Mark Lester
@markclester.bsky.social
Obnoxious conspiracy theorist.
Was VVilliam Shake-speare really an aspiring working middle class provincial grammar school boy ?
#edward-de-vere was #shakespeare
https://youtu.be/P3_855JUFaI
Was VVilliam Shake-speare really an aspiring working middle class provincial grammar school boy ?
#edward-de-vere was #shakespeare
https://youtu.be/P3_855JUFaI
Yes I can, there are literally millions and thousands of amusing ones.
You've never even played a proper game of chess, let alone competitively. You have no clue what you are dealing with.
I just beat you so badly and it still hasn't dawned on you what a factorial is and why it really does matter
You've never even played a proper game of chess, let alone competitively. You have no clue what you are dealing with.
I just beat you so badly and it still hasn't dawned on you what a factorial is and why it really does matter
June 3, 2025 at 1:16 AM
Yes I can, there are literally millions and thousands of amusing ones.
You've never even played a proper game of chess, let alone competitively. You have no clue what you are dealing with.
I just beat you so badly and it still hasn't dawned on you what a factorial is and why it really does matter
You've never even played a proper game of chess, let alone competitively. You have no clue what you are dealing with.
I just beat you so badly and it still hasn't dawned on you what a factorial is and why it really does matter
I just solved a 160 char anagram incorporating an outrageous amount of data and your response is another anagram.
So if I retrieve a different meaning, I'll produce thousands, what then ?
Remember when you sloped out of maths lessons feeling stupid. Rekindle that feeling.
So if I retrieve a different meaning, I'll produce thousands, what then ?
Remember when you sloped out of maths lessons feeling stupid. Rekindle that feeling.
June 3, 2025 at 1:11 AM
I just solved a 160 char anagram incorporating an outrageous amount of data and your response is another anagram.
So if I retrieve a different meaning, I'll produce thousands, what then ?
Remember when you sloped out of maths lessons feeling stupid. Rekindle that feeling.
So if I retrieve a different meaning, I'll produce thousands, what then ?
Remember when you sloped out of maths lessons feeling stupid. Rekindle that feeling.
No he didn't. You dont understand sums do you.
I've incorporated the Whigs, Abbey, Dee, and four Vere homonyms.
It's bollocks of course, you can do this with ANY 160 chat text.
Go on, stick "factorial of 160" in, DO IT.
This emotional mush you call logic destroys anything you might stumble into.
I've incorporated the Whigs, Abbey, Dee, and four Vere homonyms.
It's bollocks of course, you can do this with ANY 160 chat text.
Go on, stick "factorial of 160" in, DO IT.
This emotional mush you call logic destroys anything you might stumble into.
June 3, 2025 at 12:59 AM
No he didn't. You dont understand sums do you.
I've incorporated the Whigs, Abbey, Dee, and four Vere homonyms.
It's bollocks of course, you can do this with ANY 160 chat text.
Go on, stick "factorial of 160" in, DO IT.
This emotional mush you call logic destroys anything you might stumble into.
I've incorporated the Whigs, Abbey, Dee, and four Vere homonyms.
It's bollocks of course, you can do this with ANY 160 chat text.
Go on, stick "factorial of 160" in, DO IT.
This emotional mush you call logic destroys anything you might stumble into.
How thick are you exactly. I have just publicly disemboweled you and you haven't even noticed.
Your "ciphers" are humiliatingly stupid. No intelligence officer told his wife "that a cipher" it's utterly ridiculous.
Your "ciphers" are humiliatingly stupid. No intelligence officer told his wife "that a cipher" it's utterly ridiculous.
June 3, 2025 at 12:22 AM
How thick are you exactly. I have just publicly disemboweled you and you haven't even noticed.
Your "ciphers" are humiliatingly stupid. No intelligence officer told his wife "that a cipher" it's utterly ridiculous.
Your "ciphers" are humiliatingly stupid. No intelligence officer told his wife "that a cipher" it's utterly ridiculous.
I can do this for any person, relating to any event, using ANY text of over 160 or so chars,l in the entire British Library, notwithstanding X and Q if you want a guarantee.
All your "ciphers" are humiliating.
What you are doing is screwing this aspect of the subject up by burying it in rubbish.
All your "ciphers" are humiliating.
What you are doing is screwing this aspect of the subject up by burying it in rubbish.
June 2, 2025 at 4:53 PM
I can do this for any person, relating to any event, using ANY text of over 160 or so chars,l in the entire British Library, notwithstanding X and Q if you want a guarantee.
All your "ciphers" are humiliating.
What you are doing is screwing this aspect of the subject up by burying it in rubbish.
All your "ciphers" are humiliating.
What you are doing is screwing this aspect of the subject up by burying it in rubbish.
So while only a tiny percentage of these permutations are going to be even vaguely useable, we have a number so big there are many trillions of trillions of things to find.
This is why it was so easy.
I have included the Abbey, Dee, Fourth T, double V.
Yours is crap in comparison.
This is why it was so easy.
I have included the Abbey, Dee, Fourth T, double V.
Yours is crap in comparison.
June 2, 2025 at 4:45 PM
So while only a tiny percentage of these permutations are going to be even vaguely useable, we have a number so big there are many trillions of trillions of things to find.
This is why it was so easy.
I have included the Abbey, Dee, Fourth T, double V.
Yours is crap in comparison.
This is why it was so easy.
I have included the Abbey, Dee, Fourth T, double V.
Yours is crap in comparison.
You do not understand what N! means or that it requires respect. You cannot let N get out of control. N greater than 10 and we are in the numbers. N=50 and "en factorial" is greater than the number of fundamental particles in the universe.
Your anagrams permutations are about N!/7^N
Your anagrams permutations are about N!/7^N
June 2, 2025 at 4:42 PM
You do not understand what N! means or that it requires respect. You cannot let N get out of control. N greater than 10 and we are in the numbers. N=50 and "en factorial" is greater than the number of fundamental particles in the universe.
Your anagrams permutations are about N!/7^N
Your anagrams permutations are about N!/7^N
It's a process not something I can call a program which is what I spent the day playing with.
I now need to explain to you the error of your ways and why you are not just screwing over anyone trying to do the puzzles, you are actually buggering up your own candidates case
I now need to explain to you the error of your ways and why you are not just screwing over anyone trying to do the puzzles, you are actually buggering up your own candidates case
June 2, 2025 at 4:37 PM
It's a process not something I can call a program which is what I spent the day playing with.
I now need to explain to you the error of your ways and why you are not just screwing over anyone trying to do the puzzles, you are actually buggering up your own candidates case
I now need to explain to you the error of your ways and why you are not just screwing over anyone trying to do the puzzles, you are actually buggering up your own candidates case
Ahoy tempestuousness community, know all hogwash.
Hail ye mayday ok sacred Westminster Abbey
Awash in remembrance of inconseqvential Shakespeare as poet Vere ,
Show y revealed truth of Dee yt yis authors identity swap,
Go vivify his doughty whig, W yt is TTTT
Hail ye mayday ok sacred Westminster Abbey
Awash in remembrance of inconseqvential Shakespeare as poet Vere ,
Show y revealed truth of Dee yt yis authors identity swap,
Go vivify his doughty whig, W yt is TTTT
June 2, 2025 at 4:34 PM
Ahoy tempestuousness community, know all hogwash.
Hail ye mayday ok sacred Westminster Abbey
Awash in remembrance of inconseqvential Shakespeare as poet Vere ,
Show y revealed truth of Dee yt yis authors identity swap,
Go vivify his doughty whig, W yt is TTTT
Hail ye mayday ok sacred Westminster Abbey
Awash in remembrance of inconseqvential Shakespeare as poet Vere ,
Show y revealed truth of Dee yt yis authors identity swap,
Go vivify his doughty whig, W yt is TTTT
You have to promise to just fuck off if I produce anything that can be bullshitted into "vere did this" with same level of poetic license.
Seriously it's trivial so crank it up.
Seriously it's trivial so crank it up.
June 1, 2025 at 10:48 AM
You have to promise to just fuck off if I produce anything that can be bullshitted into "vere did this" with same level of poetic license.
Seriously it's trivial so crank it up.
Seriously it's trivial so crank it up.
Do you understand what I'm telling you about freedom. You have an entire block of text to pick characters from. There are endless things you won't like you can say with that text.
Oh you want someone else. Vere is trivial, it's part of the problem with a lot of bogus Oxfordian stuff.
Oh you want someone else. Vere is trivial, it's part of the problem with a lot of bogus Oxfordian stuff.
June 1, 2025 at 10:45 AM
Do you understand what I'm telling you about freedom. You have an entire block of text to pick characters from. There are endless things you won't like you can say with that text.
Oh you want someone else. Vere is trivial, it's part of the problem with a lot of bogus Oxfordian stuff.
Oh you want someone else. Vere is trivial, it's part of the problem with a lot of bogus Oxfordian stuff.
Well that brings me onto the as yet barely touched number puzzle of the trinity.
The verse, plus the crappy extra verses, and the numbering and catchword errors, constitute a vast number puzzle.
Geometry, words and numbers. They like a three this lot.
How much of this is vere is unknown.
The verse, plus the crappy extra verses, and the numbering and catchword errors, constitute a vast number puzzle.
Geometry, words and numbers. They like a three this lot.
How much of this is vere is unknown.
June 1, 2025 at 10:39 AM
Well that brings me onto the as yet barely touched number puzzle of the trinity.
The verse, plus the crappy extra verses, and the numbering and catchword errors, constitute a vast number puzzle.
Geometry, words and numbers. They like a three this lot.
How much of this is vere is unknown.
The verse, plus the crappy extra verses, and the numbering and catchword errors, constitute a vast number puzzle.
Geometry, words and numbers. They like a three this lot.
How much of this is vere is unknown.
Yes it does unfortunately. It says "by god and de vere " five times on the same spot. It's just not what you wanted and you have the cheek to discuss cryptography.
I had capitulated to the Oxfordians before I discovered they had all this. They, like you, have no clue what they are looking at.
I had capitulated to the Oxfordians before I discovered they had all this. They, like you, have no clue what they are looking at.
June 1, 2025 at 10:28 AM
Yes it does unfortunately. It says "by god and de vere " five times on the same spot. It's just not what you wanted and you have the cheek to discuss cryptography.
I had capitulated to the Oxfordians before I discovered they had all this. They, like you, have no clue what they are looking at.
I had capitulated to the Oxfordians before I discovered they had all this. They, like you, have no clue what they are looking at.
You've got arbitrary usage. The freedom is now ~ N! , the number of different things I can find is going to be super natural.
This is, relatively, trivial. If I come back with anything that scans and says Marlowe from that text will you STFU. Well will you fuck as like.
This is, relatively, trivial. If I come back with anything that scans and says Marlowe from that text will you STFU. Well will you fuck as like.
June 1, 2025 at 10:24 AM
You've got arbitrary usage. The freedom is now ~ N! , the number of different things I can find is going to be super natural.
This is, relatively, trivial. If I come back with anything that scans and says Marlowe from that text will you STFU. Well will you fuck as like.
This is, relatively, trivial. If I come back with anything that scans and says Marlowe from that text will you STFU. Well will you fuck as like.
It doesn't mean he couldn't have but it takes explaining. It's inconvenient and fun to invert the empty post dating argument.
It's in the centre of the diagram, as are C1577 and SN1572. The Masons to this day quote Kepler's view of Pythagoras and the Golden Ratio. They are both of course displayed.
It's in the centre of the diagram, as are C1577 and SN1572. The Masons to this day quote Kepler's view of Pythagoras and the Golden Ratio. They are both of course displayed.
June 1, 2025 at 10:17 AM
It doesn't mean he couldn't have but it takes explaining. It's inconvenient and fun to invert the empty post dating argument.
It's in the centre of the diagram, as are C1577 and SN1572. The Masons to this day quote Kepler's view of Pythagoras and the Golden Ratio. They are both of course displayed.
It's in the centre of the diagram, as are C1577 and SN1572. The Masons to this day quote Kepler's view of Pythagoras and the Golden Ratio. They are both of course displayed.
The verse is belonging to "the author" I'm universally informed.
A bat shit crazy dedication, in a publication with ITS ANONYMOUS bolted on the front with the two horizontal rules and the hyphen, is where you'd expect to find some answers, isn't it.
A bat shit crazy dedication, in a publication with ITS ANONYMOUS bolted on the front with the two horizontal rules and the hyphen, is where you'd expect to find some answers, isn't it.
June 1, 2025 at 10:12 AM
The verse is belonging to "the author" I'm universally informed.
A bat shit crazy dedication, in a publication with ITS ANONYMOUS bolted on the front with the two horizontal rules and the hyphen, is where you'd expect to find some answers, isn't it.
A bat shit crazy dedication, in a publication with ITS ANONYMOUS bolted on the front with the two horizontal rules and the hyphen, is where you'd expect to find some answers, isn't it.
They may have. What you have shown me is mind bogglingly ridiculous because of the freedom.
I didn't make this clear, the size works against you unless you can limit the freedom.
By God and De Vere the Fourth T is highly restrictive. Five times in the same two special pages is beyond astronomical
I didn't make this clear, the size works against you unless you can limit the freedom.
By God and De Vere the Fourth T is highly restrictive. Five times in the same two special pages is beyond astronomical
June 1, 2025 at 10:04 AM
They may have. What you have shown me is mind bogglingly ridiculous because of the freedom.
I didn't make this clear, the size works against you unless you can limit the freedom.
By God and De Vere the Fourth T is highly restrictive. Five times in the same two special pages is beyond astronomical
I didn't make this clear, the size works against you unless you can limit the freedom.
By God and De Vere the Fourth T is highly restrictive. Five times in the same two special pages is beyond astronomical
The monument in the Abbey, and all the ones round it, was built by the Masons. That's not in dispute.
Jonson was all over All Saints. There may have been another cryptographer but most sides agree "Honest" Ben Jonson was responsible for this part of the deception.
Jonson was all over All Saints. There may have been another cryptographer but most sides agree "Honest" Ben Jonson was responsible for this part of the deception.
June 1, 2025 at 9:54 AM
The monument in the Abbey, and all the ones round it, was built by the Masons. That's not in dispute.
Jonson was all over All Saints. There may have been another cryptographer but most sides agree "Honest" Ben Jonson was responsible for this part of the deception.
Jonson was all over All Saints. There may have been another cryptographer but most sides agree "Honest" Ben Jonson was responsible for this part of the deception.
Says who ? It's by Jonson.
The freedom in the solutions you have renders them worthless. G VV THE POET is also difficult to nail, but not scores of characters I can pull billions of expressions from. That's what you have. The verse you give is riduculous.
There's next to no freedom in G.Eld ...
The freedom in the solutions you have renders them worthless. G VV THE POET is also difficult to nail, but not scores of characters I can pull billions of expressions from. That's what you have. The verse you give is riduculous.
There's next to no freedom in G.Eld ...
June 1, 2025 at 9:47 AM
Says who ? It's by Jonson.
The freedom in the solutions you have renders them worthless. G VV THE POET is also difficult to nail, but not scores of characters I can pull billions of expressions from. That's what you have. The verse you give is riduculous.
There's next to no freedom in G.Eld ...
The freedom in the solutions you have renders them worthless. G VV THE POET is also difficult to nail, but not scores of characters I can pull billions of expressions from. That's what you have. The verse you give is riduculous.
There's next to no freedom in G.Eld ...
Oh sorry, can't we discuss the actual era and wtf was going on.
The hermeticists were an elite intellectual organisation that led us into the modern scientific world.
Your poetry stuff is just part of something much bigger. They established the Royal Society and built that monument
The hermeticists were an elite intellectual organisation that led us into the modern scientific world.
Your poetry stuff is just part of something much bigger. They established the Royal Society and built that monument
June 1, 2025 at 9:40 AM
Oh sorry, can't we discuss the actual era and wtf was going on.
The hermeticists were an elite intellectual organisation that led us into the modern scientific world.
Your poetry stuff is just part of something much bigger. They established the Royal Society and built that monument
The hermeticists were an elite intellectual organisation that led us into the modern scientific world.
Your poetry stuff is just part of something much bigger. They established the Royal Society and built that monument
How far did you get in maths. I have a lifetime of computing experience. You've interacted with my systems.
You do not understand combinatorics, or even what an anagram is. Many people have shown your kind of stuff is meaningless, it's abundant.
You have no clue what I'm taking about do you
You do not understand combinatorics, or even what an anagram is. Many people have shown your kind of stuff is meaningless, it's abundant.
You have no clue what I'm taking about do you
June 1, 2025 at 9:35 AM
How far did you get in maths. I have a lifetime of computing experience. You've interacted with my systems.
You do not understand combinatorics, or even what an anagram is. Many people have shown your kind of stuff is meaningless, it's abundant.
You have no clue what I'm taking about do you
You do not understand combinatorics, or even what an anagram is. Many people have shown your kind of stuff is meaningless, it's abundant.
You have no clue what I'm taking about do you
You don't know who the heck Johannes Kepler was, or why SN1604 was a major scientific event, or anything that was going on in that era in science This is futile. You've heard of Galileo right ?
You keep saying Elizabethans this and that. You know nothing really don't you
You keep saying Elizabethans this and that. You know nothing really don't you
June 1, 2025 at 9:03 AM
You don't know who the heck Johannes Kepler was, or why SN1604 was a major scientific event, or anything that was going on in that era in science This is futile. You've heard of Galileo right ?
You keep saying Elizabethans this and that. You know nothing really don't you
You keep saying Elizabethans this and that. You know nothing really don't you
Nobody in Shakespeare land agrees with that. Your claim of SN1604 in alls well is not held by RSC. One of your logic experts has dreamed that one up.
The dedication is a puzzle. You have no worthwhile solution, your proposal for Stratford is worse than the original which is an a achievement
The dedication is a puzzle. You have no worthwhile solution, your proposal for Stratford is worse than the original which is an a achievement
June 1, 2025 at 8:57 AM
Nobody in Shakespeare land agrees with that. Your claim of SN1604 in alls well is not held by RSC. One of your logic experts has dreamed that one up.
The dedication is a puzzle. You have no worthwhile solution, your proposal for Stratford is worse than the original which is an a achievement
The dedication is a puzzle. You have no worthwhile solution, your proposal for Stratford is worse than the original which is an a achievement
Yeah but these "anagrams" are rubbish mate and yes I've looked. You have not. You have repeatedly misunderstood everything I've explained, and keep repeating it.
You do not understand combinatorics in the slightest. I've a 17 and a 23 char anagram. They will take beating. They say the same thing.
You do not understand combinatorics in the slightest. I've a 17 and a 23 char anagram. They will take beating. They say the same thing.
June 1, 2025 at 8:50 AM
Yeah but these "anagrams" are rubbish mate and yes I've looked. You have not. You have repeatedly misunderstood everything I've explained, and keep repeating it.
You do not understand combinatorics in the slightest. I've a 17 and a 23 char anagram. They will take beating. They say the same thing.
You do not understand combinatorics in the slightest. I've a 17 and a 23 char anagram. They will take beating. They say the same thing.