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: 1247
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 4:18 pm
Custom Title: Cartesian Skeptic

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

Postby salomed » Mon Mar 27, 2017 12:35 pm

Poodle wrote:OK Cloth-Ears. Leesten vary carfully. I shall say zis ernly wernce (more).
It doesn't matter a toadstool's testicle that you can examine both versions and discover precise correlations. The fact is that you can also examine them and find differences brought about by ink viscosity, the way the paper was pulled from the plate, the humidity of the paper used and, probably, whether or not any of the people involved had a hangover. THERE ARE DIFFERENCES and that cannot be denied even by the most optimistic of dreamers such as yourself. As there are differences (please do not return to your mewling "but not where it's important" BS) then it is glaringly obvious that the printer did not have the degree of control of the final image demanded by your fantasy. Any of the prints could differ in many, many ways and there was no way for an acolyte of some arcane but stupid mathematical society to know where the differences lay in any particular print. Accuracy could not be guaranteed - the very accuracy upon which your fairy tale stands or falls. Even such a simple thing as a full stop could smear, run, overload with ink, warp or even disappear. The reader would, in most cases, have no way of knowing precisely where this had happened.
No one but a complete lunatic would have attempted to convey information so dependant upon accuracy in such a loose, undependable and expensive way given that it would have been easier to a) write it down in plain English b) declaim it over a pint at the local hostelry c) produce a play about it or d) simply stand on a street corner and tell the entire world.
A conspiracy is worthwhile only if there is a perceived reason to be conspiratorial. In Elizabethan England there was no such reason to hide mathematical discoveries. Your insistence is based not only upon muddy thinking, but several layers of muddy thinking from which you show no signs of escaping. So just remember - you have now been shown incontrovertible evidence that prints differed and you can, therefore, not claim any level of accuracy consistent across a range of such prints.Your


argument has fallen - it is no longer viable. It is over.

Why, then, do I know what your next post will claim?



The points align. The constants are there.
Comment savez-vous que vous ne parlez pas bollox?
Sur internet: http://bit.ly/14A0n9H

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9584
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 » Mon Mar 27, 2017 1:13 pm

Well, well! Clairvoyance is real after all.
I am the new Nostradingbat.

User avatar
salomed
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1247
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 4:18 pm
Custom Title: Cartesian Skeptic

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

Postby salomed » Mon Mar 27, 2017 3:08 pm

Poodle wrote:Well, well! Clairvoyance is real after all.
I am the new Nostradingbat.


Tell me this: Why is Brun's constant not the result of dividing the long yellow line by the short yellow line?
Comment savez-vous que vous ne parlez pas bollox?
Sur internet: http://bit.ly/14A0n9H

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9584
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 » Mon Mar 27, 2017 4:01 pm

Considering that Brun's constant has never (and is never likely to be) anything other than an estimate (that estimate already having many more digits than could possibly be defined in an imaginary construction atop a crudely-printed page), then I have to say that I cannot know. Nor can you. Nor could Brun, if he was still around. Your yellow lines could provide a ratio similar to a crude approximation of Brun's constant but, as Brun's Theorem was not proved until 1919 and Brun wasn't around when Shakespeare was merrily rhyming ...
Well, you can see where this is going. On the other hand, if you provided the absolutely definitive number of twin primes, we'd then know how lengthy Brun's constant is and could then discuss the possibility of anyone knowing about it over 250 years before Brun was born. When you've come up with that value, we can talk about this again.




Oh dear - reminder to self to type less quickly ... therefore edited.
Last edited by Poodle on Mon Mar 27, 2017 4:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Anomaly
Poster
Posts: 119
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 5:11 pm

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

Postby Anomaly » Mon Mar 27, 2017 4:07 pm

salomed wrote:
The points align.


Image

I wonder what this means...

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28536
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Salomed is a liar / Hard evidence.

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Mar 27, 2017 11:26 pm

salomed to Poodle 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.
The original first edition printed page. at the British Library, does not match that image and has different wording. You are a liar.

Here is your forged image that you claimed was a perfect match, that you superimposed on the original first edition.
sonnets more_prood_sml (1).jpg


Here is the original at the British Library.
First-edition-of-Shakespeares sonnets.jpg


They are totally different documents and do not match at all.

salomed to Poodle wrote:I have not cheated.
You have. yet again, been caught cheating and lying. In fact, by not bothering to even look at the original at the British Library, as you fraudulently claimed, your other fraud has been exposed. Would you like to know what that other fraud is? :lol:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28536
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

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

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Mar 27, 2017 11:33 pm

salomed wrote: The points align. The constants are there.
They don't align at all. You still haven't actually looked at the original document at the British Library have you? You are simply lying again.

Vultures.jpg


Shall we move onto your next forgery and fraudulent claim? ( Hint : It has something to do with the "wordy bits" on the British Library's webpage concerning printing the Sonnets........that you have never read) :lol:

Note to my fellow skeptics
Like Gorgeous, Genaro, Placid and Sandisk, the people who spam "woo" on our forum will simply lie to promote their own "woo" agendas. The trick is to keep them talking because their low IQs can't keep all their lies working together. Also like Gorgeous, Genaro, Placid and Sandisk, Salomed will now repeat his first ridiculous claim again and again and again and ignore any evidence they are lying.

Salomed started this new thread to hide his previous claim the magic geometric shapes were magically encoded into the Sonnets. No such code exists at all and Salomed refuses to say what the magic code is.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28536
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

More lies from Salomed.

Postby Matthew Ellard » Mon Mar 27, 2017 11:50 pm

Poodle wrote:Considering that Brun's constant .....having many more digits than could possibly be defined in an imaginary construction atop a crudely-printed page
You got it. Salomed is lying and claiming a unknown type setter at George Eld's Fleet Lane print shop, on one late 1609 edition of the Sonnets, magically used a full stop, which is one 130th of the width of the page (defined by type blocks fitting into the type frame) to define 1.902160583104. This is clearly bull-shit. :lol:

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28536
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Even more lies from Salomed.

Postby Matthew Ellard » Tue Mar 28, 2017 12:01 am

salomed wrote: I have moved the top layer a few pixels in the Y+ so you can see how perfectly the points align.


Really? :lol:
Even though you never looked at the original, never superimposed anything and are lying, you have another problem. Tell me exactly how you rotated your forged JPEG image onto the British Library's original? ( I suggest you look at the British Library's original document for the first time. Skeptics call this "basic research")
:D

User avatar
salomed
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1247
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 4:18 pm
Custom Title: Cartesian Skeptic

Re: Even more lies from Salomed.

Postby salomed » Tue Mar 28, 2017 9:13 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:Tell me exactly how you rotated your forged JPEG image onto the British Library's original? ( I suggest you look at the British Library's original document for the first time. Skeptics call this "basic research") [/color] :D


As said, it matters not what image was used if the points are there:

A contains x.
A copy of A contains x.

The points are there in the two separate images I have used and they encode the nine constants.

All of your embarrassing insulting and slander does not change this. It does not change the facts, it just makes you look... meh... you know...

Change things Matthew! Don't just shout and insult. Do the maths!

What would change it is you measuring the lines and doing the math. Then you will know, in moments , if the images encode the constants.

They do.

You have not done the measurements because you know they encode the constants.
Comment savez-vous que vous ne parlez pas bollox?
Sur internet: http://bit.ly/14A0n9H

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28536
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Even more lies from Salomed.

Postby Matthew Ellard » Tue Mar 28, 2017 11:04 pm

salomed wrote: As said, it matters not what image was used if the points are there:
You are lying again. Firstly there are new locations for points on the different print run (See the new book seller's name.) Secondly you still arbitrarily ignore some dots and not others as there is no hidden code. :lol:

salomed wrote: The points are there in the two separate images I have used and they encode the nine constants.
You are lying again. The dot disappears from your manipulated JPEG image after the name of William Aspley. Didn't you notice? :lol:

salomed wrote:]... if the images encode the constants.
There are no images nor is there any secret code. The fact the dots change between the two different documents proves there is no hidden secret code. Didn't you have the brains to work that out? :lol:

You are simply terrible at lying Salomed. :D

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28536
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Moderated Debate Challenge / Salomed VS Matthew

Postby Matthew Ellard » Tue Mar 28, 2017 11:33 pm

Moderated Skeptic Society Forum Debate
As you have guessed, I kept you talking as I'm setting you up for a formal moderated debate. We have had these moderated debates before, on the forum and they work well. Here is an example of such between myself and Zeuzzz.

viewtopic.php?f=32&t=25616#p465925

Format of Moderated Debate
There will be a moderated debate thread restricted to yourself, myself and a moderator, for the formal debate. There will be a secondary non-moderated comment thread for everyone else to post their comments into.


