Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Feel free to talk about anything and everything in this board.
User avatar
salomed
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1244
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 4:18 pm
Custom Title: Cartesian Skeptic

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby salomed » Thu Jul 13, 2017 5:52 pm

Nikki Nyx wrote:
salomed wrote:I just care if encoded in a 400 year old manuscript are numerous fundamental constants, some of which were not known until the 20th century.
They're not. Did you see my last post to you? Or this one? Green's own measurements do not produce pi, and his pdf shows that.


I did see it yes. I have enjoyed months of trying to get people to answer "yes" or "no" if the constants are there, a very simple question and a very simple thing to check (like I did), instead I just get speculation and distraction and derailing (A common tactic here) and it seemed you are just joining in with that. If you would like to discuss/check that, super:)

As to your point about Greens "real fraud" I just dont see it.

3.14248252...NOT PI. So he puts a little note next to it that reads, "actual value 3.14159."


In my country, when we do mathematic's we round up from 5. So:

3.14159 rounds up to 3.142, which is Pi, to three decimal places.

Green claims it is to Pi to three decimal places, which it seems to me it is. Have I missed something?

Another point here, to me anyway, is that even getting the 12 constants down to 1 decimal place, all on one page, would be astounding. Really think about that. Especially 400 hundred years ago!

Two decimal places would be mathematically and conceptually an order of magnitude more astounding. Three decimal places, which Green claims to have found, and I think he has, even more so.

The constants are there Nikki. See for yourself or not at all. :)
Comment savez-vous que vous ne parlez pas bollox?
Sur internet: http://bit.ly/14A0n9H

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8112
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby Poodle » Thu Jul 13, 2017 6:11 pm

salomed wrote:In my country, when we do mathematic's we round up from 5 ...

That would be Lalaland, then (and why wouldn't you answer my question about your native language?). In any other country, protagonists in any discussion on accuracy would avoid rounding up like the plague. As well as Grocers' Apostrophes.
I don't know why I bother - it appears that the entire dualist population of the forum has me on ignore. I alternate between satisfaction and frustration.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19634
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby scrmbldggs » Thu Jul 13, 2017 6:46 pm

They're making their own little universe here it seems. They must like us very much. :mrgreen:
Hi, Io the lurker.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby Nikki Nyx » Thu Jul 13, 2017 8:47 pm

salomed wrote:As to your point about Greens "real fraud" I just dont see it.


salomed wrote:
Nikki Nyx wrote:3.14248252...NOT PI. So he puts a little note next to it that reads, "actual value 3.14159."
In my country, when we do mathematic's we round up from 5. So:

3.14159 rounds up to 3.142, which is Pi, to three decimal places.
Do you understand the concept of irrational numbers? Their decimal places neither terminate nor repeat. If Green's division for that particular triangle did not return 3.14159265358979..., then he did not find pi. He found 3.14248252, which is not pi. One doesn't "round up" irrational numbers. Either pi is actually there, or it's not. And it's not. Go ahead and plug in 3.14248252 into equations for the area or circumference of a circle and see how far off your solutions are.

salomed wrote:Another point here, to me anyway, is that even getting the 12 constants down to 1 decimal place, all on one page, would be astounding. Really think about that. Especially 400 hundred years ago!
That's not what happened, though. What happened is Green began with the irrational numbers, rounded them to the nearest digit (making them rational numbers), then drew his triangles to fit by fudging where he started and ended his lines, ignoring any marks that weren't needed for his hoax. This is no different from a scientist beginning with a conclusion, then ignoring whatever data doesn't fit his preconceived conclusion.

I already proved to you that a number of Green's statements were blatantly false by adding four new right triangles to his page, by finding four right triangles in Common Sense, and by finding seven right triangles in The Merchant of Venice. I'll go even further and bet I can find at least four right triangles that share a hypotenuse on a page of text, another item Green presented as statistically impossible.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26362
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Jul 13, 2017 10:36 pm

salomed wrote: I care not, at this stage.......
If you didn't care, then why did you forge the evidence? :lol:

Hard Evidence of Salomed's Forgery
viewtopic.php?f=80&t=27941&start=200#p590160

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26362
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Creation of the Fraud / Methodology

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Jul 13, 2017 10:57 pm

salomed wrote:Another point here, to me anyway, is that even getting the 12 constants down to 1 decimal place, all on one page, would be astounding. Really think about that. Especially 400 hundred years ago!
Nikki Nyx wrote:That's not what happened, though. What happened is Green began with the irrational numbers......

You got it and Alan Green actually left evidence that this is exactly what he did.

Alan Green Forgery No# 1
There are 85 text markings on the Sonnets title page. 4005 lines can be drawn connecting every text mark to another. Therefore, there are over 16,000,000 combinations of measurements where one line can be divided by another and 32,000,000 if you include the fraction inversions. Alan Green simply wrote down the "answers he was looking for and then sifted through a handful of the 32,000,000 alternatives he had until he got a "hit". In reality there are thousands of hits for any number anyway. It is just mathematics.


Alan Green Text Forgery No# 2
Alan struggled more finding patterns in the text of Shakespeare. To get around this he starts mixing up different measurements. To calculate the speed of light (that he gets wrong anyway) Alan multiplies miles by kilometers by Egyptian cubits by inches without any conversion. What's worse is that no one knows how long a cubit is. ....so Alan makes it up.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Creation of the Fraud / Methodology

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jul 14, 2017 1:26 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
salomed wrote:Another point here, to me anyway, is that even getting the 12 constants down to 1 decimal place, all on one page, would be astounding. Really think about that. Especially 400 hundred years ago!
Nikki Nyx wrote:That's not what happened, though. What happened is Green began with the irrational numbers......

You got it and Alan Green actually left evidence that this is exactly what he did.
Given sufficient time, you or I could do the same thing with a completely different title page. Found this excellent comment on Reddit from redditor "KnowsAboutMath":
I wrote a Mathematica script that generates 12 points randomly, uniformly, and independently in the unit square. (By my count 12 is the number of distinct triangle vertices used in the video.) Out of 12 points, there are 12C3 = 220 ways of picking 3 points to form the vertices of a triangle. The script then searches through these 220 possible triangles, looking for triangles which are within 1 degree of being a right triangle. It found 9, which are shown here.

Out of 9 triangles, there are 351 ways of finding the ratios of the lengths of two sides. (Actually a bit less, since some of these triangles share one side, the same as in the video, but the number will still be in that ballpark.) Out of hundreds of numbers in that range, I'd guess the odds are fairly high that there would be quite a few within 1 percent or so of some "special" number, especially when the set of special numbers is allowed to include any even vaguely-known mathematical constant, as well as their reciprocals, and the roots of small integers.

ETA:
OK, I wrote another little script. It searches all possible pairs of side lengths of the aforementioned 9 random triangles. It looks for ratios of side lengths which are within 1% of the following numbers (or their reciprocals): pi, e, the golden ratio, Euler's constant, root 2, root 3, root 5, root 6, root 7, root 8, and root 10.
It found 74 such coincidences.


ETA2: I've pasted the Mathematica script I used here.

ETA3: OK, here I've done the same thing with 14 "special" points (eyes, snake tips, etc) on a Harry Potter cover. I find 5 triangles which are right to within 1 degree. By taking side length ratios, I also find 10 matches to within 1% to numbers such as e, 1/e, 1/pi, root 5, and so on. I fully believe this could be done with any book cover or title page or whatever.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jul 14, 2017 1:43 am

OMG...dying. :lol: How did I miss this priceless nonsense?!

This guy [Green] goes on to say the letters can be rearranged and flipped to spell "Egypt" in the next video. And since that only leaves behind 9 and T those have special meaning.
Image
He claims was a clever way to say 90 (never mind how 9 or T or ninety were actually pronounced in old English). As in 90 degrees, which is about where the 122nd block of a triangle built like a pyramid would be (not quite, but close-ish), if the pyramid had a central base block of 9 and a second row starting with 18. And the sonnets 9, 18, and 122 have periods after the number, while the others don't, so this is the author's intent.
Image
:rotfl:
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10189
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Jul 14, 2017 1:49 am

Ha, ha..........."you know"......... this whole subject makes me feel "stupid." I can't follow it AT ALL. Drawing lines on a book means............?................ what???? Secret Messages???? Who cares about that??? The means of communicating have nothing to do with the accuracy of what is communicated.

If certain lines make a right triangle................so what?

I mean.........is this as important as counting from zero to one in Caps?.................... or not???? .................... Or is it something mystically different?????

Please don't respond.............. if it will hurt my feelings. I'm feeling very empathetic and gender biased right now.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:48 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Ha, ha..........."you know"......... this whole subject makes me feel "stupid." I can't follow it AT ALL. Drawing lines on a book means............?................ what???? Secret Messages???? Who cares about that??? The means of communicating have nothing to do with the accuracy of what is communicated.

If certain lines make a right triangle................so what?

I mean.........is this as important as counting from zero to one in Caps?.................... or not???? .................... Or is it something mystically different?????

Please don't respond.............. if it will hurt my feelings. I'm feeling very empathetic and gender biased right now.

I'm not going to hurt your feelings, because I agree with you 100%. This is all nonsense.

Someone in 1609 decided to sloppily encode a bunch of almost-but-not-quite mathematical constants, most unknown in that era, into handset typography? For what purpose? No one decoding it in that era would know whether he was correct in his calculations, since most of those constants had yet to be discovered. So, it was for us to find in the 21st Century? Why would we care when we already know of the existence of these constants? Then the whole "and the letters, when rearranged, spell 'Egypt'." I nearly fell off my chair, I started laughing so hard.

Seriously, look up "Mike Yard's conspiracy theories." Mike creates the best, most convoluted fake conspiracy theories for comedic effect. This sounds like something he would do. "Egypt." :lol:
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10189
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Jul 14, 2017 3:21 am

Nikki: Oh. Thanks.

Well.........it would have been pretty cool if these constants had been discovered by triangle analysis before we knew them otherwise by hard old math? Are there any as yet undiscovered triangles/constants left there for our enlightenment? Einsteins Theory of Everything? The best cheesecake??

..............anything?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26362
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Evidence of Salomed's forgeries

Postby Matthew Ellard » Fri Jul 14, 2017 3:58 am

salomed wrote: In my country, when we do mathematic's ...
...we all forge evidence.... :lol:

Answer one question without lying
In March 2017 you claimed you downloaded the Sonnets page from the British Library and over-layed it over the PDF Sonnets page, you were finding shapes on, and you stated it was a perfect match. You even included an image of that overlay.

However the British Library has the original edition saying "John Wright" and your PDF was of the later print run saying William Aspley. The punctuation dots are in totally different places.

viewtopic.php?f=80&t=27941&start=40#p567602

Do you admit now you lied about the "perfect match" and forged the image?

User avatar
salomed
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1244
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 4:18 pm
Custom Title: Cartesian Skeptic

Re: Evidence of Salomed's forgeries

Postby salomed » Fri Jul 14, 2017 6:29 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
salomed wrote: In my country, when we do mathematic's ...
...we all forge evidence.... :lol:

Answer one question without lying
In March 2017 you claimed you downloaded the Sonnets page from the British Library and over-layed it over the PDF Sonnets page, you were finding shapes on, and you stated it was a perfect match. You even included an image of that overlay.

However the British Library has the original edition saying "John Wright" and your PDF was of the later print run saying William Aspley. The punctuation dots are in totally different places.

viewtopic.php?f=80&t=27941&start=40#p567602

Do you admit now you lied about the "perfect match" and forged the image?


No, I do not. You are twisting things.

The Sonnet's image, that I have repeatedly said I used, and invited you to use, was from the wikipedia page here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakespeare%27s_sonnets#/media/File:Sonnets1609titlepage.jpg

The only time I mention the British Library was in this post:

http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=27871&p=563092&hilit=salomed+library#p563042

Where I say, in reference to Gord not using the image I used or Alan Green used:

A) The version you have is somehow distorted from the one Alan Green has. They look the same to me. And the same as the one i just downloaded from the British Library. But it could well be due to issues of the graphics format.


And it does look different, as you can see:

[url]https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/first-edition-of-shakespeares-sonnets-1609
[/url]


In March 2017 you claimed you downloaded the Sonnets page from the British Library and over-layed it over the PDF Sonnets page



No I didnt. To reiterate, I downloaded that to see for myself it was not the one used. I did not do any overlying or any such thing on that image. As I recall the image was too small, irrespective of its relevance.

I you were finding shapes on, and you stated it was a perfect match. You even included an image of that overlay.


No I didn't. I have only used the Aspley one. Mind you, at the time all those months ago, I wasnt aware of the importance of the mystery as to why there were two different versions, that, in itself is ODD to me.

I have not lied. I am mistaken often, I am no liar.
Comment savez-vous que vous ne parlez pas bollox?
Sur internet: http://bit.ly/14A0n9H

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26362
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Evidence of Salomed's forgeries

Postby Matthew Ellard » Fri Jul 14, 2017 7:00 am

salomed wrote: No, I do not. You are twisting things.
No Salomed. You are a liar and a forger.

Fact : The original "John Wright" Sonnets page is the only Sonnets page, held at the British Library.

https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/firs ... nnets-1609

Fact : Your manipulated JPEG imagery is of the later "William Aspley" Sonnets page and has totally different text at the bottom. .

Fact : You directly lied and said you over-layed your manipulated JPEG version over the image at the British Library.
salomed on 27MAR2017 wrote: I have taken the image from your link and have superimposed it in GIMP onto the one from the British Library. You can do this yourself in a few minutes. I have moved the top layer a few pixels in the Y+ so you can see how perfectly the points align.


Fact : You then fraudulently took your own JPEG image and reversed the colour and then claimed it was evidence you had layered the two images together to check they were identical. Here is your forgery. It says "William Aspley" and doesn't match the "John Wright" version at all.
Forged sonnnets.jpg


Here is your original fraudulent post, for everyone to see.
viewtopic.php?f=80&t=27941&start=40#p567602

If you had any honour or honesty, which you don't, you would apologise to every member of the forum for lying and forging evidence and then stop posting here. If Alan Green wants to defend his honour, on our forum, he can do it himself.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
salomed
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1244
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 4:18 pm
Custom Title: Cartesian Skeptic

Re: Evidence of Salomed's forgeries

Postby salomed » Fri Jul 14, 2017 7:16 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
salomed wrote: No, I do not. You are twisting things.
No Salomed. You are a liar and a forger.

Fact : The original "John Wright" Sonnets page is the only Sonnets page, held at the British Library.

https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/firs ... nnets-1609

Fact : Your manipulated JPEG imagery is of the later "William Aspley" Sonnets page and has totally different text at the bottom. .

Fact : You directly lied and said you over-layed your manipulated JPEG version over the image at the British Library.
salomed on 27MAR2017 wrote: I have taken the image from your link and have superimposed it in GIMP onto the one from the British Library. You can do this yourself in a few minutes. I have moved the top layer a few pixels in the Y+ so you can see how perfectly the points align.


Fact : You then fraudulently took your own JPEG image and reversed the colour and then claimed it was evidence you had layered the two images together to check they were identical. Here is your forgery. It says "William Aspley" and doesn't match the "John Wright" version at all.
Forged sonnnets.jpg

Here is your original fraudulent post, for everyone to see.
viewtopic.php?f=80&t=27941&start=40#p567602

If you had any honour or honesty, which you don't, you would apologise to every member of the forum for lying and forging evidence and then stop posting here. If Alan Green wants to defend his honour, on our forum, he can do it himself.


OIC. That was just the inverted image to show they are not the same. I forgot I even did that. I did not do any maths overlaying. All of the maths work I did was on the wikipedia page. Show me where I did maths overlaying on that image and I will leave the forum, and consider myself either mad or more forgetful than I assumed. I have not lied. You are twisting things as you do.
Comment savez-vous que vous ne parlez pas bollox?
Sur internet: http://bit.ly/14A0n9H

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8112
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby Poodle » Fri Jul 14, 2017 8:46 am

This entire thread, and the other one, is completely based upon intentional and oft-repeated lies. The main one (although by no means the only one) has been the insistence upon the ability to be able to define the centre of non-circular blobs and then the claim that those centres were INTENDED to be joined together by non-existent lines. Despite it being clearly shown, several times by several posters, to be an untenable claim, the lie has been repeated ad nauseam.
No twisting, then - you have constantly lied like a cheap 1950s wristwatch.

User avatar
salomed
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1244
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 4:18 pm
Custom Title: Cartesian Skeptic

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby salomed » Fri Jul 14, 2017 9:50 am

Poodle wrote:This entire thread, and the other one, is completely based upon intentional and oft-repeated lies. The main one (although by no means the only one) has been the insistence upon the ability to be able to define the centre of non-circular blobs and then the claim that those centres were INTENDED to be joined together by non-existent lines. Despite it being clearly shown, several times by several posters, to be an untenable claim, the lie has been repeated ad nauseam.
No twisting, then - you have constantly lied like a cheap 1950s wristwatch.


Let us assume that I have lied. That I have distorted images. Moved dots and cheated in every way possible.

My assumed dishonesty does nothing to change the presence in that cover of the following that Green has found and discussed in depth here:
https://uploads.strikinglycdn.com/files/e8192620-d1d4-463e-b21d-21b9d7cf4b93/3.SonnetsMath.Main.pdf

From which I took this screen shot:

Screen Shot 2017-07-14.jpg


Twist my words, call me a liar, it doesnt change the facts about the cover and the constants.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Comment savez-vous que vous ne parlez pas bollox?
Sur internet: http://bit.ly/14A0n9H

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8112
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby Poodle » Fri Jul 14, 2017 10:47 am

But salomed - other than distinctly uncircular punctuation marks and a couple of very wobbly horizontals, NONE of those things are there until you draw them. That's the single salient FACT that you are constantly skipping over.

User avatar
salomed
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1244
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 4:18 pm
Custom Title: Cartesian Skeptic

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby salomed » Fri Jul 14, 2017 10:59 am

Poodle wrote:But salomed - other than distinctly uncircular punctuation marks and a couple of very wobbly horizontals, NONE of those things are there until you draw them. That's the single salient FACT that you are constantly skipping over.


So you agree that it is a "FACT" that the points that make the the triangles that encode the constants are there. We are getting somewhere.

As to why the lines themselves need to be drawn in, I assume this is because the author didn't want them to be seen publically. This is called "cryptography", crypt meaning "hidden"... though really it is closer to steganography.
Comment savez-vous que vous ne parlez pas bollox?
Sur internet: http://bit.ly/14A0n9H

User avatar
Austin Harper
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4817
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 2:22 pm
Custom Title: Rock Chalk Astrohawk
Location: Detroit
Contact:

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby Austin Harper » Fri Jul 14, 2017 12:31 pm

GUYS. I just made a huge discovery. If you take all of the letters in Shakespeare's sonnets and re-arrange them, you get the entire Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution. How is this possible?
Dum ratio nos ducet, valebimus et multa bene geremus.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8112
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby Poodle » Fri Jul 14, 2017 12:53 pm

salomed wrote:
Poodle wrote:But salomed - other than distinctly uncircular punctuation marks and a couple of very wobbly horizontals, NONE of those things are there until you draw them. That's the single salient FACT that you are constantly skipping over.


So you agree that it is a "FACT" that the points that make the the triangles that encode the constants are there. We are getting somewhere.

As to why the lines themselves need to be drawn in, I assume this is because the author didn't want them to be seen publically. This is called "cryptography", crypt meaning "hidden"... though really it is closer to steganography.

I never once mentioned points. Not a single time. This is how you and your ilk operate, salomed, and it's inexcusable. Unless you really are Mrs. Stupid of Stupid Avenue, Stupidville, then not even you could honestly describe those rather amorphous blobs as points.
What am I saying? That's precisely how woo works. Are ALL of your definitions couched in such hazy, wobbly terms?

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jul 14, 2017 4:57 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Nikki: Oh. Thanks.

Well.........it would have been pretty cool if these constants had been discovered by triangle analysis before we knew them otherwise by hard old math? Are there any as yet undiscovered triangles/constants left there for our enlightenment? Einsteins Theory of Everything? The best cheesecake??

..............anything?

Well, if I make a traditional New York Cheesecake, baked in a bain marie, then unmold it from the springform pan onto a plate, I have a perfect circle. Now, using a piece of unflavored dental floss, I can slice the cheesecake into any number of right triangles, all sharing the same hypotenuse. Voilà! The gastronomical constant of pie. :mrgreen:
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
salomed
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1244
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 4:18 pm
Custom Title: Cartesian Skeptic

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby salomed » Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:04 pm

Nikki Nyx wrote:
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Nikki: Oh. Thanks.

Well.........it would have been pretty cool if these constants had been discovered by triangle analysis before we knew them otherwise by hard old math? Are there any as yet undiscovered triangles/constants left there for our enlightenment? Einsteins Theory of Everything? The best cheesecake??

..............anything?

Well, if I make a traditional New York Cheesecake, baked in a bain marie, then unmold it from the springform pan onto a plate, I have a perfect circle. Now, using a piece of unflavored dental floss, I can slice the cheesecake into any number of right triangles, all sharing the same hypotenuse. Voilà! The gastronomical constant of pie. :mrgreen:


MatthewNikki, why don't you just show Alan Green is wrong and that this is not the case:

Screen Shot 2017-07-14.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Comment savez-vous que vous ne parlez pas bollox?
Sur internet: http://bit.ly/14A0n9H

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jul 14, 2017 7:00 pm

salomed wrote:Matthew and Nikki, why don't you just show Alan Green is wrong and that this is not the case:

Screen Shot 2017-07-14.jpg

FIFY. And I've already proven to you all of the following facts:

1. A manual typesetter, in the early 17th Century, did not have the skills, tools, and materials to encrypt precise geometric figures into a page of text. Zoom in on the word "SONNETS" and note the inkblot errors, inking voids, and deformations.
ImageImage
ImageImage
And this imprecision in printing technique is demonstrably present in the relatively large letters of the word "SONNETS." Zoom into the footer text, and there are a myriad inkblot errors, inking voids, and letter deformations. The kind of precision Green is talking about simply was not possible in that era. Period.

2. Numerous right triangles can be found by drawing lines on any page of text that includes punctuation. I showed you this on a page from Thomas Paine's Common Sense (four right triangles), and on the title page of Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice (seven right triangles...and in the shape of a surreal pyramid). Redditor "KnowsAbout Math" found right triangles on the cover of Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets.

3. Green's mathematics do not produce the constants he claims they do; his solutions are all integers...NOT irrational numbers. None of the solutions in his pdf is a mathematical constant. He cannot credit anyone in 1609 with attempting to communicate, for example, pi when his solution is not actually 3.14159265359... And since pi was actually known in 1609, there's no excuse for it being approximated, if it was indeed "encrypted" into the text.

4. I posted the comment of redditor "KnowsAboutMath," who wrote a Mathematica script to determine the probabilities for the existence of right triangles created by drawing lines between twelve random points on a page (twelve being the number of distinct vertices Green used). His script found nine right triangles. It then searched for all possible pairs of side lengths, looking for ratios that represented mathematical constants...and it found 74. Green's hoax simply makes use of probabilities.

5. I showed you that I found four additional right triangles on the specific page that Green uses, triangles that he either did not find or ignored because they didn't fit into his hoax. I also showed you an additional circle.

Here's another piece of evidence for you:
Image
At the very least, the "G. Eld" is one engraved block. Since he was the printer and would be putting his name on everything he printed, it would make sense not to have to individually typeset his name for every run. Further, I can tell by the orientation and layout of the letters that this is so. It's possible that the "By" and "for" are part of that block; all the letters of "By G. Eld for" are fairly close to the same baseline.

Here's the problem with continuing to debate this issue with you:
You are unwilling to consider any/all evidence except forum members downloading the image, drawing our own lines, measuring those lines, and doing the math. You simply discard all other evidence without actually thinking about the facts and their implications. This implies that you are not going to be dissuaded from your baseless belief, regardless of the weight of evidence that has been presented to you. Because, if you were willing to be dissuaded, you would have already integrated all the evidence that has been presented and concluded that Green is a con artist and that his Bardcode is a load of horse dung he created to make money from gullible conspiracy theorists.

Either that, or you're simply unable to integrate evidence into a coherent picture. Yet you don't seem to have a problem doing so with Green's bull-shit. So I have to conclude that you're going to continue to believe him regardless of what any of us say or do. I would bet that all of us could download the image, draw triangles until we were blue in the face, and show you that the math didn't add up...and you'd still believe. So, frankly, I'm not wasting any more time with this. Because YOU have not fulfilled your duties as the OP...YOU HAVE NOT PROVEN THAT GREEN IS CORRECT.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
salomed
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1244
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 4:18 pm
Custom Title: Cartesian Skeptic

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby salomed » Fri Jul 14, 2017 7:10 pm

Nikki Nyx wrote:You are unwilling to consider any/all evidence except forum members downloading the image, drawing our own lines, measuring those lines, and doing the math.


MatthewNikki, exactly. You have done all manner of of image editing and drawing lines, spent hours on this, and yet you still refuse to do this very simple thing, as you have for months. It supports my belief that you have some other agenda in your head-in-sand denial.

Measure the lines. Do the maths. The constants are there or they are not.
Comment savez-vous que vous ne parlez pas bollox?
Sur internet: http://bit.ly/14A0n9H

User avatar
Austin Harper
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4817
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 2:22 pm
Custom Title: Rock Chalk Astrohawk
Location: Detroit
Contact:

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby Austin Harper » Fri Jul 14, 2017 7:20 pm

salomed wrote:Measure the lines. Do the maths. The constants are there or they are not.

Emphasis mine.
Dum ratio nos ducet, valebimus et multa bene geremus.

User avatar
salomed
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1244
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 4:18 pm
Custom Title: Cartesian Skeptic

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby salomed » Fri Jul 14, 2017 7:28 pm

Austin Harper wrote:
salomed wrote:Measure the lines. Do the maths. The constants are there or they are not.

Emphasis mine.


Great Proof. Can I see your workings?

I did mine, For example:

Phi_Proof2.jpg



Green did his:

Screen Shot 2017-07-14.jpg


Where is yours?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Comment savez-vous que vous ne parlez pas bollox?
Sur internet: http://bit.ly/14A0n9H

User avatar
Austin Harper
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4817
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 2:22 pm
Custom Title: Rock Chalk Astrohawk
Location: Detroit
Contact:

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby Austin Harper » Fri Jul 14, 2017 7:44 pm

salomed wrote:
Austin Harper wrote:
salomed wrote:Measure the lines. Do the maths. The constants are there or they are not.

Emphasis mine.


Great Proof. Can I see your workings?

3.14248252 ≠ 3.14159...
QED
Dum ratio nos ducet, valebimus et multa bene geremus.

User avatar
salomed
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1244
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 4:18 pm
Custom Title: Cartesian Skeptic

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby salomed » Fri Jul 14, 2017 8:00 pm

Austin Harper wrote:
salomed wrote:
Austin Harper wrote:
salomed wrote:Measure the lines. Do the maths. The constants are there or they are not.

Emphasis mine.


Great Proof. Can I see your workings?

3.14248252 ≠ 3.14159...
QED


If you round it it does. "Ooooooo but it is irrational.... " the irony is, that retort really is irrational - it is not possible on pen and paper to fully represent an irrational number.
Comment savez-vous que vous ne parlez pas bollox?
Sur internet: http://bit.ly/14A0n9H

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jul 14, 2017 8:10 pm

salomed wrote:
Nikki Nyx wrote:You are unwilling to consider any/all evidence except forum members downloading the image, drawing our own lines, measuring those lines, and doing the math.
MatthewNikki, exactly. You have done all manner of of image editing and drawing lines, spent hours on this, and yet you still refuse to do this very simple thing, as you have for months.
Look at the righthand side of my posts and note this: Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2017 8:40 pm. I haven't been a member "for months." And I only joined in on this discussion six days ago. Enough with the sock puppet bull-shit, because you're a {!#%@} moron if you think this account was created 5½ weeks ago in order to start {!#%@} with you six days ago.

salomed wrote:Do the maths. The constants are there or they are not.
For the nth time, THE CONSTANTS ARE NOT THERE USING GREEN'S OWN {!#%@} NUMBERS.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
salomed
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1244
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 4:18 pm
Custom Title: Cartesian Skeptic

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby salomed » Fri Jul 14, 2017 8:14 pm

Nikki Nyx wrote:[Look at the righthand side of my posts and note this: Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2017 8:40 pm. I haven't been a member "for months."


And yet you know all about Ellard's writing style and posting methods... oh the intrigue!

Enough with the sock puppet bull-shit, because you're a {!#%@} moron if you think this account was created 5½ weeks ago in order to start {!#%@} with you six days ago.


Noooo! I dont at all think you created this to mess with me. How lame would that be, I have hardly posted on here in months. Today though, I am having a blast! #beatsonlinechess

THE CONSTANTS ARE NOT THERE USING GREEN'S OWN {!#%@} NUMBERS


Explain this. They clearly are to me. To three decimal places rounded up.
Comment savez-vous que vous ne parlez pas bollox?
Sur internet: http://bit.ly/14A0n9H

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8112
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby Poodle » Fri Jul 14, 2017 8:31 pm

I think you've annoyed her, salomed.
Tsk, tsk.
Allow me to explain instead. You see the constants because you want to, and you see them in a non-existent construction. And because you're a fantasist. And because you cannot think for yourself. And because it suits your fairy-story temperament.
Am I getting warm?

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jul 14, 2017 9:19 pm

salomed wrote:
Nikki Nyx wrote:[Look at the righthand side of my posts and note this: Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2017 8:40 pm. I haven't been a member "for months."
And yet you know all about Ellard's writing style and posting methods... oh the intrigue!
Yes, because I've been in this forum every day since I joined for hours at a time. I'm not gorgeous either, but I can tell you she uses neither capital letters nor punctuation; she separates her sentences and phrases with ellipses. I'm not Gord, but I can tell you that he will correct your abysmal spelling if I don't beat him to it. Nor am I bobbo..........who habitually uses..........really long ellipses. Do you stop to think before you post?

salomed wrote:
Nikki Nyx wrote:Enough with the sock puppet bull-shit, because you're a {!#%@} moron if you think this account was created 5½ weeks ago in order to start {!#%@} with you six days ago.
Noooo! I dont at all think you created this to mess with me. How lame would that be, I have hardly posted on here in months. Today though, I am having a blast! #beatsonlinechess
How lame would it be for Matthew to have a double account when he's clearly winning his debate with you using only one? Also, I've been posting since 1030 UTC-4 today...are you making the ridiculous claim that Matthew stayed up all night in Australia just to annoy you? LOL

salomed wrote:
Nikki Nyx wrote:THE CONSTANTS ARE NOT THERE USING GREEN'S OWN {!#%@} NUMBERS
Explain this. They clearly are to me. To three decimal places rounded up.
Those are not the constants. If the constants were intended to be there, if someone in 1609 had discovered unknown constants and deliberately meant to communicate them, they would not be "rounded up." Such sloppy mathematics would be completely useless to anyone who managed to "decode" them.

Even if the person receiving the blank page managed—with absolutely no clues to follow...remember, there are NO clues that this claimed "encryption" even exists on the page—to draw the triangles in exactly the same places that Green did, it would not help him, because he would not be able to deduce the actual value of pi from 3.14248. Or the actual value of e from 2.71813. In fact, he would not be able to deduce a single one of these mathematical constants, or grasp the importance of them in any way, because you cannot represent an irrational number this way. So, he would end up with a bunch of rational numbers, none of which is a mathematical constant. WHAT WOULD BE THE POINT? NOTHING OF VALUE WOULD HAVE BEEN COMMUNICATED.

This whole thing is a hoax, and Green is a con artist. That you cannot integrate the evidence herein and grasp this obvious conclusion is staggering.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
salomed
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1244
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 4:18 pm
Custom Title: Cartesian Skeptic

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby salomed » Fri Jul 14, 2017 9:40 pm

Nikki Nyx wrote: if someone in 1609 had discovered unknown constants and deliberately meant to communicate them, they would not be "rounded up." Such sloppy mathematics would be completely useless to anyone who managed to "decode" them.


Then how would it be done without rounding up? These constants go on infinitely. Please explain this to me. You, MatthewNikki, go on and on about this, in stereo or mono, being important, exactly the same argument, explain the counterfactual: How would it be done, on a small printed page, representing, say, Pi, without rounding up?

This whole thing is a hoax, and Green is a con artist.


If you are not Ellard, you use his same slanderous tone. And you just cannot prove it is a hoax, because it is not. The constants are there. Your whole, desperate, tag-team little attack has reduced to 0.5 not rounding up to 1.0.
Comment savez-vous que vous ne parlez pas bollox?
Sur internet: http://bit.ly/14A0n9H

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19634
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby scrmbldggs » Fri Jul 14, 2017 9:56 pm

Nikki, I recall you mentioned this. More specifically the "mystery" of the three numbers with periods. I had been leaning towards thinking that the "9." in "1609." might have been a small block, since it's fairly identical on both versions posted here. That "three number incident" seems to hint at that they made numbers with and without periods. And probably used what they had handy to set their types. (And the "9." looks very much like the one used on the page(s) in question.)
Hi, Io the lurker.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jul 14, 2017 11:02 pm

salomed wrote:
Nikki Nyx wrote: if someone in 1609 had discovered unknown constants and deliberately meant to communicate them, they would not be "rounded up." Such sloppy mathematics would be completely useless to anyone who managed to "decode" them.
Then how would it be done without rounding up? These constants go on infinitely. Please explain this to me. You, MatthewNikki, go on and on about this, in stereo or mono, being important, exactly the same argument, explain the counterfactual: How would it be done, on a small printed page, representing, say, Pi, without rounding up?
I will be happy to explain it to you after you answer me. Please do not post the link to Green's video yet again; I would like your answers. But I would like you to take some time with my questions and think about them logically. I have taken a great deal of time in providing you with my evidence; please do me the same courtesy.

1. By what method were people notified that mathematic constants were encrypted into a secondary run of the title page of Shakespeare's sonnets? Is there a clue on the title page itself? Are there clues in the sonnets? How would people know that they were supposed to draw a circle and a bunch of right triangles on the title page?

2. Where, exactly, are the instructions for drawing the triangles and the circle? Given that they must be drawn with some precision, and that the vertices of different triangles are at different points on the same punctuation mark, and given that most of the mathematic constants Green claims are encrypted were unknown by people of that era, how would anyone know they'd drawn the triangles correctly?

3. Even if they did manage to draw the triangles correctly, and ended up with the exact same solutions that Green did, of what use would those "approximations" be, since they are not the actual mathematic constants? How would the solver deduce the constant (the irrational number...never terminating, never repeating) from the sloppy approximation?

4. Given that mathematic concepts were discussed openly in that era and location, why would anyone both to conceal mathematic ideas? Especially ideas that were, by design, incomplete (because you cannot represent an irrational number in this manner) and, therefore, useless?

5. Presuming that this so-called encryption was not meant for people of that era, but for others in the future, how would anyone know they'd drawn the triangles correctly unless they knew ahead of time which mathematic constants to approximate?

salomed wrote:
Nikki Nyx wrote:This whole thing is a hoax, and Green is a con artist.
If you are not Ellard, you use his same slanderous tone.
I have said nothing false or malicious. The available evidence proves this Bardcode to be a hoax, therefore Green is a con artist.

salomed wrote:And you just cannot prove it is a hoax, because it is not.
I understand that you want it to be true. Emotionally, the thrill of discovery is heady and addictive, even when it's not your discovery, but you are merely sharing in it. The disappointment of being proven wrong (as well as gullible) would be horribly depressing. I really do get it, Salomed. But you're allowing your emotions to cloud your ability to think critically.

salomed wrote:The constants are there. Your whole, desperate, tag-team little attack has reduced to 0.5 not rounding up to 1.0.
The constants are not there; you cannot "round up" an irrational number and call it a day. Further, I have presented several other lines of argument to you, along with evidence. You have chosen to ignore the facts in favor of your faith in a pseudo-mystery. And you are taking this far too personally, as if by attacking Green and his charade, I'm indulging in ad hominem attack toward you, and that is demonstrably not the case.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26362
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

More Evidence of Salomed's forgeries

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sat Jul 15, 2017 12:34 am

salomed yesterday wrote:I did not do any maths overlaying. All of the maths work I did was on the wikipedia page.
salomed on 27MARCH 2017 wrote: I have taken the image from your link and have superimposed it in GIMP onto the one from the British Library. You can do this yourself in a few minutes. I have moved the top few pixels in the Y+ so you can see how perfectly the points align.
Salomed forged photo.jpg

viewtopic.php?f=80&t=27941&start=40#p567602


You are directly lying again You claimed in March, to have overlaid your manipulated JPEG image over the real Sonnets page at the Bristish Library. You claimed they were exact matches and even forged an image to show your "overlay" and "superimposition" :lol:

Salomed is leaving the forum
salomed yesterday wrote:Show me where I did maths overlaying on that image and I will leave the forum,
Here is your forged "superimposed" image of your manipulated JPEG "William Aspley" image and the British Library image (which you didn't notice, said "John Wright")
viewtopic.php?f=80&t=27941&start=40#p567602

This is a direct forgery and you specifically state next to the image it is a superimposition using the image from the "British Library" , when it was not.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26362
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Salomed is leaving the forum

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sat Jul 15, 2017 12:39 am

salomed yesterday wrote:Show me where I did maths overlaying on that image and I will leave the forum,

Does everyone agree Salomed is lying, forged an overlay image and should leave the forum as he agreed to do? (click thanks button)

Does anyone here disagree and would like to make a counter argument is support of Salomed's forgery? (set out your argument) .

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26362
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Do these four coloured lines represent four key constants?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sat Jul 15, 2017 12:58 am

Austin Harper wrote:GUYS. I just made a huge discovery. If you take all of the letters in Shakespeare's sonnets and re-arrange them, you get the entire Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution. How is this possible?

Hi Austin.

In March 2017 I posted your name, Pyrrho's name and some other candidates, as a potential debate moderator, for a formal debate between myself and Salomed, concerning he and his partner, Alan Green's spammed Shakespeare claims. (It would have been in the Zeuzzz debate format.)


I withdrew this offer when it became clear that Salomed was using his and Alan Green's forged images and posting them here. I have hard evidence for all their different forgeries.

In essence, Alan Green and Salomed are attempting to create a viral campaign for their two unreleased Shakespeare books. Alan Green is also posting on our forum, using the name "Barcode". Alan is letting Salomed do the talking.
http://www.tobeornottobe.org/books

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26362
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Salomed is leaving the forum

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sat Jul 15, 2017 1:19 am

salomed wrote:MatthewNikki,
Pyrrho the moderator sees our server addresses, our locations and other things. That's how he knows when to ban sock-puppets. Didn't you know? :lol:

Pyrrho closed down your last attempt at a viral campaign for a "woo" book remember?
:lol:


Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest