that Marlowe wrote Shakespeare?
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Certain?! I've neVER heard Peter express the certainty that is the
> hallmark of cranks like Crowley and Elizabeth Weird. Rather, he has
> worked out a scenario that intrigues him, which he has explored
> further and offered as a possibility. Moreover, Peter, unlike
> a great many anti-Stratfordians, is not immune to correction,
Examples?
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> and he does not deny readily verifiable facts
> or dismiss all evidence that doesn't support
> a particular pet monomaniacal _idée fixe_
> as forgeries or Masonic fakes.
Well, of course, that is because
MAR-L.O. is, himself, a Masonic fake.
>> "Peter Farey" <pete...@rey.prestel.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>> I am not 'certain'. However, I believe that it explains what
>>> appear to be the facts better than any other 'Shakespeare
>>> authorship' theory does. The next issue of *The Oxfordian*
>>> might help you to understand why.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> *The Oxfordian* no less!
>>http://www.shakespeare-oxford.com/?page_id=90
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Indeed, it seems a pity that Peter didn't place his article in a
> venue that enjoys both wider circulation and a better reputation for
> sound scholarship; but perhaps he was in a hurry to get it into print.
Perhaps Peter could explain why for himself.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> (Did you ever read my own article in *The Marlovian* ?
>> http://www.marlovian.com/newsletter/)
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> *You* wrote an article that appeared in _The Marlovian_, Art??!!
> In which issue did it appear?
Issue 11--Fall 1999
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> At any rate, any article of yours dealing with authorship
> seems very unlikely to be vulnerable to the criticism leveled
> at the only other published paper of yours of which
> I am aware, Art (Crone and Neuendorffer, 1988).
It is invulnerable.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> For those of us who just can't wait
>> (and are not quite ready to fork over
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Fork ol' Ver? He's already forked, Art.
Fulke U(nderhill), Dave.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> $25)
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Did you eVER hear of a library, Art.
I go to the library about 3 times a week, Dave
(; mostly to read Time, Newsweek & The New Yorker).
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> What?! Do you mean to say that even
> elite university research libraries with very extensive
> journal collections don't subscribe to _The Oxfordian_, Art??!
All they have is that S.Q. rag.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> I'm shocked -- shocked!
You're schlocked?
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Perhaps you could borrow Lynne's copy?
> Or Dr. Stritmatter's? Or Marty Hyatt's?
You're not thinking of _Shakespeare Matters_ , are you.
You must subscribe to _The Oxfordian_, Dave.
Can I borrow your copy when you are done?
>> would you mind giving us a short summary, Peter?
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> For those of us who just can't wait (and are not quite ready to
> waste time rummaging around online) would you mind giving us
> summary of your article in _The Marlovian_, Art? Better still,
> could you include the precise reference so that those of us
> who harbor morbid curiosity can try to look it up?
Why not borrow Dave More's copy of Issue 11--Fall 1999?
Art Neuendorffer
nordicskiv2
<14b68596-26cf-45aa...@o7g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
art <acne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> Farey is neither Strat nor Oxfordian.
> >>>> David L.Webb wrote:
> >
> >>>>> More to the point, he is actually sane,
> >>>>> a rarity in the anti-Stratfordian world.
> >> Peter wrote:
>
> >>> How very kind.
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Little more than Lynne
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Why are you bringing Lynne into this, Art?
> She rhymes with "kin" and is not always "kind."
I haven't observed Lynne being unkind. I do recall her being
justifiably upset that a moron who admits that he doesn't even know
what a primary source is and who moreoVER had not even read the
pertinent Kositsky-Stritmatter articles began attacking Kositsky and
Stritmatter for plagiarism of Volker Multhopp's idiotic piece, but
that scarcely counts as unkindness.
[...]
> >>>> Then why is he so certain that Marlowe wrote Shakespeare?
.
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Certain?! I've neVER heard Peter express the certainty that is the
> > hallmark of cranks like Crowley and Elizabeth Weird. Rather, he has
> > worked out a scenario that intrigues him, which he has explored
> > further and offered as a possibility. Moreover, Peter, unlike
> > a great many anti-Stratfordians, is not immune to correction,
[...]
> > and he does not deny readily verifiable facts
> > or dismiss all evidence that doesn't support
> > a particular pet monomaniacal _idée fixe_
> > as forgeries or Masonic fakes.
> Well, of course, that is because
> MAR-L.O. is, himself, a Masonic fake.
You prove my point _ipso facto_, Art -- many (if not most) anti-
Stratfordians merely deny inconvenient facts and dismiss all evidence
that doesn't support their particular monomaniacal _idée fixe_ as
forgeries or Masonic fakes, as you have just done.
> >> "Peter Farey" <pete...@rey.prestel.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >>> I am not 'certain'. However, I believe that it explains what
> >>> appear to be the facts better than any other 'Shakespeare
> >>> authorship' theory does. The next issue of *The Oxfordian*
> >>> might help you to understand why.
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> *The Oxfordian* no less!
"No less"? How could any venue be described as *less* than _The
Oxfordian_?
> >>http://www.shakespeare-oxford.com/?page_id=90
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Indeed, it seems a pity that Peter didn't place his article in a
> > venue that enjoys both wider circulation and a better reputation for
> > sound scholarship; but perhaps he was in a hurry to get it into print.
> Perhaps Peter could explain why for himself.
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> (Did you ever read my own article in *The Marlovian* ?
> >> http://www.marlovian.com/newsletter/)
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > *You* wrote an article that appeared in _The Marlovian_, Art??!!
> > In which issue did it appear?
> Issue 11--Fall 1999
Unfortunately, that issue does not appear online, as far as I can
tell. Would you please send me a copy?
[...]
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> For those of us who just can't wait
> >> (and are not quite ready to fork over
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Fork ol' Ver? He's already forked, Art.
> Fulke U(nderhill), Dave.
Now, now, Art -- keep it clean.
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> $25)
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Did you eVER hear of a library, Art.
> I go to the library about 3 times a week, Dave
> (; mostly to read Time, Newsweek & The New Yorker).
Does your library subscribe to _National Enquirer_ or _Weekly World
News_, Art?
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > What?! Do you mean to say that even
> > elite university research libraries with very extensive
> > journal collections don't subscribe to _The Oxfordian_, Art??!
> All they have is that S.Q. rag.
Sûreté du Québec?
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > I'm shocked -- shocked!
> You're schlocked?
"Schlock" isn't a VERb, Art. And I'm mildly surprised (but
pleased) that you would use the noun in reference to _The Oxfordian_,
which does qualify under the OED definition of "schlock": "Cheap,
shoddy, or defective goods; inferior material, junk,..."
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Perhaps you could borrow Lynne's copy?
> > Or Dr. Stritmatter's? Or Marty Hyatt's?
> You're not thinking of _Shakespeare Matters_ , are you.
No; _Shakespeare Matters_ can be funnier still -- it is the tabloid
of print Oxfordian venues.
> You must subscribe to _The Oxfordian_, Dave.
Of course not, Art -- I wouldn't waste money that way. (Nor would
I lend financial support to a publication that seeks to undermine the
goals of our conspiracy, of course.)
> Can I borrow your copy when you are done?
You could if I had a copy, Art (but the Grand Master's copy does
not circulate).
> >> would you mind giving us a short summary, Peter?
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > For those of us who just can't wait (and are not quite ready to
> > waste time rummaging around online) would you mind giving us
> > summary of your article in _The Marlovian_, Art? Better still,
> > could you include the precise reference so that those of us
> > who harbor morbid curiosity can try to look it up?
> Why not borrow Dave More's copy of Issue 11--Fall 1999?
I am not in contact with Dave More; indeed, I cannot recall his
being active at h.l.a.s. for years. However, not having been able to
attend your talk in Baltimore, I would love to see your article; could
you please send me a copy? Thanks in advance.
> Art Neuendorffer
art
>>>>>> David L.Webb wrote:
>
>>>>>>> More to the point, he is actually sane,
>>>>>>> a rarity in the anti-Stratfordian world.
>>>> Peter wrote:
>
>>>>> How very kind.
>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Little more than Lynne
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> Why are you bringing Lynne into this, Art?
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> She rhymes with "kin" and is not always "kind."
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> I haven't observed Lynne being unkind. I do recall her being
> justifiably upset that a moron who admits that he doesn't even know
> what a primary source is and who moreoVER had not even read the
> pertinent Kositsky-Stritmatter articles began attacking Kositsky
> and Stritmatter for plagiarism of Volker Multhopp's idiotic
> piece, but that scarcely counts as unkindness.
The VERy fact that Lynne would probably agree with you
on that score is why she is not always "kind."
>>>>>> Then why is he so certain that Marlowe wrote Shakespeare?
> .
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> Certain?! I've neVER heard Peter express the certainty that is the
>>> hallmark of cranks like Crowley and Elizabeth Weird. Rather, he has
>>> worked out a scenario that intrigues him, which he has explored
>>> further and offered as a possibility. Moreover, Peter, unlike
>>> a great many anti-Stratfordians, is not immune to correction,
Examples?
> .
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> and he does not deny readily verifiable facts
>>> or dismiss all evidence that doesn't support
>>> a particular pet monomaniacal _idée fixe_
>>> as forgeries or Masonic fakes.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Well, of course, that is because
>> MAR-L.O. is, himself, a Masonic fake.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> You prove my point _ipso facto_, Art -- many (if not most) anti-
> Stratfordians merely deny inconvenient facts and dismiss all
> evidence that doesn't support their particular monomaniacal
> _idée fixe_ as forgeries or Masonic fakes, as you have just done.
The facts & evidence:
---------------------------------------------------
_____ *MAR-LO*
_____ *HI-RAM*
---------------------------------------------------
. T O T H E O N _____ L I E B E G E T T
. E R O F T H E ______S E I N S V I N G
. S O N N E T S M _ R W H A L L H A
. P P I N E S S E __-A ___N D T H A T E
. T E R N I T I E P____R O ___M I S E D
. B Y O V R E V E R _ L_I____V I N G P
. O E T W I S H E T H T __ H___ E W E L
. L W I S H I N G A D V E _____ N T V R
. E R I N S E T T I N G F_______O R T H
-------------------------------------------------------
Some interesting 5-letter Rollett strings
"found in arrays based on the first 144 letters
of the dedication to Shakespeare's Sonnets.":
.
*HIRAM* : 1706u (Masonic mystery man)
.
Terry Ross site: http://shakespeareauthorship.com/wds1.html
----------------------------------------------------------
From: Terry Ross (tr...@bcpl.net)
Subject: Re: Rosencraft & Guildenstone flip coins
Newsgroups: humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare
Date: 2000-11-27 03:53:28 PST
.
Odds of picking 5 letters at random out of the 144 in the dedication
and getting *HIRAM* are 10/144 * 14/143 * 9/142* 5/141 * 2/140
or about 1 in 4.6 million. There are 2520 5-letter slots in the
arrays, and since Rollett allowed words to appear reading either
up or down, there are in effect 5040 places to search for *HIRAM*.
.
. The chance of finding *HIRAM* somewhere
. in some array is thus about 1 in 909.
---------------------------------------------------------
Christopher Knight & Robert Lomas, The Hiram Key:
<<Refusing to divulge the secrets of his craft, *HIRAM receives a
violent blow on his forehead* which drops him to his left knee. At
that point in the story, the candidate receives a light blow to his
temples and is pressed to the ground by two deacons to his left knee.
The story where *HIRAM* seeks to escape by the west gate and is struck
with another blow. The candidate goes down on his right knee. At the
east gate, the third ruffian "struck him a *violent blow full in the
center of the forehead* with a heavy stone maul, which laid him
lifeless at his feet. Such was he manner of his death."
"In the light of the candle I saw the Worshipful Master reach forward
over his pedestal with an instrument which touched my forehead and I
felt many hands pulling me backwards to the floor. I was held straight
and my feet were kept in place, so that I hinged backwards as I swung
into the darkness. As I touched he ground a funeral shroud was
immediately draped around me, so only my upper face was uncovered.">>
----------------------------------------------------
>>>> "Peter Farey" <pete...@rey.prestel.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>>> I am not 'certain'. However, I believe that it explains what
>>>>> appear to be the facts better than any other 'Shakespeare
>>>>> authorship' theory does. The next issue of *The Oxfordian*
>>>>> might help you to understand why.
>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> *The Oxfordian* no less!
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> "No less"?
> How could any venue be described as *less* than _The Oxfordian_?
Well, Peter apparently found it worthwhile.
>>>>http://www.shakespeare-oxford.com/?page_id=90
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> Indeed, it seems a pity that Peter didn't place his article in a
>>> venue that enjoys both wider circulation and a better reputation for
>>> sound scholarship; but perhaps he was in a hurry to get it into print.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Perhaps Peter could explain why for himself.
>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> (Did you ever read my own article in *The Marlovian* ?
>>>> http://www.marlovian.com/newsletter/)
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> *You* wrote an article that appeared in _The Marlovian_, Art??!!
>>> In which issue did it appear?
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Issue 11--Fall 1999
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Unfortunately, that issue does not appear online, as far as
> I can tell. Would you please send me a copy?
What's your address again?
>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> For those of us who just can't wait
>>>> (and are not quite ready to fork over
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> Fork ol' Ver? He's already forked, Art.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Fulke U(nderhill), Dave.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Now, now, Art -- keep it clean.
You have a problem with patricide?
>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> $25)
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> Did you eVER hear of a library, Art.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I go to the library about 3 times a week, Dave
>> (; mostly to read Time, Newsweek & The New Yorker).
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Does your library subscribe to _National Enquirer_
> or _Weekly World News_, Art?
I'll check next time.
>
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> What?! Do you mean to say that even
>>> elite university research libraries with very extensive
>>> journal collections don't subscribe to _The Oxfordian_, Art??!
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> All they have is that S.Q. rag.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Sûreté du Québec?
Shakespeare Quarterly
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> I'm shocked -- shocked!
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> You're schlocked?
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> "Schlock" isn't a VERb, Art. And I'm mildly surprised (but
> pleased) that you would use the noun in reference to _The Oxfordian_,
> which does qualify under the OED definition of "schlock": "Cheap,
> shoddy, or defective goods; inferior material, junk,..."
--------------------------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakespeare_Quarterly
<<Shakespeare Quarterly is an academic journal founded in 1950 by the
Shakespeare Association of America. It is now under the auspices of
the Folger Shakespeare Library. Along with book and performance
criticism, Shakespeare Quarterly incorporates scholarly research and
essays on Shakespeare and the age in which he worked. It also includes
a special section devoted to the latest ideas in Shakespeare
scholarship. The editor of Shakespeare Quarterly is Dr. Gail Kern
Paster, director of the Folger Library. The journal is published
seasonally. Circulation is 3,239 and the average length of an issue is
128 pages.>>
--------------------------------------
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> Perhaps you could borrow Lynne's copy?
>>> Or Dr. Stritmatter's? Or Marty Hyatt's?
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> You're not thinking of _Shakespeare Matters_ , are you?
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> No; _Shakespeare Matters_ can be funnier still --
> it is the tabloid of print Oxfordian venues.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> You must subscribe to _The Oxfordian_, Dave.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Of course not, Art -- I wouldn't waste money that way.
> (Nor would I lend financial support to a publication that
> seeks to undermine the goals of our conspiracy, of course.)
Of course.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Can I borrow your copy when you are done?
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> You could if I had a copy, Art (but
> the Grand Master's copy does not circulate).
Does the Grand Master have anything that still circulates?
>>>> would you mind giving us a short summary, Peter?
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> For those of us who just can't wait (and are not quite ready to
>>> waste time rummaging around online) would you mind giving us
>>> summary of your article in _The Marlovian_, Art? Better still,
>>> could you include the precise reference so that those of us
>>> who harbor morbid curiosity can try to look it up?
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Why not borrow Dave More's copy of Issue 11--Fall 1999?
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> I am not in contact with Dave More; indeed, I cannot recall his
> being active at h.l.a.s. for years. However, not having been able
> to attend your talk in Baltimore, I would love to see your article;
> could you please send me a copy? Thanks in advance.
I wouldn't know where to begin to find my 10 year old copy.
But, you could try your local library or........ send $15 to
John Baker, c/o Sticklin-Greenwood Cemetary [sic] , Centralia,
Washington. Make check payable to Christopher Marlowe More.)
____ http://www.marlovian.com/mla/
------------------------------------------------------------
Issue 11--Fall 1999 Marley's Ghost (by Art Neuendorffer)
discussed a later Mecca eclipse & Saturn/Venus conj.
250 years after Marlowe's demise:
-----------------------------------------------------------
http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/SEcat/SE1801-1900.html
.
Ver: May 30, 1593 Eclipse Mag. at Mecca 0.91
Hiems: Dec.21, 1843 Eclipse Mag. at Mecca 0.84
---------------------------------------------------------
. The 3 stages of Freemasonry:
.
<<Expect the first tomorrow, when the bell tolls One.'
. `Expect the second on the next night at the same
. hour. The third upon the next night when the last
. stroke of Twelve has ceased to vibrate.>>
.
ECLIPSE <= Dec.21 / Marley / Christmas EVE
________ Dec.22 / 1st Gh. / Dec.25
________ Dec.23 / 2nd Gh. / Dec.26
________ Dec.24 / 3rd Gh. / Dec.27
____ Christmas / rebirth / Dec.28 => Saturn/Venus conj.
.
. <<`It's Christmas Day.' said Scrooge to himself.
. `I haven't missed it.
. The Spirits have done it all in one night.
. They can do anything they like.
. Of course they can. Of course they can.>>
-----------------------------------------------------------
. Stave 1: Marley's Ghost
.
Old Marley was as dead as a DOOR-NAIL.
Mind! I don't mean to say that I know, of my
own knowledge, what there is particularly dead about
a DOOR-NAIL. I might have been inclined, myself, to
regard a coffin-nail as the deadest piece of ironmongery
in the trade. But the wisdom of our ancestors
is in the simile; and my unhallowed hands
shall not disturb it, or the Country's done for. You
will therefore permit me to repeat, emphatically, that
Marley was as dead as a DOOR-NAIL.
---------------------------------------------------------
"I.e., DOOR-NAILS get hit in the head" - Asimov
------------------------------------------------------------
. TOTHE O NLIEBEGETTEROFT
. HESEI N SVINGSONNETSMRW
. HALLH A PPINESSEANDTHAT
. ETERN I TIEPROMISEDBYOV
. REVER L IVINGPOETWISHET
. HTHEW E LLWISHINGADVENT
. VRERI N SETTINGFORTH
-----------------------------------------------------------------
An Ancre's life to leade, with NAILES to scratche my grave,
Where earthly Wormes on me shall fede, is all the joyes I crave;
. -- Finis. E.O.
.
http://drk.sd23.bc.ca/DeVere/Oxford_Poems_and_Songs-18.pdf
. http://www3.telus.net/oxford/oxfordspoems.html#3
---------------------------------------------------------
. Roman citizens St.Paul, St.George & St.Crispin
. were all executed by beheading.
.
. In 1222, the Council of Oxford
. assigned 23rd April as St. George's Day
.
. [Ancient British Ballad]
. <<But George he did the dragon kill
. As dead as any DOOR-NAIL>>
-----------------------------------------------
. <<ded as a DORE-NAYLE>>
. The Vision of
. pie(R)s
. p(LOWMA)n
-----------------------------------------------
. (CHRIST. M.)as
. c.( AROL)
. by Charles Dickens
.
. I have EnDEaVouREd in this Ghostly little book,
to raise the Ghost of an Idea, which shall not put my
readers out of humour with themselves, with each other,
. with the season, or with me.
. MAY it haunt their houses pleasantly,
. and no one wish to lay it.
. Their faithful Friend and Servant,
. C. D. DECEMBER, 1843.
-----------------------------------------------
Peter Bull wrote:
<<The ghost of Marley has always bothered me. Could Dickens have been
a high level Mason, or some other sort of adept? Might he have been in
on the secret? The afterword to my book is titled 'The Revenant'
partly in honour of the ghost of Marley (and partly on account of some
clues in the preface to The Jew of Malta that seems to hint of
Marlowe's 'ghostly' return to England about 15 years after his
'murder').
.
Has it occurred to you that the expression 'As dead as a door nail' is
an anagram of 'As dead as a rood nail' - a nail of the true cross -
symbol of death. I think it may be intentional. Marlo/Hiram being hit
on the head like a door nail (the nail that the knocker claps on) is
extremely apt . . . knock three times . . . Hamlet's ghost departed
when the cock crowed three times . . .>>
.
. I like that: 'As dead as a rood nail'
--------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Bull wrote:
.
<<Christmas Marley - Christopher Marley/Marlowe
.
A door nail - gematria value 255 - Hebrew name HIRM (he yod resh mim)
Hiram (as found in 2 Chron iv, 11)
.
A rood nail - symbol of resurrection? The Rosicrucian cross was a
healing cross.
.
Method in this madness?>>
.
. Not madness ... just Folly. ;-)
--------------------------------------------------------------
[_The SCOURGE of Folly_ by JOHN Davies ]
------------------------------------------------------------------
. To our English Terence, Mr. Will. Shake-speare.
.
. Some say (good Will) which I, in sport, do sing,
. Had'st thou not plaid some Kingly parts in sport,
. Thou hadst bin a companion for a King;..
.
. And, beene A KING AMONG THE MEANER SORT.
---------------------------------------------------------------
. JOHN {the Divine} 19
------------------------------------------------------------------
JOHN 19:18 Where they crucified him, and two other with him,
. on either side one, and Jesus in the midst. {T T T}
.
JOHN 19:19 And * * Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the CROSS.
. And the writing was,
. JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS.
.
JOHN 19:33 when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already,
. they *BRAKE* not his legs: But one of the soldiers with a *SPEAR*
. pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water.
. And he that saw it bare record, and his record is *TRUE*:
. and he knoweth that he saith *TRUE*, that ye might believe.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Art Neuendorffer
Peter Farey
David. L. Webb wrote:
>
> Art Neuendorffer wrote:
> >
> > Peter Farey wrote:
> > >
> > > I am not 'certain'. However, I believe that it explains what
> > > appear to be the facts better than any other 'Shakespeare
> > > authorship' theory does. The next issue of *The Oxfordian*
> > > might help you to understand why.
> >
> > *The Oxfordian* no less!
> > http://www.shakespeare-oxford.com/?page_id=90
>
> Indeed, it seems a pity that Peter didn't place his article
> in a venue that enjoys both wider circulation and a better
> reputation for sound scholarship; but perhaps he was in a hurry
> to get it into print.
No, I responded to an invitation from the journal's new editor,
Michael Egan (who thinks Shakespeare wrote Shakespeare but who
considers the authorship question to be a legitimate one) to
contribute a piece providing an updated review of the case for
Marlowe.
As I understand it, his intention is to assemble a collecton of
essays representing various authorship viewpoints, and not only
the most familiar ones. The editorial process I am going through
with him (if applied throughout) should ensure that the journal's
reputation for 'sound scholarship' is somewhat enhanced.
Personally, I think it is an excellent idea, and I'm amazed that
nobody had thought of doing it before. Summaries of the various
arguments like those of John Michell are OK in their way, but
simply cannot cover the latest thinking on the subject that the
proponents themselves can provide.
art
>>
>> It seems a pity that Peter didn't place his article
>> in a venue that enjoys both wider circulation and a better
>> reputation for sound scholarship; but perhaps he was
>> in a hurry to get it into print.
"Peter Farey" <pete...@rey.prestel.co.uk> wrote:
>
> No, I responded to an invitation from the journal's new editor,
> Michael Egan (who thinks Shakespeare wrote Shakespeare but
> who considers the authorship question to be a legitimate one) to
> contribute a piece providing an updated review of the case for
> Marlowe.
I've just been reading that Pope Pius XII considered
Evolution to be a legitimate concept in 1950 but that it took
Pope John Paul II to confirm Evolution as a proven fact.
I suspect that the Shakespeare Quarterly would have
rejected your paper with extreme prejudice; don't you.
.
"Peter Farey" <pete...@rey.prestel.co.uk> wrote:
>
> As I understand it, his intention is to assemble a collecton of
> essays representing various authorship viewpoints, and not only
> the most familiar ones. The editorial process I am going through
> with him (if applied throughout) should ensure that the journal's
> reputation for 'sound scholarship' is somewhat enhanced.
>
> Personally, I think it is an excellent idea, and I'm amazed that
> nobody had thought of doing it before. Summaries of the various
> arguments like those of John Michell are OK in their way, but
> simply cannot cover the latest thinking on the subject that the
> proponents themselves can provide.
I don't doubt that *The Oxfordian* has sound scholarship but does
it really have a 'reputation' outside of the Oxfordian community?
Did you expand significantly on your website or your Wikipedia
article?
Art Neuendorffer
nordicskiv2
<ed81755d-d674-49cf...@i6g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,
art <acne...@gmail.com>
(acnew...@gmail.comedy) wrote:
[...]
> >>>>>>> More to the point, [Peter Farey] is actually sane,
> >>>>>>> a rarity in the anti-Stratfordian world.
> >>>> Peter wrote:
> >
> >>>>> How very kind.
> >>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>>> Little more than Lynne
> >> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>> Why are you bringing Lynne into this, Art?
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> She rhymes with "kin" and is not always "kind."
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > I haven't observed Lynne being unkind. I do recall her being
> > justifiably upset that a moron who admits that he doesn't even know
> > what a primary source is and who moreoVER had not even read the
> > pertinent Kositsky-Stritmatter articles began attacking Kositsky
> > and Stritmatter for plagiarism of Volker Multhopp's idiotic
> > piece, but that scarcely counts as unkindness.
> The VERy fact that Lynne would probably agree with you
> on that score is why she is not always "kind."
You mean, you think it *reasonable* for a moron who doesn't know
what a primary source is and hasn't even read the paper to accuse the
authors of plagiarism (or "plagerism") when the moron in question
doesn't even know what's in their paper, let alone what sources they
used?! You underscore my point about the rarity of sanity among your
coreligionists, Art.
> >>>>>> Then why is he so certain that Marlowe wrote Shakespeare?
> >> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >>> Certain?! I've neVER heard Peter express the certainty that is the
> >>> hallmark of cranks like Crowley and Elizabeth Weird. Rather, he has
> >>> worked out a scenario that intrigues him, which he has explored
> >>> further and offered as a possibility. Moreover, Peter, unlike
> >>> a great many anti-Stratfordians, is not immune to correction,
[...]
> >>> and he does not deny readily verifiable facts
> >>> or dismiss all evidence that doesn't support
> >>> a particular pet monomaniacal _idée fixe_
> >>> as forgeries or Masonic fakes.
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Well, of course, that is because
> >> MAR-L.O. is, himself, a Masonic fake.
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
Was the above supposed to have been "facts"? Or "evidence"?
> Christopher Knight & Robert Lomas, The Hiram Key:
>
> <<Refusing to divulge the secrets of his craft, *HIRAM receives a
> violent blow on his forehead* which drops him to his left knee. At
> that point in the story, the candidate receives a light blow to his
> temples and is pressed to the ground by two deacons to his left knee.
> The story where *HIRAM* seeks to escape by the west gate and is struck
> with another blow. The candidate goes down on his right knee. At the
> east gate, the third ruffian "struck him a *violent blow full in the
> center of the forehead* with a heavy stone maul, which laid him
> lifeless at his feet. Such was he manner of his death."
>
> "In the light of the candle I saw the Worshipful Master reach forward
> over his pedestal with an instrument which touched my forehead and I
> felt many hands pulling me backwards to the floor. I was held straight
> and my feet were kept in place, so that I hinged backwards as I swung
> into the darkness. As I touched he ground a funeral shroud was
> immediately draped around me, so only my upper face was uncovered.">>
Do you recall my remark about your nutcase sources, Art? You again
prove my point _ipso facto_. Knight and Lomas claim to have
identified the "historical" Hiram Abif (as though there was one!)
because an Egyptian mummy has a head injury! There is wishful
thinking (of the usual Oxfordian variety) and there is barking mad
wishful thinking (of the Elizabeth Weird variety); _The Hiram Key_
unquestionably falls into the latter category.
> >>>> (Did you ever read my own article in *The Marlovian* ?
> >>>> http://www.marlovian.com/newsletter/)
> >> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>> *You* wrote an article that appeared in _The Marlovian_, Art??!!
> >>> In which issue did it appear?
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Issue 11--Fall 1999
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Unfortunately, that issue does not appear online, as far as
> > I can tell. Would you please send me a copy?
> What's your address again?
You can send it me at the Dartmouth Mathematics Department -- and
thanks!
> >>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>>> For those of us who just can't wait
> >>>> (and are not quite ready to fork over
[...]
> >>>> $25)
> >> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >>> Did you eVER hear of a library, Art.
> .
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> I go to the library about 3 times a week, Dave
> >> (; mostly to read Time, Newsweek & The New Yorker).
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Does your library subscribe to _National Enquirer_
> > or _Weekly World News_, Art?
> I'll check next time.
Good -- please report back when you find out.
> >> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>> What?! Do you mean to say that even
> >>> elite university research libraries with very extensive
> >>> journal collections don't subscribe to _The Oxfordian_, Art??!
[...]
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> You must subscribe to _The Oxfordian_, Dave.
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Of course not, Art -- I wouldn't waste money that way.
> > (Nor would I lend financial support to a publication that
> > seeks to undermine the goals of our conspiracy, of course.)
> Of course.
[...]
> >>>> would you mind giving us a short summary, Peter?
>
> >> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>> For those of us who just can't wait (and are not quite ready to
> >>> waste time rummaging around online) would you mind giving us
> >>> summary of your article in _The Marlovian_, Art? Better still,
> >>> could you include the precise reference so that those of us
> >>> who harbor morbid curiosity can try to look it up?
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Why not borrow Dave More's copy of Issue 11--Fall 1999?
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > I am not in contact with Dave More; indeed, I cannot recall his
> > being active at h.l.a.s. for years. However, not having been able
> > to attend your talk in Baltimore, I would love to see your article;
> > could you please send me a copy? Thanks in advance.
> I wouldn't know where to begin to find my 10 year old copy.
But you asked me for my address above, Art; surely you have *some*
copy you can send me. For example, you could email me a copy of
the .pdf file.
> But, you could try your local library or........ send $15 to
> John Baker,
I'm not sending money to Faker, Art; moreoVER, he may for all I
know be in jail now.
> c/o Sticklin-Greenwood Cemetary [sic] , Centralia,
> Washington. Make check payable to Christopher Marlowe More.)
>
> ____ http://www.marlovian.com/mla/
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Issue 11--Fall 1999 Marley's Ghost (by Art Neuendorffer)
> discussed a later Mecca eclipse & Saturn/Venus conj.
> 250 years after Marlowe's demise:
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/SEcat/SE1801-1900.html
> .
> Ver: May 30, 1593 Eclipse Mag. at Mecca 0.91
> Hiems: Dec.21, 1843 Eclipse Mag. at Mecca 0.84
The title suggests that the article is asinine astrology rather
than your more customary crackpot cryptography or nutcase numerology,
Art -- is that correct? In any case, I am astonished that you managed
to get any statement of your position on paper in a coherent enough
fashion that it could actually be published, Art -- did you try
sending a copy to Lehigh? Maybe the admissions committee would
reconsider.
[Lunatic logorrhea snipped]
art
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> You prove my point _ipso facto_, Art -- many (if not most) anti-
>>> Stratfordians merely deny inconvenient facts and dismiss all
>>> evidence that doesn't support their particular monomaniacal
>>> _idée fixe_ as forgeries or Masonic fakes, as you have just done.
.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Was the above supposed to have been "facts"? Or "evidence"?
.
Both.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Christopher Knight & Robert Lomas, The Hiram Key:
>
>> <<Refusing to divulge the secrets of his craft, *HIRAM receives a
>> violent blow on his forehead* which drops him to his left knee. At
>> that point in the story, the candidate receives a light blow to his
>> temples and is pressed to the ground by two deacons to his left knee.
>> The story where *HIRAM* seeks to escape by the west gate and is struck
>> with another blow. The candidate goes down on his right knee. At the
>> east gate, the third ruffian "struck him a *violent blow full in the
>> center of the forehead* with a heavy stone maul, which laid him
>> lifeless at his feet. Such was he manner of his death."
>
>> "In the light of the candle I saw the Worshipful Master reach forward
>> over his pedestal with an instrument which touched my forehead and I
>> felt many hands pulling me backwards to the floor. I was held straight
>> and my feet were kept in place, so that I hinged backwards as I swung
>> into the darkness. As I touched he ground a funeral shroud was
>> immediately draped around me, so only my upper face was uncovered.">>
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Do you recall my remark about your nutcase sources, Art? You again
> prove my point _ipso facto_. Knight and Lomas claim to have
> identified the "historical" Hiram Abif (as though there was one!)
> because an Egyptian mummy has a head injury! There is wishful
> thinking (of the usual Oxfordian variety) and there is barking mad
> wishful thinking (of the Elizabeth Weird variety); _The Hiram Key_
> unquestionably falls into the latter category.
Marlowe had a fatal head injury caused by three ruffians.
>>>>>> (Did you ever read my own article in *The Marlovian* ?
>>>>>> http://www.marlovian.com/newsletter/)
>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>>>> *You* wrote an article that appeared in _The Marlovian_, Art??!!
>>>>> In which issue did it appear?
>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Issue 11--Fall 1999
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> Unfortunately, that issue does not appear online, as far as
>>> I can tell. Would you please send me a copy?
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> What's your address again?
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> You can send it me at the Dartmouth Mathematics Department
"You can send it me?"
>>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>> For those of us who just can't wait
>>>>>> (and are not quite ready to fork over $25)
>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>>>>> Did you eVER hear of a library, Art.
>> .
>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> I go to the library about 3 times a week, Dave
>>>> (; mostly to read Time, Newsweek & The New Yorker).
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> Does your library subscribe to
>>> _National Enquirer_ or _Weekly World News_, Art?
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I'll check next time.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Good -- please report back when you find out.
You must have an Enquiring mind, Dave.
>>>>>> would you mind giving us a short summary, Peter?
>
>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>>>> For those of us who just can't wait (and are not quite ready to
>>>>> waste time rummaging around online) would you mind giving us
>>>>> summary of your article in _The Marlovian_, Art? Better still,
>>>>> could you include the precise reference so that those of us
>>>>> who harbor morbid curiosity can try to look it up?
>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Why not borrow Dave More's copy of Issue 11--Fall 1999?
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> I am not in contact with Dave More; indeed, I cannot recall his
>>> being active at h.l.a.s. for years. However, not having been able
>>> to attend your talk in Baltimore, I would love to see your article;
>>> could you please send me a copy? Thanks in advance.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I wouldn't know where to begin to find my 10 year old copy.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> But you asked me for my address above, Art;
> surely you have *some* copy you can send me.
It's been 10 years, Dave (, and don't call me Shirley)!
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> But, you could try your local library
>> or........ send $15 to John Baker,
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> I'm not sending money to Faker, Art; moreoVER,
> he may for all I know be in jail now.
We can probably get that address if you need it.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> c/o Sticklin-Greenwood Cemetary [sic] , Centralia,
>> Washington. Make check payable to Christopher Marlowe More.)
>
>> ____ http://www.marlovian.com/mla/
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> Issue 11--Fall 1999 Marley's Ghost (by Art Neuendorffer)
>> discussed a later Mecca eclipse & Saturn/Venus conj.
>> 250 years after Marlowe's demise:
>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>>http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/SEcat/SE1801-1900.html
>> .
>> Ver: May 30, 1593 Eclipse Mag. at Mecca 0.91
>> Hiems: Dec.21, 1843 Eclipse Mag. at Mecca 0.84
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>The title suggests that the article is asinine astrology rather than
> your more customary crackpot cryptography or nutcase numerology,
I'm a man of many talents.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Art -- is that correct?
No.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> In any case, I am astonished that you managed to get
> any statement of your position on paper in a coherent
> enough fashion that it could actually be published, Art
Well, More or less published.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> -- did you try sending a copy to Lehigh?
> Maybe the admissions committee would reconsider.
Lehigh's loss was MIT's gain.
Art Neuendorffer
Peter Farey
Art Neuendorffer wrote:
>
> Peter Farey wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > It seems a pity that Peter didn't place his article
> > > in a venue that enjoys both wider circulation and a better
> > > reputation for sound scholarship; but perhaps he was
> > > in a hurry to get it into print.
> >
> > Michael Egan (who thinks Shakespeare wrote Shakespeare but
> > who considers the authorship question to be a legitimate one) to
> > contribute a piece providing an updated review of the case for
> > Marlowe.
>
> I've just been reading that Pope Pius XII considered
> Evolution to be a legitimate concept in 1950 but that it took
> Pope John Paul II to confirm Evolution as a proven fact.
>
> I suspect that the Shakespeare Quarterly would have
> rejected your paper with extreme prejudice; don't you.
Sure do.
> > As I understand it, his intention is to assemble a collecton of
> > essays representing various authorship viewpoints, and not only
> > the most familiar ones. The editorial process I am going through
> > with him (if applied throughout) should ensure that the journal's
> > reputation for 'sound scholarship' is somewhat enhanced.
> >
> > Personally, I think it is an excellent idea, and I'm amazed that
> > nobody had thought of doing it before. Summaries of the various
> > arguments like those of John Michell are OK in their way, but
> > simply cannot cover the latest thinking on the subject that the
> > proponents themselves can provide.
>
> I don't doubt that *The Oxfordian* has sound scholarship but does
> it really have a 'reputation' outside of the Oxfordian community?
See below.
> Did you expand significantly on your website or your Wikipedia
> article?
It would be surprising if I hadn't made use of information and
argument that I had used before. In this case, however, for the
reason you give above, the readership is assumed to consist
mainly of people who are already prepared to accept the like-
lihood of someone other than Shakespeare having written 'his'
works, although relatively blinkered as to just who the most
logical alternative might be.
nordicskiv2
<fbdb2543-21c6-4cbf...@s31g2000yqs.googlegroups.com>,
art <acne...@gmail.com>
(acnew...@gmail.comedy) wrote:
> >>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> MAR-L.O. is, himself, a Masonic fake.
> >> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>> You prove my point _ipso facto_, Art -- many (if not most) anti-
> >>> Stratfordians merely deny inconvenient facts and dismiss all
> >>> evidence that doesn't support their particular monomaniacal
> >>> _idée fixe_ as forgeries or Masonic fakes, as you have just done.
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Was the above supposed to have been "facts"? Or "evidence"?
> Both.
The above was strictly nutcase stuff, Art.
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Christopher Knight & Robert Lomas, The Hiram Key:
> >
> >> <<Refusing to divulge the secrets of his craft, *HIRAM receives a
> >> violent blow on his forehead* which drops him to his left knee. At
> >> that point in the story, the candidate receives a light blow to his
> >> temples and is pressed to the ground by two deacons to his left knee.
> >> The story where *HIRAM* seeks to escape by the west gate and is struck
> >> with another blow. The candidate goes down on his right knee. At the
> >> east gate, the third ruffian "struck him a *violent blow full in the
> >> center of the forehead* with a heavy stone maul, which laid him
> >> lifeless at his feet. Such was he manner of his death."
> >
> >> "In the light of the candle I saw the Worshipful Master reach forward
> >> over his pedestal with an instrument which touched my forehead and I
> >> felt many hands pulling me backwards to the floor. I was held straight
> >> and my feet were kept in place, so that I hinged backwards as I swung
> >> into the darkness. As I touched he ground a funeral shroud was
> >> immediately draped around me, so only my upper face was uncovered.">>
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Do you recall my remark about your nutcase sources, Art? You again
> > prove my point _ipso facto_. Knight and Lomas claim to have
> > identified the "historical" Hiram Abif (as though there was one!)
> > because an Egyptian mummy has a head injury! There is wishful
> > thinking (of the usual Oxfordian variety) and there is barking mad
> > wishful thinking (of the Elizabeth Weird variety); _The Hiram Key_
> > unquestionably falls into the latter category.
> Marlowe had a fatal head injury caused by three ruffians.
I am well aware of that fact, Art, and it is completely
irrelevant. Marlowe's demise is utterly unrelated to the point that
the authors of _The Hiram Key_ are delusional lunatics if they believe
that, because they have found a description of mummy with a head
injury, they have found the historical Hiram Abif -- to leap to that
conclusion is as moronic as concluding, from some dead wood found on
Mt. Ararat, that one has found an authentic piece of Noah's Ark.
Incidentally, Art, have you noted that the estate in Kent to which
Ingram Frizer moved (after receiving numerous tokens of the Crown's
favor) is called Eltham -- an anagram of "Hamlet"? Surely this must
be "evidence" to you of a deep Masonic conspiracy at work!
> >>>>>> (Did you ever read my own article in *The Marlovian* ?
> >>>>>> http://www.marlovian.com/newsletter/)
> >>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >>>>> *You* wrote an article that appeared in _The Marlovian_, Art??!!
> >>>>> In which issue did it appear?
> >>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>>> Issue 11--Fall 1999
> >> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>> Unfortunately, that issue does not appear online, as far as
> >>> I can tell. Would you please send me a copy?
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> What's your address again?
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > You can send it me at the Dartmouth Mathematics Department
> "You can send it me?"
Then you *will* send me a copy? Thank you, Art!
> >>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>>>>> For those of us who just can't wait
> >>>>>> (and are not quite ready to fork over $25)
> >>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >>>>> Did you eVER hear of a library, Art.
> >>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>>> I go to the library about 3 times a week, Dave
> >>>> (; mostly to read Time, Newsweek & The New Yorker).
> >> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>> Does your library subscribe to
> >>> _National Enquirer_ or _Weekly World News_, Art?
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> I'll check next time.
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Good -- please report back when you find out.
> You must have an Enquiring mind, Dave.
I do indeed. In this instance, I am curious to learn whether a
library that subscribes to _National Inquirer_ and/or _Weekly World
News_ does not subscribe to _The Oxfordian_.
> >>>>>> would you mind giving us a short summary, Peter?
> >>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>>>> For those of us who just can't wait (and are not quite ready to
> >>>>> waste time rummaging around online) would you mind giving us
> >>>>> summary of your article in _The Marlovian_, Art? Better still,
> >>>>> could you include the precise reference so that those of us
> >>>>> who harbor morbid curiosity can try to look it up?
> >>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>>> Why not borrow Dave More's copy of Issue 11--Fall 1999?
> >> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>> I am not in contact with Dave More; indeed, I cannot recall his
> >>> being active at h.l.a.s. for years. However, not having been able
> >>> to attend your talk in Baltimore, I would love to see your article;
> >>> could you please send me a copy? Thanks in advance.
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> I wouldn't know where to begin to find my 10 year old copy.
Surely you kept some reprints as a memento, Art!
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > But you asked me for my address above, Art;
> > surely you have *some* copy you can send me.
> It's been 10 years, Dave
But surely it's on your hard drive or somewhere in your files,
Art. Mr. Streitz keeps sending me material unbidden (rather
amusingly, it is addressed to me in care of the English Department --
Mr. Streitz was neVER VERy quick on the uptake -- but eventually it
finds its way to me anyway), as does someone whom I presume to be
Richard Whalen; surely you can send me your paper in response to a
direct request, Art. Please?
> (, and don't call me Shirley)!
I didn't. Do at least try to learn to read English, Art -- not
many interesting texts are available in your native COBOL.
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> But, you could try your local library
My local library doesn't subscribe to _The Marlovian_, Art.
Indeed, I would be surprised to find any reputable library that did,
although there may be a few libraries that would give the publication
shelf space if a subscription were donated.
> >> or........ send $15 to John Baker,
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > I'm not sending money to Faker, Art; moreoVER,
> > he may for all I know be in jail now.
> We can probably get that address if you need it.
"We"? Who is "we," Art? But I am impressed -- if you know Faker's
jail address (for that matter, if you even know that he *is* in jail),
then you have kept in closer touch with your fellow loonies than I
would have guessed. What is "Buckeye Pete" doing these days, Art? I
know, of course, that Stephanie Caruana and Paul Streitz have gone on
to more fulfilling and more conspicuous forms of lunacy, but I've lost
track of PWDBard. But if you *are* in touch with "Dr." Faker, then
the least you could do is to find someone willing to host his web page
to insure that all those uproariously funny essays (my favorite is the
one on "E=mc^2") are not lost to posterity. The material needs to be
safely archived as soon as possible!
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> c/o Sticklin-Greenwood Cemetary [sic] , Centralia,
> >> Washington. Make check payable to Christopher Marlowe More.)
> >
> >> ____ http://www.marlovian.com/mla/
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Issue 11--Fall 1999 Marley's Ghost (by Art Neuendorffer)
> >> discussed a later Mecca eclipse & Saturn/Venus conj.
> >> 250 years after Marlowe's demise:
> >> -----------------------------------------------------------
> >>http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/SEcat/SE1801-1900.html
> >> .
> >> Ver: May 30, 1593 Eclipse Mag. at Mecca 0.91
> >> Hiems: Dec.21, 1843 Eclipse Mag. at Mecca 0.84
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >The title suggests that the article is asinine astrology rather than
> > your more customary crackpot cryptography or nutcase numerology,
> I'm a man of many talents.
Indeed, Art -- one could add inane inference to the list.
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Art -- is that correct?
> No.
Then what *is* your paper's topic and methodology, Art?
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > In any case, I am astonished that you managed to get
> > any statement of your position on paper in a coherent
> > enough fashion that it could actually be published, Art
> Well, More or less published.
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > -- did you try sending a copy to Lehigh?
> > Maybe the admissions committee would reconsider.
> Lehigh's loss was MIT's gain.
I'm not so sure, Art -- have you canvassed those responsible for
supplying Baker House with pianos for their opinion on the matter?
> Art Neuendorffer
art
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> Was the above supposed to have been "facts"? Or "evidence"?
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Both.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> The above was strictly nutcase stuff, Art.
But you, yourself, were the one who told me about:
---------------------------------------------------
_____ *MAR-LO*
_____ *HI-RAM*
---------------------------------------------------
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Marlowe had a fatal head injury caused by three ruffians.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> I am well aware of that fact, Art,
> and it is completely irrelevant.
Prove it.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Incidentally, Art, have you noted that the estate in Kent to which
> Ingram Frizer moved (after receiving numerous tokens of the Crown's
> favor) is called Eltham -- an anagram of "Hamlet"? Surely this must
> be "evidence" to you of a deep Masonic conspiracy at work!
------------------------------------------------
<<Frizer was found on June 1, 1593 to be not guilty of murder for
reasons of self defense. On the June 28, the Queen granted Frizer a
formal pardon. A few years later when James I of England ascended the
throne, Frizer received numerous benefices from the crown, through the
action of Audrey Walsingham (Thomas' wife and a friend of James'
Queen, Anne of Denmark). He moved to an estate in Eltham, Kent, where
he lived until his death.>>
..................................................
June 28, 1491 – King Henry VIII born
June 28, 1577 – Peter Paul Rubens born
June 28, 1593 – Elizabeth pardon's Ingram Frizer
-----------------------------------------------------
<<The borough of Greenwich lies along the south bank of the River
Thames between *Deptford* and Thamesmead. Because of the shape of the
river, the waterfront is extremely long. Travelling south away from
the waterfront, the ground swiftly rises: *Shooters Hill* in the east
and the high ground of Blackheath in the west bookend the borough,
*Eltham* to the south of these hills falls away slightly.>>
-----------------------------------------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eltham_Palace
<<Eltham Palace is a large house in Eltham, within the London Borough
of Greenwich, South East London, England. The original palace was
given to Edward II in 1305 by the Bishop of Durham, Anthony Bek, and
used as a royal residence from the 14th to the 16th century.
According to one account the incident which inspired Edward III's
foundation of the Order of the Garter took place here.
As the favourite palace of Henry IV it played host to Manuel II
Palaiologos, the only Byzantine emperor ever to visit England, from
December 1400 to January 1401, with a joust being given in his honour.
There is still a jousting tilt yard. Edward IV built a Great Hall in
the 1470s, and Prince Henry also grew up here; it was here that he met
and impressed the scholar Erasmus. Tudor courts often used the palace
for their Christmas celebrations. With the grand rebuilding of
Greenwich Palace, which was more easily reached by river, Eltham was
less frequented, save for
Great Hall, the hunting in its enclosed parks, easily reached from
Greenwich, "as well enjoyed, the Court lying at Greenwiche, as if it
were at this house it self". The deer remained plentiful in the Great
Park, of 596 acres (2.4 km2), the Little, or Middle Park, of 333 acres
(1.3 km2), and the Home Park, or Lee Park, of 336 acres (1.4 km2).
In the 1630s, by which time the palace was no longer used by the royal
family, Sir Anthony van Dyck was given the use of a suite of rooms as
a country retreat. During the English Civil War, the parks were
denuded of trees and deer. John Evelyn saw it 22 April 1656: "Went to
see his Majesty's house at Eltham; both the palace and chapel in
miserable ruins, the noble wood and park destroyed by Rich the rebel".
The palace never recovered. Eltham was bestowed by Charles II on John
Shaw and— in its ruinous condition, reduced to Edward IV's Great Hall,
the former buttery, called "Court House", a bridge across the moat and
some walling— remained with Shaw's descendants as late as 1893.>>
---------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> (Did you ever read my own article in *The Marlovian* ?
>>>>>>>> http://www.marlovian.com/newsletter/)
>>>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>>>>>>> *You* wrote an article that appeared in _The Marlovian_, Art??!!
>>>>>>> In which issue did it appear?
>>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>> Issue 11--Fall 1999
>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>>>> Unfortunately, that issue does not appear online, as far as
>>>>> I can tell. Would you please send me a copy?
>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> What's your address again?
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> You can send it me at the Dartmouth Mathematics Department
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> "You can send it me?"
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Then you *will* send me a copy? Thank you, Art!
I would send it you if I had it me.
>>>>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>> For those of us who just can't wait
>>>>>>>> (and are not quite ready to fork over $25)
>>>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>>>>>>> Did you eVER hear of a library, Art.
>>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>> I go to the library about 3 times a week, Dave
>>>>>> (; mostly to read Time, Newsweek & The New Yorker).
>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>>>> Does your library subscribe to
>>>>> _National Enquirer_ or _Weekly World News_, Art?
>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> I'll check next time.
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> Good -- please report back when you find out.
>> You must have an Enquiring mind, Dave.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> I do indeed. In this instance, I am curious to learn whether
> a library that subscribes to _National Inquirer_ and/or
> _Weekly World News_ does not subscribe to _The Oxfordian_.
They don't. (_National Inquirer_ ?)
>>>>>>>> would you mind giving us a short summary, Peter?
>>>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>>>>>> For those of us who just can't wait (and are not quite ready to
>>>>>>> waste time rummaging around online) would you mind giving us
>>>>>>> summary of your article in _The Marlovian_, Art? Better still,
>>>>>>> could you include the precise reference so that those of us
>>>>>>> who harbor morbid curiosity can try to look it up?
>>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>> Why not borrow Dave More's copy of Issue 11--Fall 1999?
>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>>>> I am not in contact with Dave More; indeed, I cannot recall his
>>>>> being active at h.l.a.s. for years. However, not having been able
>>>>> to attend your talk in Baltimore, I would love to see your article;
>>>>> could you please send me a copy? Thanks in advance.
>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> I wouldn't know where to begin to find my 10 year old copy.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Surely you kept some reprints as a memento, Art!
Memento mori?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0209144/plotsummary
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> But you asked me for my address above, Art;
>>> surely you have *some* copy you can send me.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> It's been 10 years, Dave(, and don't call me Shirley)!
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> But surely it's on your hard drive or somewhere in your files,
> surely you can send me your paper in response to a
> direct request, Art. Please?
There you go again!
> Art. Mr. Streitz keeps sending me material unbidden (rather
> amusingly, it is addressed to me in care of the English Department --
> Mr. Streitz was neVER VERy quick on the uptake -- but eventually it
> finds its way to me anyway), as does someone whom I presume to be
> Richard Whalen;
Richard Whalen found his whay to you?
> I didn't. Do at least try to learn to read English, Art -- not
> many interesting texts are available in your native COBOL.
>
>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> But, you could try your local library
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> My local library doesn't subscribe to _The Marlovian_, Art.
> Indeed, I would be surprised to find any reputable library that
> did, although there may be a few libraries that would give
> the publication shelf space if a subscription were donated.
Robert or Peter Donat?
>>>> or........ send $15 to John Baker,
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> I'm not sending money to Faker, Art; moreoVER,
>>> he may for all I know be in jail now.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> We can probably get that address if you need it.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> "We"? Who is "we," Art?
It's the royal "we."
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> But I am impressed -- if you know Faker's
> jail address (for that matter, if you even know that he *is* in jail),
> then you have kept in closer touch with your fellow loonies than I
> would have guessed. What is "Buckeye Pete" doing these days, Art? I
> know, of course, that Stephanie Caruana and Paul Streitz have gone on
> to more fulfilling and more conspicuous forms of lunacy, but I've lost
> track of PWDBard. But if you *are* in touch with "Dr." Faker, then
> the least you could do is to find someone willing to host his web page
> to insure that all those uproariously funny essays (my favorite is the
> one on "E=mc^2") are not lost to posterity.
What has posterity ever archived for us?
>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> c/o Sticklin-Greenwood Cemetary [sic] , Centralia,
>>>> Washington. Make check payable to Christopher Marlowe More.)
>
>>>> ____ http://www.marlovian.com/mla/
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Issue 11--Fall 1999 Marley's Ghost (by Art Neuendorffer)
>>>> discussed a later Mecca eclipse & Saturn/Venus conj.
>>>> 250 years after Marlowe's demise:
>>>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>>>>http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/SEcat/SE1801-1900.html
>>>> .
>>>> Ver: May 30, 1593 Eclipse Mag. at Mecca 0.91
>>>> Hiems: Dec.21, 1843 Eclipse Mag. at Mecca 0.84
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>>The title suggests that the article is asinine astrology rather than
>>> your more customary crackpot cryptography or nutcase numerology,
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I'm a man of many talents.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Indeed, Art -- one could add inane inference to the list.
One couldn't but two could.
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> Art -- is that correct?
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> No.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Then what *is* your paper's topic and methodology, Art?
I just told you. (Good Grief!)
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> In any case, I am astonished that you managed to get
>>> any statement of your position on paper in a coherent
>>> enough fashion that it could actually be published, Art
>> Well, More or less published.
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> -- did you try sending a copy to Lehigh?
>>> Maybe the admissions committee would reconsider.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Lehigh's loss was MIT's gain.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> I'm not so sure, Art -- have you canvassed those responsible for
> supplying Baker House with pianos for their opinion on the matter?
It was "felo de se" on the piano's part.
Art Neuendorffer
nordicskiv2
<0e8d5652-e55d-4780...@c1g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>,
art <acne...@gmail.com>
(acnew...@gmail.comedy) wrote:
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Both.
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > The above was strictly nutcase stuff, Art.
> But you, yourself, were the one who told me about:
> ---------------------------------------------------
> _____ *MAR-LO*
> _____ *HI-RAM*
> ---------------------------------------------------
I know, Art; I was also the one who told you about Eltham/Hamlet.
But as I've said many times before, while it is poor form to explain a
joke, sometimes (e.g., when one's interlocutor is a moron) it simply
cannot be helped.
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Marlowe had a fatal head injury caused by three ruffians.
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > I am well aware of that fact, Art,
> > and it is completely irrelevant.
> Prove it.
Try to focus what's left of your mind upon the point as issue, Art;
I know it's tough for you to engage in a battle of wits when you find
yourself so completely unarmed, but I'll take it easy on you. The
question is: is Knight and Lomas a nutcase source? The answer is
clearly affirmative: they believe that, because they have found
reference to an Egyptian mummy with a head injury, that mummy must be
the remains of the legendary Hiram Abif. This is delusional lunacy,
for seVERal reasons: first, there is no sound reason to believe that
Hiram Abif eVER existed in the first place, or that he is anything
other than a figure of legend; claiming to have identified Hiram Abif
is a bit like dressing Rush Limbaugh in a red suit and claiming to
have found Santa Claus -- and if you still believe in Santa Claus,
Art, then I deeply regret having disillusioned you. Second, Knight
and Lomas furnish the reader with no reason whateVER -- other than the
self-delusion that characterizes the "research" of the authors -- to
believe that their mummy is the only case in history of death from a
head injury, hence must perforce be the remains of Abif -- I realize,
of course, that their "argument" may seem compelling to a moron who
believes that there could not possibly more than one person on the
planet named Peter Gay (or Anne Hathaway), but to the sane such
"reasoning" is ludicrous.
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Incidentally, Art, have you noted that the estate in Kent to which
> > Ingram Frizer moved (after receiving numerous tokens of the Crown's
> > favor) is called Eltham -- an anagram of "Hamlet"? Surely this must
> > be "evidence" to you of a deep Masonic conspiracy at work!
[Lunatic logorrhea snipped]
> In the 1630s, by which time the palace was no longer used by the royal
> family, Sir Anthony van Dyck was given the use of a suite of rooms as
> a country retreat. During the English Civil War, the parks were
> denuded of trees and deer. John Evelyn saw it 22 April 1656: "Went to
> see his Majesty's house at Eltham; both the palace and chapel in
> miserable ruins, the noble wood and park destroyed by Rich the rebel".
> The palace never recovered. Eltham was bestowed by Charles II on John
> Shaw and— in its ruinous condition, reduced to Edward IV's Great Hall,
> the former buttery,
That's right, Art -- although I must warn you that "buttery" is
used here in a sense to which you, as a demented Oxfordian, are
probably unaccustomed, since on Oxford's estate, the word referred to
Cogno's sleeping quarters.
[...]
> >>>>>>>> (Did you ever read my own article in *The Marlovian* ?
> >>>>>>>> http://www.marlovian.com/newsletter/)
> >>>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> *You* wrote an article that appeared in _The Marlovian_, Art??!!
> >>>>>>> In which issue did it appear?
> >>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>>>>> Issue 11--Fall 1999
> >>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>>>> Unfortunately, that issue does not appear online, as far as
> >>>>> I can tell. Would you please send me a copy?
[...]
> >>>>>>>> For those of us who just can't wait
> >>>>>>>> (and are not quite ready to fork over $25) [...]
> >>>>>>>> would you mind giving us a short summary, Peter?
> >>>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >>>>>>> For those of us who just can't wait (and are not quite ready to
> >>>>>>> waste time rummaging around online) would you mind giving us
> >>>>>>> summary of your article in _The Marlovian_, Art? Better still,
> >>>>>>> could you include the precise reference so that those of us
> >>>>>>> who harbor morbid curiosity can try to look it up?
> >>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> Why not borrow Dave More's copy of Issue 11--Fall 1999?
> >>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>>>> I am not in contact with Dave More; indeed, I cannot recall his
> >>>>> being active at h.l.a.s. for years. However, not having been able
> >>>>> to attend your talk in Baltimore, I would love to see your article;
> >>>>> could you please send me a copy? Thanks in advance.
> >>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> I wouldn't know where to begin to find my 10 year old copy.
I find this amazing, Art. I still have either reprints or
preprints (and certainly the original manuscript) of eVERy paper that
I have eVER published; in the case of papers dating from later than
1990, when computerized typesetting became the norm, I still have both
the TeX source and the .pdf file. Do you mean to tell me that you
have NO record whateVER of your article?! It seems to have
disappeared as inscrutably as all the "evidence" that Oxfordians
generally claim to possess but somehow cannot find when asked for it.
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Surely you kept some reprints as a memento, Art!
> Memento mori?
No, Art; in your case, "memento moron" is more apt.
[...]
> >Mr. Streitz keeps sending me material unbidden (rather
> > amusingly, it is addressed to me in care of the English Department --
> > Mr. Streitz was neVER VERy quick on the uptake -- but eventually it
> > finds its way to me anyway), as does someone whom I presume to be
> > Richard Whalen;
> Richard Whalen found his whay to you?
I presume that it is he; it is merely a sort of periodical
newsletter, apparently sent out to a mailing list of academics. But
it seems VERy like a Whalen.
[...]
> >>>> But, you could try your local library
> .
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > My local library doesn't subscribe to _The Marlovian_, Art.
> > Indeed, I would be surprised to find any reputable library that
> > did, although there may be a few libraries that would give
> > the publication shelf space if a subscription were donated.
> Robert or Peter Donat?
Donat change the subject, Art. Surely you beg an extra reprint
from Dave More, with whom you are far more apt to be in touch than I
am, and send it to me? Wouldn't you like to have a copy yourself in
any case, Art?
> >>>> or........ send $15 to John Baker,
> >> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>> I'm not sending money to Faker, Art; moreoVER,
> >>> he may for all I know be in jail now.
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> We can probably get that address if you need it.
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > "We"? Who is "we," Art?
> It's the royal "we."
Pero no sos real, Art.
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > But I am impressed -- if you know Faker's
> > jail address (for that matter, if you even know that he *is* in jail),
> > then you have kept in closer touch with your fellow loonies than I
> > would have guessed. What is "Buckeye Pete" doing these days, Art? I
> > know, of course, that Stephanie Caruana and Paul Streitz have gone on
> > to more fulfilling and more conspicuous forms of lunacy, but I've lost
> > track of PWDBard. But if you *are* in touch with "Dr." Faker, then
> > the least you could do is to find someone willing to host his web page
> > to insure that all those uproariously funny essays (my favorite is the
> > one on "E=mc^2") are not lost to posterity.
> What has posterity ever archived for us?
You didn't answer my question, Art: what is Buckeye Pete up to
nowadays? And if you *are* in touch with "Dr." Faker, why not do him
and the world a favor by arranging web hosting for the hilarious
essays that formerly graced his web page?
[...]
> >>>> Issue 11--Fall 1999 Marley's Ghost (by Art Neuendorffer)
> >>>> discussed a later Mecca eclipse & Saturn/Venus conj.
> >>>> 250 years after Marlowe's demise:
> >>>> -----------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/SEcat/SE1801-1900.html
> >>>> .
> >>>> Ver: May 30, 1593 Eclipse Mag. at Mecca 0.91
> >>>> Hiems: Dec.21, 1843 Eclipse Mag. at Mecca 0.84
> >> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >>>The title suggests that the article is asinine astrology rather than
> >>> your more customary crackpot cryptography or nutcase numerology,
[...]
> >>> Art -- is that correct?
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> No.
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Then what *is* your paper's topic and methodology, Art?
> I just told you. (Good Grief!)
No, you didn't. You gave me only the title and a précis suggesting
that the paper was your usual asinine astrology; when I suggested
this, you denied it, thereby leaving your fans completely in the dark
concerning the paper's topic (if intelligible) and methodology (if
any).
> >> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>> In any case, I am astonished that you managed to get
> >>> any statement of your position on paper in a coherent
> >>> enough fashion that it could actually be published, Art
> >> Well, More or less published.
> >> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>> -- did you try sending a copy to Lehigh?
> >>> Maybe the admissions committee would reconsider.
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Lehigh's loss was MIT's gain.
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > I'm not so sure, Art -- have you canvassed those responsible for
> > supplying Baker House with pianos for their opinion on the matter?
> It was "felo de se" on the piano's part.
I don't doubt that, Art; neVERtheless, those charged with supplying
Baker House with pianos must have felt the loss keenly. Matters being
so, are you SURE that Lehigh's loss was MIT's gain?
> Art Neuendorffer
art
>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Both.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> But you, yourself, were the one who told me about:
>> ---------------------------------------------------
>> _____ *MAR-LO*
>> _____ *HI-RAM*
>> ---------------------------------------------------
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> I know, Art;
> I was also the one who told you about Eltham/Hamlet.
So why are you so good to me, Dave?
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Prove it.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> there is no sound reason to believe that Hiram Abif
> eVER existed in the first place, or that he is anything other
> than a figure of legend; claiming to have identified Hiram Abif
> is a bit like dressing Rush Limbaugh in a red suit and claiming to
> have found Santa Claus -- and if you still believe in Santa Claus,
> Art, then I deeply regret having disillusioned you.
There is no sound reason to believe that William Shakspere,
Kit Marlowe or Ben Jonson eVER existed in the first place
or that they are anything other than figures of legend.
>>>>>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>> *You* wrote an article that appeared in _The Marlovian_!!
>>>>>>>>> In which issue did it appear?
>>>>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>> Issue 11--Fall 1999
>>>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>>>>>> Unfortunately, that issue does not appear online, as
>>>>>>> far as I can tell. Would you please send me a copy?
http://www.hedweb.com/animimag/okapi.htm
>>>>>>>>>> For those of us who just can't wait
>>>>>>>>>> (and are not quite ready to fork over $25) [...]
>>>>>>>>>> would you mind giving us a short summary, Peter?
>>>>>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> For those of us who just can't wait (and are not quite ready to
>>>>>>>>> waste time rummaging around online) would you mind giving us
>>>>>>>>> summary of your article in _The Marlovian_, Art? Better still,
>>>>>>>>> could you include the precise reference so that those of us
>>>>>>>>> who harbor morbid curiosity can try to look it up?
>>>>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Why not borrow Dave More's copy of Issue 11--Fall 1999?
>>>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>>>>>> I am not in contact with Dave More; indeed, I cannot recall his
>>>>>>> being active at h.l.a.s. for years. However, not having been able
>>>>>>> to attend your talk in Baltimore, I would love to see your article;
>>>>>>> could you please send me a copy? Thanks in advance.
>>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> I wouldn't know where to begin to find my 10 year old copy.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> I find this amazing, Art. I still have either reprints
> or preprints (and certainly the original manuscript)
> of eVERy paper that I have eVER published;
Can't get rid of them, huh?
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> in the case of papers dating from later than 1990,
> when computerized typesetting became the norm,
> I still have both the TeX source and the .pdf file.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collyer_brothers
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Do you mean to tell me that you have NO record
> whateVER of your article?! It seems to have disappeared
> as inscrutably as all the "evidence" that Oxfordians generally
> claim to possess but somehow cannot find when asked for it.
Almost all my scrutable authorship work can be googled at HLAS.
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> Surely you kept some reprints as a memento, Art!
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Memento mori?
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> No, Art; in your case, "memento moron" is more apt.
Memento moroni?
<<Upon completion of _The Marlovian_ Issue 11--Fall 1999,
written on golden ratio pi plates, Art supposedly buried
the pi plates in a stone box in a hill in what is now *POTTstown*
, PA, where they were recoVERED by Mrs. Amanda Smith
and were used by here for BAKERing.>>
>>> Mr. Streitz keeps sending me material unbidden (rather
>>> amusingly, it is addressed to me in care of the English Department --
>>> Mr. Streitz was neVER VERy quick on the uptake -- but
>>> eventually it finds its way to me anyway), as does
>>> someone whom I presume to be Richard Whalen;
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Richard Whalen found his whay to you?
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> I presume that it is he; it is merely a sort of periodical
> newsletter, apparently sent out to a mailing list of academics.
So then how did you end up receiving it, Dave?
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> But it seems VERy like a Whalen.
--------------------------------------------
How Moby Shakespeare Took Over the Internet
http://www.opensourceshakespeare.org/info/moby_shakespeare.php
<<Moby Shakespeare was fixed in 1995 and released into the public
domain (Ward). There is nothing horribly wrong with Moby, from a
general reader’s standpoint. It uses modern, regularized spelling,
which scholars may not favor, but an average person would rather not
be impeded with archaic spellings, many of which are tied to
seventeenth-century typography. The original authors conflated the
quarto and folio texts into a critical edition, so readers are not
faced with competing versions of the same play. But primarily, Moby
Shakespeare is ubiquitous because it’s free.
Why aren’t there other public-domain Shakespeares, or at least texts
that the public can use freely? There are, but for various reasons
they are not as popular. Bartleby.com has the 1914 Oxford Shakespeare
on its site, but you cannot easily download the texts and manipulate
them, the way you can with Moby, and they are not public-domain
(Craig). Other collections do not contain all of the works. There is a
project called Nameless Shakespeare, produced by Northwestern
University and Tufts University, but it is copyright-protected (even
though it is based on the later edition of Globe Shakespeare,
published in 1891-3 and thus also in the public domain). Users are
authorized to download XML versions of the texts, but only for
personal, non-commercial use. All other uses are controlled by the
owner ( Berry). At this writing, the prototype interface for *Nameless
Shakespeare* is “ clunky and inconsistent” in the creators’ own words,
and they are going to deploy a more elegant interface in the near
future. Until then, it will probably not be widely used, although the
Java search applet is impressively powerful.
The Internet Shakespeare Editions is the closest anyone has come to
duplicating Moby, and you can download the texts of the plays for non-
profit use. But as the texts use the original spelling, and are
essentially diplomatic editions of the folio and quarto texts with
very little editing applied to them, they are intended for a scholarly
audience.
Only a small number of plays have been refereed, though all have been
proofread (Best, “Internet”). Perhaps someday, a group of individuals
will produce a modern, scholarly, free alternative to Moby
Shakespeare. The deck is stacked against it, however. For one thing,
the amount of labor involved in producing this critical edition of
the text would be huge – not insurmountable, but more than one or two
people would be willing to undertake (Clark and Wright lived in the
days before desktop publishing and vast educational subsidies, and
they could read a much larger percentage of Shakespearean scholarship
because there was less of it.)
Also, such a free edition, while superior to Moby Shakespeare, would
not necessarily be that much of an improvement. All of the
“competitive” modern collections have annotations, glossaries,
detailed introductions to the play, etc. A free edition would almost
certainly have to include such things to expand its audience and
eclipse any other versions.
One might hope that some publisher somewhere would make its text, if
not free, at least more widely available online. It seems unsporting
to take someone else’s work and make money from it in perpetuity –
even if that person has been dead for centuries. True, scholarly
editions are not mere reprints, and are the result of many hours of
hard work, but the reason people read and study the editions’ texts is
not because of the glosses on the pages, but because Shakespeare wrote
the texts. But since publishers can sell their products in quantity to
schools and students, and the resulting revenue subsidizes other, less
popular works, it seems unlikely that a major edition will ever be
released to the public in any useable form, at least not for free and
not in its entirety.>>
-------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> But, you could try your local library
>> .
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> My local library doesn't subscribe to _The Marlovian_, Art.
>>> Indeed, I would be surprised to find any reputable library that
>>> did, although there may be a few libraries that would give
>>> the publication shelf space if a subscription were donated.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Robert or Peter Donat?
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Donat change the subject, Art.
.
Mmmmmmm....Donat.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Surely you beg an extra reprint from Dave More, with
> whom you are far more apt to be in touch than I am,
> and send it to me? Wouldn't you like to have
> a copy yourself in any case, Art?
If More or Baker didn't see fit to post it online...no.
>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>>>> In any case, I am astonished that you managed to get
>>>>> any statement of your position on paper in a coherent
>>>>> enough fashion that it could actually be published, Art
>>>> Well, More or less published.
>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>>>> -- did you try sending a copy to Lehigh?
>>>>> Maybe the admissions committee would reconsider.
>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Lehigh's loss was MIT's gain.
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>>I'm not so sure, Art -- have you canvassed those responsible for
>>>supplying Baker House with pianos for their opinion on the matter?
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> It was "felo de se" on the piano's part.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> I don't doubt that, Art; neVERtheless, those charged with supplying
> Baker House with pianos must have felt the loss keenly. Matters
> being so, are you SURE that Lehigh's loss was MIT's gain?
Some day MIT will build a statue to me:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09q9ZfA2fRo
Art Neuendorffer
nordicskiv2
<39e6d12a-a3f9-4e80...@18g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
art <acne...@gmail.com>
(acnew...@gmail.comedy) wrote:
> >>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>>>>> The facts & evidence:
[Crackpot cryptography snipped]
> >>> The above was strictly nutcase stuff, Art.
> .
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> But you, yourself, were the one who told me about:
> >> ---------------------------------------------------
> >> _____ *MAR-LO*
> >> _____ *HI-RAM*
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > I know, Art;
> > I was also the one who told you about Eltham/Hamlet.
> So why are you so good to me, Dave?
I'm eVER your well-wisher, Art. Besides, as I have said before,
one can lead a horse -- or in your case, the hindquarters thereof --
to water, but you can't make him think. The Grand Master deems such
tidbits as I deign to REVeal to you harmless, as you lack the capacity
to integrate them into any coherent theory.
[Lunatic logorrhea gleaned from farcical sources snipped]
> >>>>>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>>>>>>>> *You* wrote an article that appeared in _The Marlovian_!!
> >>>>>>>>> In which issue did it appear?
> >>>>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>>>>>>> Issue 11--Fall 1999
> >>>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>>>>>> Unfortunately, that issue does not appear online, as
> >>>>>>> far as I can tell. Would you please send me a copy?
> http://www.hedweb.com/animimag/okapi.htm
I said that one could lead a *horse's* hindquarters to water, not
those of an okapi.
> >>>>>>>>>> For those of us who just can't wait
> >>>>>>>>>> (and are not quite ready to fork over $25) [...]
> >>>>>>>>>> would you mind giving us a short summary, Peter?
> >>>>>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>> For those of us who just can't wait (and are not quite ready to
> >>>>>>>>> waste time rummaging around online) would you mind giving us
> >>>>>>>>> summary of your article in _The Marlovian_, Art? Better still,
> >>>>>>>>> could you include the precise reference so that those of us
> >>>>>>>>> who harbor morbid curiosity can try to look it up?
> >>>>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Why not borrow Dave More's copy of Issue 11--Fall 1999?
> >>>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>>>>>> I am not in contact with Dave More; indeed, I cannot recall his
> >>>>>>> being active at h.l.a.s. for years. However, not having been able
> >>>>>>> to attend your talk in Baltimore, I would love to see your article;
> >>>>>>> could you please send me a copy? Thanks in advance.
> >>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> I wouldn't know where to begin to find my 10 year old copy.
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > I find this amazing, Art. I still have either reprints
> > or preprints (and certainly the original manuscript)
> > of eVERy paper that I have eVER published;
> Can't get rid of them, huh?
On the contrary -- in many cases, I have had to resort to making
more photocopies of the original preprint because I have already given
away all the reprints.
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > in the case of papers dating from later than 1990,
> > when computerized typesetting became the norm,
> > I still have both the TeX source and the .pdf file.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collyer_brothers
Keeping both the TeX source and the .pdf or .dvi file of a
published paper is a pretty routine practice among those who publish
regularly, Art, as you would know if you had eVER done so. Since the
material will all fit easily onto a memory stick the size of a AA
battery, only an idiot would *not* back up his files in this manner --
like yourself, for instance.
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Do you mean to tell me that you have NO record
> > whateVER of your article?! It seems to have disappeared
> > as inscrutably as all the "evidence" that Oxfordians generally
> > claim to possess but somehow cannot find when asked for it.
> Almost all my scrutable authorship work can be googled at HLAS.
I rest my case.
> >> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>> Surely you kept some reprints as a memento, Art!
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Memento mori?
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > No, Art; in your case, "memento moron" is more apt.
> Memento moroni?
>
> <<Upon completion of _The Marlovian_ Issue 11--Fall 1999,
> written on golden ratio pi plates,
No, Art; "memento moron" was correct, as you just demonstrated.
The golden ratio, an algebraic number of degree two over the rational
field, is *NOT* pi, which is transcendental. This is on a par with
your REVelations concerning the number nineteen.
> Art supposedly buried
> the pi plates in a stone box in a hill in what is now *POTTstown*
> , PA, where they were recoVERED by Mrs. Amanda Smith
> and were used by here for BAKERing.>>
Were used by a faker, you mean?
> >>> Mr. Streitz keeps sending me material unbidden (rather
> >>> amusingly, it is addressed to me in care of the English Department --
> >>> Mr. Streitz was neVER VERy quick on the uptake -- but
> >>> eventually it finds its way to me anyway), as does
> >>> someone whom I presume to be Richard Whalen;
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Richard Whalen found his whay to you?
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > I presume that it is he; it is merely a sort of periodical
> > newsletter, apparently sent out to a mailing list of academics.
> So then how did you end up receiving it, Dave?
The answer is quite obvious, Art, although apparently not to you,
as might be expected.
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > But it seems VERy like a Whalen.
[Lunatic logorrhea snipped]
> >>>>>> But, you could try your local library
> >> .
> >> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>> My local library doesn't subscribe to _The Marlovian_, Art.
Indeed, I am not aware that my local library even subscribes to
_Weekly World News_, let alone the plethora of less respectable
nutcase periodicals.
> >>> Indeed, I would be surprised to find any reputable library that
> >>> did, although there may be a few libraries that would give
> >>> the publication shelf space if a subscription were donated.
[...]
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Surely you beg an extra reprint from Dave More, with
> > whom you are far more apt to be in touch than I am,
> > and send it to me? Wouldn't you like to have
> > a copy yourself in any case, Art?
> If More or Baker didn't see fit to post it online...no.
Why would Faker have posted it online, Art?
> >>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>>>> In any case, I am astonished that you managed to get
> >>>>> any statement of your position on paper in a coherent
> >>>>> enough fashion that it could actually be published, Art
> >>>> Well, More or less published.
> >>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>>>> -- did you try sending a copy to Lehigh?
> >>>>> Maybe the admissions committee would reconsider.
> >>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>>> Lehigh's loss was MIT's gain.
> >> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>>I'm not so sure, Art -- have you canvassed those responsible for
> >>>supplying Baker House with pianos for their opinion on the matter?
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> It was "felo de se" on the piano's part.
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > I don't doubt that, Art; neVERtheless, those charged with supplying
> > Baker House with pianos must have felt the loss keenly. Matters
> > being so, are you SURE that Lehigh's loss was MIT's gain?
>
> Some day MIT will build a statue to me:
...just as Yale will erect a statue of George W. Bush. You were
both misundereducated to an unprecedented degree, so surely some
recognition is desERVED.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09q9ZfA2fRo
>
> Art Neuendorffer
art
>
>>>> But you, yourself, were the one who told me about:
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>> _____ *MAR-LO*
>>>> _____ *HI-RAM*
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> I know, Art;
>>> I was also the one who told you about Eltham/Hamlet.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> So why are you so good to me, Dave?
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> I'm eVER your well-wisher, Art.
Do you mean well-pusher, Dave?
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Besides, as I have said before, one can lead a horse
> -- or in your case, the hindquarters thereof
> -- to water, but you can't make him think.
You should read what Robert Nye has to say
about that in _The Late Mr. Shakespeare_ /
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> The Grand Master deems such tidbits as I deign
> to REVeal to you harmless, as you lack the capacity
> to integrate them into any coherent theory.
But I'm damn good at incoherent theories!
>>>>>>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>>> _The Marlovian_!! Issue 11--Fall 1999
>>>>>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>> Unfortunately, that issue does not appear online, as
>>>>>>>>> far as I can tell. Would you please send me a copy?
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>http://www.hedweb.com/animimag/okapi.htm
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> I said that one could lead a *horse's* hindquarters to water,
> not those of an okapi.
NEVERtheless, I consider my obligation here is done.
>>>>>>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Why not borrow Dave More's copy of Issue 11--Fall 1999?
>>>>>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>> I am not in contact with Dave More; indeed, I cannot recall his
>>>>>>>>> being active at h.l.a.s. for years. However, not having been able
>>>>>>>>> to attend your talk in Baltimore, I would love to see your article;
>>>>>>>>> could you please send me a copy? Thanks in advance.
>>>>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I wouldn't know where to begin to find my 10 year old copy.
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> I find this amazing, Art. I still have either reprints
>>> or preprints (and certainly the original manuscript)
>>> of eVERy paper that I have eVER published;
>> Can't get rid of them, huh?
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> On the contrary -- in many cases, I have had to resort to making
> more photocopies of the original preprint because I have already
> given away all the reprints.
Dartmouth wouldn't pay for more than a few preprints?
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> in the case of papers dating from later than 1990,
>>> when computerized typesetting became the norm,
>>> I still have both the TeX source and the .pdf file.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collyer_brothers
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Keeping both the TeX source and the .pdf or .dvi file of a
> published paper is a pretty routine practice among those who publish
> regularly, Art, as you would know if you had eVER done so. Since the
> material will all fit easily onto a memory stick the size of a AA
> battery, only an idiot would *not* back up his files in this manner --
> like yourself, for instance.
Well, if I had a memory stick right now of my
published works I sure know what I would do with it.
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> Do you mean to tell me that you have NO record
>>> whateVER of your article?! It seems to have disappeared
>>> as inscrutably as all the "evidence" that Oxfordians generally
>>> claim to possess but somehow cannot find when asked for it.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Almost all my scrutable authorship work can be googled at HLAS.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> I rest my case.
Make sure you don't rest it on a recently painted deck chair:
http://www.hedweb.com/animimag/okapi.htm
>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>>>> Surely you kept some reprints as a memento, Art!
>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Memento mori?
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> No, Art; in your case, "memento moron" is more apt.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Memento moroni?
.
>> <<Upon completion of _The Marlovian_ Issue 11--Fall 1999,
>> written on golden ratio pi plates,
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> No, Art; "memento moron" was correct, as you just demonstrated.
> The golden ratio, an algebraic number of degree two over
> the rational field, is *NOT* pi, which is transcendental.
My work is both irrational AND transcendental!
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> This is on a par with
> your REVelations concerning the number nineteen.
------------------------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War_Veterans_Memorial
<<Within the walled triangle are 19 stainless
steel statues designed by *Frank Gaylord* >>
------------------------------------
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Art supposedly buried the pi plates in a stone box
>> in a hill in what is now *POTTstown* , PA,
>> where they were recoVERED by Mrs. Amanda Smith
>> and were used by here for BAKERing.>>
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Were used by a faker, you mean?
Only those which were kept in a mayonnaise jar
outside Funk & Wagnalls' porch since noon today.
>>>>> Mr. Streitz keeps sending me material unbidden (rather
>>>>> amusingly, it is addressed to me in care of the English Department --
>>>>> Mr. Streitz was neVER VERy quick on the uptake -- but
>>>>> eventually it finds its way to me anyway), as does
>>>>> someone whom I presume to be Richard Whalen;
>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Richard Whalen found his whay to you?
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> I presume that it is he; it is merely a sort of periodical
>>> newsletter, apparently sent out to a mailing list of academics.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> So then how did you end up receiving it, Dave?
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> The answer is quite obvious, Art,
> although apparently not to you, as might be expected.
You're just academic?
>>>>>>>> But, you could try your local library
>>>> .
>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>>>> My local library doesn't subscribe to _The Marlovian_, Art.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Indeed, I am not aware that my local library even subscribes
> to _Weekly World News_, let alone the plethora of less
> respectable nutcase periodicals.
You should check it out, Dave.
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> Surely you beg an extra reprint from Dave More, with
>>> whom you are far more apt to be in touch than I am,
>>> and send it to me? Wouldn't you like to have
>>> a copy yourself in any case, Art?
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> If More or Baker didn't see fit to post it online...no.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Why would Faker have posted it online, Art?
Why wouldn't he?
>>>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>>>>>> In any case, I am astonished that you managed to get
>>>>>>> any statement of your position on paper in a coherent
>>>>>>> enough fashion that it could actually be published, Art
>>>>>> Well, More or less published.
>>>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>>>>>> -- did you try sending a copy to Lehigh?
>>>>>>> Maybe the admissions committee would reconsider.
>>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>> Lehigh's loss was MIT's gain.
>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>>>>I'm not so sure, Art -- have you canvassed those responsible for
>>>>>supplying Baker House with pianos for their opinion on the matter?
>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> It was "felo de se" on the piano's part.
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> I don't doubt that, Art; neVERtheless, those charged with supplying
>>> Baker House with pianos must have felt the loss keenly. Matters
>>> being so, are you SURE that Lehigh's loss was MIT's gain?
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Some day MIT will build a statue to me:
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> ...just as Yale will erect a statue of George W. Bush.
> You were both misundereducated to an unprecedented degree,
> so surely some recognition is desERVED.
"Misundereducated" is a word?
>
>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09q9ZfA2fRo
Art Neuendorffer
nordicskiv2
<937cec9e-065d-4f9b...@d23g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>,
art <acne...@gmail.com>
(acnew...@gmail.comedy) wrote:
> >>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>>> But you, yourself, were the one who told me about:
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------
> >>>> _____ *MAR-LO*
> >>>> _____ *HI-RAM*
> >> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>> I know, Art;
> >>> I was also the one who told you about Eltham/Hamlet.
...and Droeshout/Herodotus, for that matter.
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> So why are you so good to me, Dave?
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > I'm eVER your well-wisher, Art.
> Do you mean well-pusher, Dave?
Of course not, Art! How many times must I remind you: One can
lead a horse -- or in your case, the hindquarters thereof -- to water,
but you can't make him think. Matters being so, I am unlikely to
engage in the Sisyphean task of trying to bring you into the prOXimity
of a well --a Will, perhaps, but not a well.
[...]
> >>>>>>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>>>>>>>>> _The Marlovian_!! Issue 11--Fall 1999
> >>>>>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Unfortunately, that issue does not appear online, as
> >>>>>>>>> far as I can tell. Would you please send me a copy?
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>http://www.hedweb.com/animimag/okapi.htm
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> > I said that one could lead a *horse's* hindquarters to water,
> > not those of an okapi.
> NEVERtheless, I consider my obligation here is done.
What obligation is that, Art?
> >>>>>>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Why not borrow Dave More's copy of Issue 11--Fall 1999?
> >>>>>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> I am not in contact with Dave More; indeed, I cannot recall his
> >>>>>>>>> being active at h.l.a.s. for years. However, not having been able
> >>>>>>>>> to attend your talk in Baltimore, I would love to see your article;
> >>>>>>>>> could you please send me a copy? Thanks in advance.
> >>>>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> I wouldn't know where to begin to find my 10 year old copy.
> >> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >>> I find this amazing, Art. I still have either reprints
> >>> or preprints (and certainly the original manuscript)
> >>> of eVERy paper that I have eVER published;
> >> Can't get rid of them, huh?
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> > On the contrary -- in many cases, I have had to resort to making
> > more photocopies of the original preprint because I have already
> > given away all the reprints.
> Dartmouth wouldn't pay for more than a few preprints?
Of course it will, Art; I didn't say that I paid for them myself.
For someone who claims to have had training in physics, you seem
astonishingly ignorant of elementary article mechanics, Art.
> >> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >>> in the case of papers dating from later than 1990,
> >>> when computerized typesetting became the norm,
> >>> I still have both the TeX source and the .pdf file.
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collyer_brothers
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Keeping both the TeX source and the .pdf or .dvi file of a
> > published paper is a pretty routine practice among those who publish
> > regularly, Art, as you would know if you had eVER done so. Since the
> > material will all fit easily onto a memory stick the size of a AA
> > battery, only an idiot would *not* back up his files in this manner --
> > like yourself, for instance.
> Well, if I had a memory stick right now of my
> published works I sure know what I would do with it.
What would you do with it, Art?
> >> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >>> Do you mean to tell me that you have NO record
> >>> whateVER of your article?! It seems to have disappeared
> >>> as inscrutably as all the "evidence" that Oxfordians generally
> >>> claim to possess but somehow cannot find when asked for it.
[...]
> >>>>> Surely you kept some reprints as a memento, Art!
> >>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>>> Memento mori?
> >> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>> No, Art; in your case, "memento moron" is more apt.
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Memento moroni?
> .
> >> <<Upon completion of _The Marlovian_ Issue 11--Fall 1999,
> >> written on golden ratio pi plates,
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > No, Art; "memento moron" was correct, as you just demonstrated.
> > The golden ratio, an algebraic number of degree two over
> > the rational field, is *NOT* pi, which is transcendental.
> My work is both irrational AND transcendental!
You don't have to convince me of that, Art; howeVER, the golden
ratio phi is NOT transcendental: being the root of a quadratic
equation with rational coefficients, it is about as far from
transcendental as possible, short of actually being rational.
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > This is on a par with
> > your REVelations concerning the number nineteen.
> ------------------------------------
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War_Veterans_Memorial
>
> <<Within the walled triangle are 19 stainless
> steel statues designed by *Frank Gaylord* >>
First, as has pointed out to you before, Art, Oxford was scarcely a
"gay lord"; indeed, he incurred the wrath of the Queen for
impregnating one of her ladies in waiting, and his debauchery with a
notorious Italian courtesan was also apparently well known. There is
evidence that Oxford was a pederast, but that it a VERy different
matter. MoreoVER, if Oxford did indeed conceal his authorship of the
Shakespeare canon under a pseudonym, then he was anything but frank!
Here one finds yet another of your nutcase numerological REVelations
concerning the number nineteen.
[...]
> >>>>>>>> But, you could try your local library
> >>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>>>> My local library doesn't subscribe to _The Marlovian_, Art.
[...]
> > Indeed, I am not aware that my local library even subscribes
> > to _Weekly World News_, let alone the plethora of less
> > respectable nutcase periodicals.
> You should check it out, Dave.
You are talking utter rubbish as usual, Art -- how could I possibly
check out material that I have already told you that my library does
*not* possess?!
Would you please request a copy from Dave More and send it to me?
We need a copy for our secret archives beneath Rosslyn Chapel. Thank
you in advance, Art.
> >> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>> Surely you beg an extra reprint from Dave More, with
> >>> whom you are far more apt to be in touch than I am,
> >>> and send it to me? Wouldn't you like to have
> >>> a copy yourself in any case, Art?
> > art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> If More or Baker didn't see fit to post it online...no.
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> > Why would Faker have posted it online, Art?
> Why wouldn't he?
Because it is so evidently nutcase stuff that even Faker, that
venerable proponent of the NASA lunar landing hoax and solVER of
Fermat's Last Theorem, wouldn't touch it?
> >>>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>>>>>> In any case, I am astonished that you managed to get
> >>>>>>> any statement of your position on paper in a coherent
> >>>>>>> enough fashion that it could actually be published, Art
[...]
> >>>>>>> -- did you try sending a copy to Lehigh?
> >>>>>>> Maybe the admissions committee would reconsider.
> >>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>>>>> Lehigh's loss was MIT's gain.
[...]
> >> Some day MIT will build a statue to me:
> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
> >
> > ...just as Yale will erect a statue of George W. Bush.
> > You were both misundereducated to an unprecedented degree,
> > so surely some recognition is desERVED.
> "Misundereducated" is a word?
Bush said himself that he was "misunderestimated"; surely such a
Presidential neologism may be adapted to coVER both his and your
misundereducation.
Incidentally, do you know the difference between yourself and Oleg
Gordievsky, Art?
> >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09q9ZfA2fRo
>
> Art Neuendorffer
art
>
>>>>>> But you, yourself, were the one who told me about:
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> _____ *MAR-LO*
>>>>>> _____ *HI-RAM*
>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>>>> I know, Art;
>>>>> I was also the one who told you about Eltham/Hamlet.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> ...and Droeshout/Herodotus, for that matter.
Indeed.
>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> So why are you so good to me, Dave?
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> I'm eVER your well-wisher, Art.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Do you mean well-pusher, Dave?
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Of course not, Art! How many times must I remind you: One can
> lead a horse -- or in your case, the hindquarters thereof -- to water,
> but you can't make him think. Matters being so, I am unlikely to
> engage in the Sisyphean task of trying to bring you into
> the prOXimity of a well --a Will, perhaps, but not a well.
I don't mean pushing me TO a well;
rather pushing me *INTO* a well (or, at least, wishing to).
>>>>>>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I wouldn't know where to begin to find my 10 year old copy.
>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>>>>> I find this amazing, Art. I still have either reprints
>>>>> or preprints (and certainly the original manuscript)
>>>>> of eVERy paper that I have eVER published;
>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Can't get rid of them, huh?
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>>> On the contrary -- in many cases, I have had to resort
>>> to making more photocopies of the original preprint
>>> because I have already given away all the reprints.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dartmouth wouldn't pay for more than a few preprints?
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Of course it will, Art; I didn't say that I paid for them myself.
> For someone who claims to have had training in physics, you seem
> astonishingly ignorant of elementary article mechanics, Art.
I never wrote as many elementary articles as you apparently have.
>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>>>>> in the case of papers dating from later than 1990,
>>>>> when computerized typesetting became the norm,
>>>>> I still have both the TeX source and the .pdf file.
>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collyer_brothers
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> Keeping both the TeX source and the .pdf or .dvi file of a
>>> published paper is a pretty routine practice among those who publish
>>> regularly, Art, as you would know if you had eVER done so. Since the
>>> material will all fit easily onto a memory stick the size of a AA
>>> battery, only an idiot would *not* back up his files in this manner --
>>> like yourself, for instance.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Well, if I had a memory stick right now of my
>> published works I sure know what I would do with it.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> What would you do with it, Art?
I'm afraid that is not publishable, Dave.
>>>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>>>>>>> Surely you kept some reprints as a memento, Art!
>>>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>> Memento mori?
>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>>>> No, Art; in your case, "memento moron" is more apt.
>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Memento moroni?
>> .
>>>> <<Upon completion of _The Marlovian_ Issue 11--Fall 1999,
>>>> written on golden ratio pi plates,
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> No, Art; "memento moron" was correct, as you just demonstrated.
>>> The golden ratio, an algebraic number of degree two over
>>> the rational field, is *NOT* pi, which is transcendental.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> My work is both irrational AND transcendental!
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> You don't have to convince me of that, Art; howeVER, the golden
> ratio phi is NOT transcendental: being the root of a quadratic
> equation with rational coefficients, it is about as far from
> transcendental as possible, short of actually being rational.
----------------------------------------------
Phi does have a simpler continuued fraction than pi.
----------------------------------------------
EDGAR: Child Rowland to the dark tower came,
. His word was still,--Phi, foh, and fum,
. I smell the blood of a British man.
...................................................
TITUS ANDRONICUS: Why, there they are both, baked in that pi;
----------------------------------------------
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> This is on a par with
>>> your REVelations concerning the number nineteen.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> ------------------------------------
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War_Veterans_Memorial
>>
>> <<Within the walled triangle are 19 stainless
>> steel statues designed by *Frank Gaylord* >>
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Here one finds yet another of your nutcase numerological
> REVelations concerning the number nineteen.
The Lincoln & Jefferson statues are both 19 ft. tall.
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> First, as has pointed out to you before, Art, Oxford was scarcely
> a "gay lord"; indeed, he incurred the wrath of the Queen for
> impregnating one of her ladies in waiting, and his debauchery
> with a notorious Italian courtesan was also apparently well known.
The *wrath of the Queen* ...oh, my!
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> MoreoVER, if Oxford did indeed conceal his authorship of the
> Shakespeare canon under a pseudonym, then he was anything but frank!
Well, then, was he frank or wasn't he?
-------------------------------------------------------
combination of "E.O." & *FREE* [= *FRANK/FRANCIS* ]
...................................................
. King Henry IV, ii Act 3, Scene 2
.
. SHALLOW: Ha, ha, ha! you can do it, sir; you can do it:
. I commend you well. *FRANCIS FEEBLE* !
.
.__ T *O*
.-- T H [E]
. O N [L]
.__ I E [B]
.- E G [E]
._- T T [E]
. R O [F]
-----------------------------------------------------------
. 23 E's 22 E's 2 B's 6 L's 21 E's (left)
probability of *FEEBLE* with a skip of 3 (or less): 1 / 118,000
. = 6*[(23*22*2*6*21)/(143*142*141*140*139)]
------------------------------------------------------
. Sonnet 4
.
. Nature's bequest gives nothing but doth lend,
. And being *FRANK* she lends to those are *FREE*.
.
______________ T *O* . = 2
_____________ TH [E] . = 3
___________- ONLI [E] . = 5
______- BEGETTE [R] . = 8 *FIBONACCI'S*
______________ O [F] .
----------------------------------------------------------
_ *Franciscus BACONVS de VERUlamio*
<<Bacon's name in Latin is Franciscus BACONUS. When he used it
on the title-page of a book he wrote it in the possessive case,
*FRANCISCI BACONI* . It may be seen so used on the title-pages
of several of his books.>> http://www.sirbacon.org/pattonstrs.htm
.........................................................
___ *FRANCISCI BACONI*
___ *FIBONACCI'S CAIRN*
-----------------------------------------------------
___ *EDWARD VERE'S CAIRN*
___ *CAESAR NEVER DID WR* -ong
-----------------------------------------------------
RGTSRVEAIILEHHWONIERYEMPTREHNSNPLHMEONSE[H]O[T]G[E]N[H] T
*TFIEIRNDNSLWTEIEGVREODIR [IN] ta [DEEP] HARTNGVIE [FEEBLE] O*
HONTNETVGHWEHTSTPILVVBSOEIETTASIALWSNSINSTRT _______ EIOT
-------------------------------------------------------------
. And put their bodies *IN DEEP* prison,
. For the trespass that they have done,
.
. Thieves he shall harbour nEVER one,
. Nor him *THAT HATH* killed a man,
. Nor the same *THAT HATH* a *FEEBLE* name,
. Lest it would turn the craft to shame.
. [The Halliwell or Regius MS]
---------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>> But, you could try your local library
>>>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>>>>>> My local library doesn't subscribe to _The Marlovian_, Art.
> [...]
>>> Indeed, I am not aware that my local library even subscribes
>>> to _Weekly World News_, let alone the plethora of less
>>> respectable nutcase periodicals.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> You should check it out, Dave.
>
> You are talking utter rubbish as usual, Art -- how could
> I possibly check out material that I have already told you
> that my library does *not* possess?!
You only told me that "you were not aware"
(Something we probably all could have guessed.)
> Would you please request a copy from Dave More and send it to me?
> We need a copy for our secret archives beneath Rosslyn Chapel.
> Thank you in advance, Art.
If Terry Ross & Lynne got married.....
>>>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>>>> Surely you beg an extra reprint from Dave More, with
>>>>> whom you are far more apt to be in touch than I am,
>>>>> and send it to me? Wouldn't you like to have
>>>>> a copy yourself in any case, Art?
>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> If More or Baker didn't see fit to post it online...no.
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>>> Why would Faker have posted it online, Art?
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Why wouldn't he?
>
> Because it is so evidently nutcase stuff that even Faker,
> that venerable proponent of the NASA lunar landing hoax
> and solVER of Fermat's Last Theorem, wouldn't touch it?
>
What if I carved it all on a tree?
>
>>> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Some day MIT will build a statue to me:
>>>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09q9ZfA2fRo
>> nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
>>> ...just as Yale will erect a statue of George W. Bush.
>>> You were both misundereducated to an unprecedented degree,
>>> so surely some recognition is desERVED.
.
> art <acneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> "Misundereducated" is a word?
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Bush said himself that he was "misunderestimated";
> surely such a Presidential neologism may be adapted
> to coVER both his and your misundereducation.
Do you always follow Bush's examples so religiously?
.
nordicskiv2 <David.L.W...@Dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> Incidentally, do you know the difference
> between yourself and Oleg Gordievsky, Art?
I have yet to be knighted or poisoned?
-------------------------------------
Art Neuendorffer
MQ
>
> On Jul 5, 6:00 pm, art wrote:
>
> > Jan Feb _Mar Apr _May Jun
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > _75 172 _196 _82 _199 _67 ForestofArden
> > 850 823 1024 917 1000 685 HLAS
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> The reason, Art, that FOA is going DOA is because
> resident Strats and Oxfordians have no evidence to
> post.
>
A view of FoA -
(quote)
January 13, 2009
For anyone who is interested:
There is a one-per-week discussion of Shakespeare’s sonnets at the
Google Group “Forest of Arden.” They are currently doing number
sixteen.
It seems they got the idea from the Usenet group
“humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare”, where these discussions used to
take place. “Forest of Arden” was founded by the combined disaffected
forces of hlas and the Shakespeare Fellowship, who wanted a moderated
forum where they could discuss “alternate Shakespeare authorship”
without being, as they felt, harassed by people who care about the
historical truth.
(There’s an argument to be made that the partisans of the forest
themselves harassed the participants of hlas until the latter had
become useless, but what’s done is done. Another oddity is that there
are those who compare “alternate authorship studies” to Holocaust
denial -- granted, this is an overstatement based on an emotional
reaction that puts all politically motivated denials of the scholarly
consensus on an equal level -- and yet many of the longstanding
members of the Shakespeare Fellowship are outspoken Jews. Go figure.
Indeed, both sides, in hlas, often attacked Jewish participants on
grounds that they had not sufficiently disallied themselves from a
group that was morally equivalent to Nazism. In any event, “Forest of
Arden” is now run to the satisfaction of both the cranks and the
credentialless people who take it upon themselves to keep the cranks
in line. Here’s an example of the kind of argumentation you can find
among those who describe themselves as “Oxfordians,” regarding the
dropoff in interest in Shakespeare among British teachers since the
requirement for fourteen year-olds to study Shakespeare was dropped.
Yes, they annoyed the heck out of me.)