Choose a mutually acceptable moderator.
Pyrrho may be busy but we could ask Pyrrho to moderate. Previously we used the President of a US skeptic organisation, Austin Harper and I would like to use Austin again, as the moderator. Alternatively, I could ask one of the lawyer moderators of the ISF to moderate as a special favour to me. (I'm a lawyer). Alternatively, I could ask Statistical Mechanic, a forum historian to moderate the debate. At a pinch we may ask Dr Terry, a senior historian and skeptic from the University of Exeter's history department.

Who do you choose? Who are your alternative suggestions for the debate moderator?


Duties of Moderator
1) To ensure both parties respond to all questions within one week of posting,
2) Check all historical and mathematical citations are listed in academic format
(eg MacD. P. Jackson, “Punctuation and the Compositors of Shakespeare’s Sonnets (1609),” The Library 5th series, 30 (1975): 1-24)
3) Ensure scientific and logic arguments comply with the scientific method,
4) Check how watermarks define the variance between the various printings, typesetters, compositors and page topology.
5) Bring the debate to a conclusion and make a ruling after three "rounds" or weeks.
6) Remove all insults.


Set out your claim "once and for all"
You will have to set out your hypothesis, once and for all. Currently, your claim seems to be
a) There is a secret code in the typeface printed text of all 13 existing copies of Shakespeare's Sonnets title page, printed in George Eld's Fleet Lane print shop in 1609AD
b) By following this secret code you are able to discover particular lines and geometric shapes.
c) By performing subsequent arbitrary mathematical applications, you can deduce mathematical constants exist in these shapes and lines, some that were only discovered after 1609AD.


I will present evidence. logic and argument that
a) There is no hidden code and you made up an "ever changing" code to find your 2016 preconceived result, arbitrarily missing some dots or arbitrarily joining lines between other dots and so on
b) The dots are not in exact locations to define any precise mathematical constant and never could have been as Elizabethan printed text location is defined by type blocks fitting into a wooden printer's frame in pre-defined locations. (I have many books to cite on this)
c) You deceptively replaced earlier images with new images to hide dots you arbitrarily missed.
d) You simply copied your "work" from three You-Tube video by a con-artist called Alan Green, who first made the shapes claim in a Shakespeare visual puzzle book.


Do you accept the terms of this formal moderated debate?
Salomed 2.jpg
Type frame restrictions.jpg
type frame restrictions 2.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
salomed
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1247
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 4:18 pm
Custom Title: Cartesian Skeptic

Re: Moderated Debate Challenge / Salomed VS Matthew

Postby salomed » Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:01 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:Moderated Skeptic Society Forum Debate
As you have guessed, I kept you talking as I'm setting you up for a formal moderated debate. We have had these moderated debates before, on the forum and they work well. Here is an example of such between myself and Zeuzzz.

viewtopic.php?f=32&t=25616#p465925


Let us do this! I hope in such a debate you will refrain from calling me "idiot", "turd", "Liar" etc...
Pyrrho may be busy but we could ask Pyrrho to moderate. Previously we used the President of a US skeptic organisation, Austin Harper and I would like to use Austin again, as the moderator. Alternatively, I could ask one of the lawyer moderators of the ISF to moderate as a special favour to me. (I'm a lawyer). Alternatively, I could ask Statistical Mechanic, a forum historian to moderate the debate. At a pinch we may ask Dr Terry, a senior historian and skeptic from the University of Exeter's history department.


I am happy to be moderated by whoever. I would prefer to be it face to face on Skype etc, but I know you wont do that.

Who do you choose? Who are your alternative suggestions for the debate moderator? [/color]


Really don't care. Truth is Truth.

You will have to set out your hypothesis, once and for all. Currently, your claim seems to be

a) There is a secret code in the typeface printed text of all 13 existing copies of Shakespeare's Sonnets title page, printed in George Eld's Fleet Lane print shop in 1609AD
b) By following this secret code you are able to discover particular lines and geometric shapes.
c) By performing subsequent arbitrary mathematical applications, you can deduce mathematical constants exist in these shapes and lines, some that were only discovered after 1609AD. [/color]


No, my claim is simple and just to do with the image of the Sonnet's cover Wikipedia and whether or not it contains encoded in the lines formed by the full stops four mathematical constants. I will forumulate it should the debate get started.

In response to your points:

b) The dots are not in exact locations to define any precise mathematical constant and never could have been as Elizabethan printed text location is defined by type blocks fitting into a wooden printer's frame in pre-defined locations. (I have many books to cite on this)


Then I would argue, if it is impossible for these dots to be the case it must just be an astronomical coincidence because the constants are there.

c) You deceptively replaced earlier images with new images to hide dots you arbitrarily missed.


I will ask you to show any image I have modified deceptively.

Do you accept the terms of this formal moderated debate? [/b]Salomed 2.jpgType frame restrictions.jpgtype frame restrictions 2.jpg


If you are able to talk like an adult rather than an insulting child who hasn't got his way, sure. I accept.
Comment savez-vous que vous ne parlez pas bollox?
Sur internet: http://bit.ly/14A0n9H

User avatar
OutOfBreath
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2152
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 1:38 pm
Custom Title: Persistent ponderer
Location: Norway

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

Postby OutOfBreath » Wed Mar 29, 2017 3:44 pm

:pc:
What is perceived as real becomes real in its consequences.

"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9584
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 » Wed Mar 29, 2017 5:07 pm

OutOfBreath wrote::pc:


Mind if I take the next seat?

User avatar
OutOfBreath
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2152
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 1:38 pm
Custom Title: Persistent ponderer
Location: Norway

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

Postby OutOfBreath » Wed Mar 29, 2017 9:10 pm

Poodle wrote:
OutOfBreath wrote::pc:


Mind if I take the next seat?

Not at all. Here, I'll make room. Oh and have a :gb: with your :pc: as well.

Peace
Dan
What is perceived as real becomes real in its consequences.

"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28536
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Moderated Debate Challenge / Salomed VS Matthew

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Mar 30, 2017 1:07 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:You will have to set out your hypothesis, once and for all. Currently, your claim seems to be :

a) There is a secret code in the typeface printed text of all 13 existing copies of Shakespeare's Sonnets title page, printed in George Eld's Fleet Lane print shop in 1609AD
b) By following this secret code you are able to discover particular lines and geometric shapes.
c) By performing subsequent arbitrary mathematical applications, you can deduce that mathematical constants exist in these shapes and lines, some that were only discovered after 1609AD.
salomed wrote: No, my claim is simple and just to do with the image of the Sonnet's cover and whether or not it contains encoded in the lines formed by the full stops four mathematical constants. I will forumulate it should the debate get started.v
No. You must set out your claim now, once and for all. I am not going to ask Austin Harper to moderate a debate and then have you change your claim for the debate.

Are you formally withdrawing your current claim now in lieu of replacing it with another claim for the debate?

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28536
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Moderated Debate Challenge / Salomed VS Matthew

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Mar 30, 2017 2:18 am

salomed wrote:Then I would argue, if it is impossible for these dots to be the case it must just be an astronomical coincidence because the constants are there.
salomed wrote:I will ask you to show any image I have modified deceptively.
Firstly, the full stops , change location on the William Aspley print runs compared to the John Wright print runs. We already know your current claim, that the dots form specific geometric shapes is totally bogus. Indeed many aspects change between print runs when the Quatro paper type was changed between those with the parrot water mark (Aspley) to the grape watermark (Wright). :D

Secondly there are seven full stops and four line ends on the John Wright version of the Sonnets Title page. To connect all these by line requires 66 lines.
Sonnets page 66 lines.jpg


You already had a preconceived need to find the geometric shapes that appeared in the 2012 Shakespeare visual puzzle book, "I, Shakespeare". So you simply ignored 60 lines and pretended there was a secret code that encoded some lines and "directed you" to only connect 5 dots in a particular way.
Sonnets Salomeds deception.jpg
You run away every time we ask what this secret code is that allows you to cherry pick five lines only, and where this secret code is hidden.

Thirdly, you then add another bogus level by dividing the length of those lines by others, that get you closest to a supposed mathematical constant and then deleting the 91% of lines that don't get you as close. That is called scientific fraud.

In reality, Alan Green, like you, deceptively cherry picked those lines that gave him close approximations to some particular shapes he already wanted for his 2012 puzzle book. Alan Green directly says, in the You tube video you asked us to watch, that these remaining lines are are only 96% approximate. You didn't watch your own video.

The Scientific Method
Salomed? Does the scientific method allow you to cherry pick 9% of the evidence, that matches your preconceived claims or does all the evidence lead scientists to make a better hypotheses? (Please do some basic reading on the scientific method before posting again).
:lol:

The Title page lines are on most publications by George Eld.
This will make everyone laugh. You can see two horizontal lines on the title page. Salomed and Alan Green claimed these were specifically created to detail secret geometric shapes on the Sonnets title page. In reality, as title pages have large blank areas George Eld placed the same lines on all title pages, using a metal bar block, to stop the paper resting on the print composite frame and resulting in blotches. The same lines with the same nicks and dents appear on many of George Eld's printed title pages.
:lol:
The earlier version.jpeg


(As some of you have already guessed, I got my paws on a couple books on the technical printing of the Sonnets including changes to type errors, as the print run was repeated and sometimes, mid way, during specific print runs. These changes can be seen on the 12 remaining Sonnets title pages. The UCLA copy is missing its title page. ) :D
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28536
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

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

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Mar 30, 2017 2:40 am

OutOfBreath wrote: :pc:
Poodle wrote:Mind if I take the next seat?

I will wait until Salomed makes his final "once and for all" claim. You may remember that Zeuzzz tried to change his "Stoned Ape" claim mid way through the last moderated debate, before finally running away. :D
Salomed Chicken.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
salomed
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1247
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 Mar 30, 2017 11:47 am

My claim is that encoded in at least one cover of the Sonnets are at lease five mathematical constants.

Is that formal enough?
Comment savez-vous que vous ne parlez pas bollox?
Sur internet: http://bit.ly/14A0n9H

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9584
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 Mar 30, 2017 12:42 pm

salomed wrote:My claim is that encoded in at least one cover of the Sonnets are at lease five mathematical constants.

Is that formal enough?


It may be formal but it leads to an unendable debate. Be more specific. Specify which cover so that the playing field is level and then specify a precise number of named constants so that a target is established. I would suggest that you replace "at least five" with "four". Any others can wait. I would also suggest that you add the word "intentionally" immediately before the word "encoded" as that constitutes one of the main points of your claim. Oh - and don't go for pi - any circle anywhere implies pi.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28536
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

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

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Mar 30, 2017 11:22 pm

salomed wrote:My claim is that encoded in at least one cover of the Sonnets are at lease five mathematical constants. Is that formal enough?
No, it is not encoded. What is this magic code?

Where does this magic code say "ignore some dots if they don't fit your preconceived result"?

Where does this magic code say "Fraudulently delete all 61 lines that don't fit your pre-conceived solution"?
Sonnets page 66 lines.jpg


Where does this magic code say "Divide the length of one line by another to find a constant"?

Where does this magic code say "Ignore 91% of all resulting data to pretend to obtained your pre-conceived result"


"Falsifiability" / The Scientific Method
"If a theory doesn’t make a testable prediction, it isn’t science."
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/blogs/phys ... fiability/

Falsifiability or refutability of a statement, hypothesis, or theory is the inherent possibility that it can be proven false
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability

In essence, as 91% of the results in your secret code falsify your claim, your claim is complete bull-shit. :lol:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28536
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

How Salomed's "Bad Science" works.

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Mar 30, 2017 11:35 pm

Srar field.JPG

Salomed sees a random Star field with many stars and looks only for stars that form a geometrical shape.

Star field 2.jpg

Salomed then deletes all other stars from his image.
Star field 3.jpg


Salomed then claims "Geometrical shapes are encoded into all stars and this must be more than coincidence"

This is a standard "woo technique" and "bad science" used extensively by Erik Von Daniken in Chariot of the Gods.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28536
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

How Salomed's deception works.

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Mar 30, 2017 11:48 pm

Let us see Salomed's deception in action. Here are all Eleven points on the John Wright (British library print) Sonnets title page, connected by lines according to Salomed's magical code.
Sonnets page 66 lines.jpg

Salomed then cherry picks only five lines that are closest to the result he wants to acheive and Salomed then deletes all other lines that FALISIFY his magic code hypothesis.
Sonnets Salomeds deception.jpg


Additional Deception by Salomed
The lowest dot in Salomed's deceptive attempt to hide all negative evidence, has moved between different print runs for Aspley and Wright meaning the above diagram is total bull-shit anyway. That's why Salomed has removed the name from his deceptive diagram.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28536
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Salomed to Define his claim "Once and for all"

Postby Matthew Ellard » Thu Mar 30, 2017 11:58 pm

salomed wrote:My claim is that encoded in at least one cover of the Sonnets are at lease five mathematical constants. Is that formal enough?
No. As you claim there is a secret code that you have applied to the title page.
Where is this secret code? Define it!
:lol:
Salomed chicken 3.jpeg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
salomed
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1247
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 Mar 31, 2017 6:15 am

Poodle wrote:
salomed wrote:My claim is that encoded in at least one cover of the Sonnets are at lease five mathematical constants.

Is that formal enough?


It may be formal but it leads to an unendable debate. Be more specific. Specify which cover so that the playing field is level and then specify a precise number of named constants so that a target is established. I would suggest that you replace "at least five" with "four". Any others can wait. I would also suggest that you add the word "intentionally" immediately before the word "encoded" as that constitutes one of the main points of your claim. Oh - and don't go for pi - any circle anywhere implies pi.


OK, I will try again:

My claim is that in this cover:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakespea ... lepage.jpg

There is a straight line,B1, between the dot after "imprinted" and the rightmost end of the lower horizontal line.
There is a straight line,B2, between the rightmost end of the lower horizontal line and the full stop after the large "G".
There is a straight line,B3, between the dot after "imprinted" and the dot after "1609".
There is a straight line,B4, between the dot after "1609" and the full stop after the large "G".


Claim One is that the length of B2 divided by the length of B1 gives Brun's constant:1.902
Claim Two is that the length of B3 divided by the length of B4 gives Phi: 1.618

That is all my claims are. Happy to fine tune them.
Comment savez-vous que vous ne parlez pas bollox?
Sur internet: http://bit.ly/14A0n9H

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9584
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 Mar 31, 2017 8:17 am

Oh well - this will be one of the shortest debates in history.

User avatar
salomed
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1247
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 Mar 31, 2017 2:56 pm

Poodle wrote:Oh well - this will be one of the shortest debates in history.


Because the two constants are there:)
Comment savez-vous que vous ne parlez pas bollox?
Sur internet: http://bit.ly/14A0n9H

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9584
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 Mar 31, 2017 3:35 pm

Salomed, I have to ask - what is your native language? Genuine question.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28536
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Salomed's New Claim / Debunked in seconds

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sat Apr 01, 2017 12:58 am

salomed wrote: My claim is that :

JPEG image, on Internet, of Sonnets Title page with upside-down Parrot watermark / Second print run for bookseller William Aspley, with a relocated full stop.

There is a straight line,B1, between the dot after "imprinted" and the rightmost end of the lower horizontal line.
There is a straight line,B2, between the rightmost end of the lower horizontal line and the full stop after the large "G".
There is a straight line,B3, between the dot after "imprinted" and the dot after "1609".
There is a straight line,B4, between the dot after "1609" and the full stop after the large "G".


Well that was easy. There is no straight line in any of those locations. Just look. There's nothing there. :lol:

You are really saying is that a person, today, can themselves, choose to draw a straight line between any full stop, any line end, any particular letter, corners of the page, or whatever they want, etc etc and then by measuring the length of those thousands of different lines and dividing some by others, by mere coincidence some will be close approximations to other known maths ratios. toothpick lengths, prime numbers, phone numbers of politicians, "666" and Shakespeare's birthday, Marlowe's birthday and so on.

salomed wrote: So it is just a coincidence and not encoded.
That's right Salomed. It is merely a coincidence and not magically encoded by anyone.

You may now leave and return to the David Icke forum. :lol:

User avatar
salomed
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1247
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 4:18 pm
Custom Title: Cartesian Skeptic

Re: Salomed's New Claim / Debunked in seconds

Postby salomed » Sat Apr 01, 2017 6:43 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
salomed wrote: My claim is that :

JPEG image, on Internet, of Sonnets Title page with upside-down Parrot watermark / Second print run for bookseller William Aspley, with a relocated full stop.

There is a straight line,B1, between the dot after "imprinted" and the rightmost end of the lower horizontal line.
There is a straight line,B2, between the rightmost end of the lower horizontal line and the full stop after the large "G".
There is a straight line,B3, between the dot after "imprinted" and the dot after "1609".
There is a straight line,B4, between the dot after "1609" and the full stop after the large "G".


Well that was easy. There is no straight line in any of those locations. Just look. There's nothing there. :lol:

You are really saying is that a person, today, can themselves, choose to draw a straight line between any full stop, any line end, any particular letter, corners of the page, or whatever they want, etc etc and then by measuring the length of those thousands of different lines and dividing some by others, by mere coincidence some will be close approximations to other known maths ratios. toothpick lengths, prime numbers, phone numbers of politicians, "666" and Shakespeare's birthday, Marlowe's birthday and so on.

salomed wrote: So it is just a coincidence and not encoded.
That's right Salomed. It is merely a coincidence and not magically encoded by anyone.

You may now leave and return to the David Icke forum. :lol:


The straight lines are between the dots, you know this, you just know you can't really take it to debate. You really have tried every trick in the book.

I have stated my claim as you asked, now let us debate it.
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

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28536
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Salomed's New Claim / Debunked in seconds

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sat Apr 01, 2017 7:26 am

salomed wrote:The straight lines are between the dots, you know this.
No Salomed there are no straight lines between any of the full stops, on Shakespeare's Sonnets Title page. Nor are their invisible circles, triangles, oblongs, pictures of ponies or anything other than the printed text.

You drew those lines in in 2016. Are you claiming your own imaginary lines, drawn in by you, in 2016 AD, to obtain a pre-determined solution, are evidence of a 1609 AD secret code? Are you really that stupid?
:D
Sonnets titlepage.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28536
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Salomed's New Claim / Debunked in seconds

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sat Apr 01, 2017 7:32 am

salomed wrote:I have stated my claim as you asked, now let us debate it.
Just to stop you wriggling out of your own claim.... Are you saying the magical lines you drew in 2016 were intentionally encoded in 1609AD or appear by mere coincidence? :P

State this in your claim.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9584
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 » Sat Apr 01, 2017 10:02 am

Your present statement, salomed, is missing a couple of the wilder things you actually claimed. But never mind. What's left isn't worth setting up a formal debate as it's so laughable. As Matthew keeps telling you, there are only two lines evident on the frontispiece - the horizontal ones which can be plainly seen. All of your remaining claims (as you appear now to be running away from intention as fast as you can) are based upon non-existent lines made by joining selected dots. Here, then ...
Q. Is it possible to draw a straight line between any two dots on a plane? YES.
Q. Does that mean the line was intended to be deduced? NO.
That's it - end of story, end of debate ...
... unless, of course, you reintroduce intention to your claim. Without that intention, this is fairy dust.

EDIT: Here's a thought. Why don't you move on to the Hubble Deep Field image? Lots and lots of dots to join together and an altogether better agent (a god, no less!) to provide intention and mystical reasoning. I think it pretty safe to state that you'll find even more constants encoded in triangles there.

User avatar
salomed
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1247
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 4:18 pm
Custom Title: Cartesian Skeptic

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

Postby salomed » Sat Apr 01, 2017 5:26 pm

Poodle wrote:Your present statement, salomed, is missing a couple of the wilder things you actually claimed. But never mind. What's left isn't worth setting up a formal debate as it's so laughable. As Matthew keeps telling you, there are only two lines evident on the frontispiece - the horizontal ones which can be plainly seen. All of your remaining claims (as you appear now to be running away from intention as fast as you can) are based upon non-existent lines made by joining selected dots. Here, then ...
Q. Is it possible to draw a straight line between any two dots on a plane? YES.
Q. Does that mean the line was intended to be deduced? NO.
That's it - end of story, end of debate ...
... unless, of course, you reintroduce intention to your claim. Without that intention, this is fairy dust.

EDIT: Here's a thought. Why don't you move on to the Hubble Deep Field image? Lots and lots of dots to join together and an altogether better agent (a god, no less!) to provide intention and mystical reasoning. I think it pretty safe to state that you'll find even more constants encoded in triangles there.


I think you are very mistaken and I am not interested in changing your opinion.

I now want a proper debate.
Comment savez-vous que vous ne parlez pas bollox?
Sur internet: http://bit.ly/14A0n9H

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9584
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 » Sat Apr 01, 2017 5:47 pm

Be it on your own head - but don't say I didn't warn you. Do remember that if the debate is set up, it will be just you and Matthew plus a referee, as it were, who will take no part in the actual debate but will certainly keep it right on track. You have presented your claim and you are now insisting upon its wording - as a result your argument is going to be demolished within a single response. That will not be worthwhile. Please reconsider your statement - at least make it interesting for everyone.

User avatar
Angel
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1536
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 6:23 pm
Custom Title: LOVE

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

Postby Angel » Sat Apr 01, 2017 6:00 pm

salomed wrote:
Angel wrote:Constant?
Con a string of ants
Your line isn't even a line.
It's a line of pixels ~ broken. Lol


Could you take my image and show me where the line breaks?
Where the points don't align?
Where dividing the long line by the short line, in any of the colored lines below, does not yield a mathematical constant?

If you can, you should be able to easily - and without confusion. You should be able to show the number of pixels between one point and another. And do this twice. And show that the divisor of any of those pixel values is not a special number. Easy peasy.

Will you give that a go?

Do_these_4_lines_represent_4_constants_sml.jpg


It's in the program.
You go count dots lol
Final Warning *bell rings*
Next step ~ names ~ addresses ~ ID's
They will know you
as I am known. I 4 a I lol
Has A Nice Day :lol: <3

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28536
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Defining Salomed's claim

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Apr 02, 2017 2:43 am

salomed wrote: I now want a proper debate.
You are going to get exactly that. I am waiting for you to make an unambiguous claim.

I have replaced your approximations of the constants with their accurate values
I have added the word deliberately, to your claim these constants are encoded.



Salomed's Debate claim
There is an existing Sonnets Title page from 1609 AD, that replaces John Wright with William Aspley as the book seller, and that has the inverted parrot watermark (Aspley's own mark).

On this document, a person can draw a straight line between the dot after "imprinted" and the rightmost end of the lower horizontal line and then draw another straight line between the rightmost end of the lower horizontal line and the full stop after the large "G". The length of the second line divided by the length of first line gives Brun's constant:
Brun's Constant is 1.902160583104

A person can then draw a straight line between the dot after "imprinted" and the dot after "1609". and then draw a straight line between the dot after "1609" and the full stop after the large "G". The length of the second line divided by the length of first line gives Phi:
Phi is 1.6180339887498948482

These two constants were deliberately encoded in this particular title page by an unknown person in George Eld's print-shop in 1609AD.


Is this your claim for the debate?

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28536
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

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

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun Apr 02, 2017 3:04 am

Poodle wrote:Be it on your own head - but don't say I didn't warn you. .
Here is another fun matter. Salomed only found out a week ago that the Sonnets page changed as different book sellers were engaged by Thomas Thorpe. Salomed's main magic line goes to the dot at the end of 1609, which was relocated on the print run for William Aspley.

However the other dots location remain constant on the Wright and Aspley versions, Therefore

Salomed is saying that there were no magic constants in the Sonnets except for one page, when one dot was moved up one level of type size by a compositor for the William Aspley print run.....and magically the constants appeared.

That means the first compositor of the Wright version did not encode anything and the second compositor simply moved one dot and could not change the locations of the other existing dots. That means nothing was "encoded" at all.

Sonnets William Aspley.jpg
Sonnets John Wright version.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
salomed
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1247
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 4:18 pm
Custom Title: Cartesian Skeptic

Re: Defining Salomed's claim

Postby salomed » Sun Apr 02, 2017 7:36 am

Salomed's Debate claim

There is an existing Sonnets Title page from 1609 AD, that replaces John Wright with William Aspley as the book seller, and that has the inverted parrot watermark (Aspley's own mark).


Is that the one on the Wikipedia Page? That is the one I am referring to.


On this document, a person can draw a straight line between the dot after "imprinted" and the rightmost end of the lower horizontal line and then draw another straight line between the rightmost end of the lower horizontal line and the full stop after the large "G". The length of the second line divided by the length of first line gives Brun's constant:
Brun's Constant is 1.902160583104

A person can then draw a straight line between the dot after "imprinted" and the dot after "1609". and then draw a straight line between the dot after "1609" and the full stop after the large "G". The length of the second line divided by the length of first line gives Phi:
Phi is 1.6180339887498948482


I am happy with the above.

We will need to agree on a level of precision/decimal places.
We will need to agree on what constitutes a straight line connection between two points. I propose the rule:

If a line no thicker than the smallest dot crosses the edge of the two dots that is a straight line connection.

These two constants were deliberately encoded in this particular title page by an unknown person in George Eld's print-shop in 1609AD.


I am not happy with the above line as:

1) I do not know it is deliberate, it could be a coincidence.
2) I do not know where it was done if it was done. It might be that someone hoaxed the Wiki page in 2005.

So that line needs to go or you need to convince me why it is important.


[color=#000080]Is this your claim for the debate?


We are getting there. Do you think it is work debating the presence of the other constants at this stage?
Comment savez-vous que vous ne parlez pas bollox?
Sur internet: http://bit.ly/14A0n9H


Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests