Based on my admitted limited research, the Francis Bacon theory is way weak and easily dismissable. The De Vere one not so much, I don't "buy it" per se but buy its feasibility, at least for possibly some of his stuff.
An infinite number of monkeys
Don't be silly; it was just a large number of monkies working overtime.
Yet another alleged atheist thinking, once again, about God. surprise surpriseI can't figure out how to write stuff like Shakespeare's. The obvious explanation, therefore, is that it was written byGodan unnamed designer.
God bless the gov't.Monkeys don't work overtime. They'll clock in on a Saturday, sure. But then they just sit in their cubicles, surfing the net, getting paid time and half to do it. What's worse, they sometimes use that time to look for better-paid jobs online!
1 - Have a link or other ref. to this evidence?There is statistical evidence (using the frequencies of particular words used in plays, predicted by the words Shakespeare was known to be speaking in other plays at the time he was writing) that supports the idea that Shakespeare was indeed Shakespeare.
Yeah I hear ya and that's why I'm far from sold on any given "he didn't write all that stuff" viewpoint. It's just kind of an interesting thing to ponder..For the other theories, I think the best model is seen in our "conspiracy theory" sub-forum. "Shakespeare couldn't have known about X" is eerily similar, in context, to "there's no way a plane crash could have brought down the towers". Once the conclusion is determined, it is easy to cherry-pick, distort, and misconstrue data to support it.
2 - Sorry not following. Because he used certain words a certain # of times this somehow proves he wrote all his works? ??
I believe it is to infer, not to prove.
Things like word frequency of certain words, word length, sentence length, and many other things, go into showing someones' style.
Check out
http://www.amstat.org/publications/chance/162.complete.pdf
for an example.
God bless the gov't.
Somehow I feel let down by the choice of feature set in these kinds of analysis. Taking multiple words(normally 4 to 5) as a feature is sufficient to capture the style, if not the content the author.
It'd be nice to see them use this rather than just counting words and sentence length.
There is statistical evidence (using the frequencies of particular words used in plays, predicted by the words Shakespeare was known to be speaking in other plays at the time he was writing) that supports the idea that Shakespeare was indeed Shakespeare.