Comments for shake-speares-bible.com http://shake-speares-bible.com Wed, 18 Apr 2012 01:13:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 Comment on James Shapiro and Hunt for the “Notorious Hyphen” by Roger Stritmatter http://shake-speares-bible.com/2010/04/18/james-shapiro-and-the-notorious-hyphen/comment-page-1/#comment-510 Roger Stritmatter Wed, 18 Apr 2012 01:13:00 +0000 http://shake-speares-bible.com/?p=1312#comment-510 Yes, it takes a special talent, doesn't it, to be *this* wrong. I mean, most scholars are wrong from time to time about things outside their specialization of interest (or maybe even within it), but this sort of being wrong -- as in asserting something to be a fact that manifestly isn't one, and then going forward from this false positing to construct an entire theory about the genesis of a particular enigma that is obviated when the fact gets deconstructed takes a special kind of....special academic, one groomed for success from the very beginning, a veritable golden boy of being preposterously wrong in defense of established conventions. Yes, it takes a special talent, doesn’t it, to be *this* wrong. I mean, most scholars are wrong from time to time about things outside their specialization of interest (or maybe even within it), but this sort of being wrong — as in asserting something to be a fact that manifestly isn’t one, and then going forward from this false positing to construct an entire theory about the genesis of a particular enigma that is obviated when the fact gets deconstructed takes a special kind of….special academic, one groomed for success from the very beginning, a veritable golden boy of being preposterously wrong in defense of established conventions.

]]> Comment on James Shapiro and Hunt for the “Notorious Hyphen” by Lurking Ox http://shake-speares-bible.com/2010/04/18/james-shapiro-and-the-notorious-hyphen/comment-page-1/#comment-509 Lurking Ox Tue, 17 Apr 2012 23:24:18 +0000 http://shake-speares-bible.com/?p=1312#comment-509 Thoroughly enjoyed this article on the Shaman Who Heard Only His Own Voice (again). Thoroughly enjoyed this article on the Shaman Who Heard Only His Own Voice (again).

]]> Comment on London Times: How Many Pseudonyms Hath Shakespeare? by Hooker and Shakespeare | The Calvinist International http://shake-speares-bible.com/2009/12/26/london-times-how-many-pseudonyms-hath-shakespeare/comment-page-1/#comment-507 Hooker and Shakespeare | The Calvinist International Sun, 01 Apr 2012 23:13:09 +0000 http://shake-speares-bible.com/?p=950#comment-507 [...] certainly, contra recent speculation, a Protestant writer; the political plays especially are, as this writer notes (citing the definitive work of Daniel Wright), unquestionably “suffused with the rhetoric [...] [...] certainly, contra recent speculation, a Protestant writer; the political plays especially are, as this writer notes (citing the definitive work of Daniel Wright), unquestionably “suffused with the rhetoric [...]

]]> Comment on Alien Scientists and the Science of LANR by Roger Stritmatter http://shake-speares-bible.com/2012/03/01/alien-scientists-and-the-science-of-lenr/comment-page-1/#comment-505 Roger Stritmatter Wed, 28 Mar 2012 12:14:25 +0000 http://shake-speares-bible.com/?p=4812#comment-505 Yep! Both great videos. Update: More and more evidence for for the reality of LENR/LANR has been coming out of the woodwork. Within the last week alone, conference presentations at both Nasa and CERN have focused on various details of the process. It is still poorly understood, and only Rossi and Defkalion in Greece claim to have commercially viable prototypes with production plans. Defkalion, however, is now claiming that it will be producing units for sale as early as July, 2012. That's only four months and counting. This recent post by patent lawyer David French on the Cold Fusion Now site is an excellent summary of the state of the art, with very clear parameters that need to be optimized in order for the technology to move from the lab to Home Depot: http://coldfusionnow.org/?p=15307 Rossi has always said that the earliest would be fall 2012, and sometimes has implied that it could be another year after that before his e-cat will be for sale. Rossi is also making noises about suing someone-- probably Defkalion -- for intellectual property infringement. Defkalion for its part claims that Rossi has difficulty controlling the reaction in his devices, but that they have solved this problem. So the situation is, predictably given the stakes, still muddy. But the evidence that the process itself is real continues to mount. Even if neither Rossi nor Defkalion can deliver on their claims, it seems we are most likely on the verge of one of the most exciting technological revolutions in the history of the planet...... Yep! Both great videos. Update: More and more evidence for for the reality of LENR/LANR has been coming out of the woodwork. Within the last week alone, conference presentations at both Nasa and CERN have focused on various details of the process. It is still poorly understood, and only Rossi and Defkalion in Greece claim to have commercially viable prototypes with production plans. Defkalion, however, is now claiming that it will be producing units for sale as early as July, 2012. That’s only four months and counting.

This recent post by patent lawyer David French on the Cold Fusion Now site is an excellent summary of the state of the art, with very clear parameters that need to be optimized in order for the technology to move from the lab to Home Depot: http://coldfusionnow.org/?p=15307

Rossi has always said that the earliest would be fall 2012, and sometimes has implied that it could be another year after that before his e-cat will be for sale. Rossi is also making noises about suing someone– probably Defkalion — for intellectual property infringement. Defkalion for its part claims that Rossi has difficulty controlling the reaction in his devices, but that they have solved this problem. So the situation is, predictably given the stakes, still muddy. But the evidence that the process itself is real continues to mount. Even if neither Rossi nor Defkalion can deliver on their claims, it seems we are most likely on the verge of one of the most exciting technological revolutions in the history of the planet……

]]> Comment on Alien Scientists and the Science of LANR by Lurking Ox http://shake-speares-bible.com/2012/03/01/alien-scientists-and-the-science-of-lenr/comment-page-1/#comment-504 Lurking Ox Wed, 28 Mar 2012 05:08:12 +0000 http://shake-speares-bible.com/?p=4812#comment-504 .. on TRUTH. .. on TRUTH.

]]> Comment on Alien Scientists and the Science of LANR by Lurking Ox http://shake-speares-bible.com/2012/03/01/alien-scientists-and-the-science-of-lenr/comment-page-1/#comment-503 Lurking Ox Wed, 28 Mar 2012 05:07:32 +0000 http://shake-speares-bible.com/?p=4812#comment-503 What a GREAT video! What a GREAT video!

]]> Comment on Anatomy of a Wikillusion Or, how to Rid Yourself of Embarrassing Footnotes in Three Easy Steps…. by knitwitted http://shake-speares-bible.com/2011/11/05/anatomy-of-a-wikipedia-delusion/comment-page-1/#comment-502 knitwitted Fri, 23 Mar 2012 19:59:11 +0000 http://shake-speares-bible.com/?p=4036#comment-502 Okay. One more thing (at least for now :) ... Do we think maybe Meres recognized from the dedications by Shax in V&A and Lucrece that he was writing "labors of love"? If you read the dedications as if written to God, they seem to just fall into place. Per Meres' "mellifluous and hony-tongued" as well as "his sugred sonnets"... Aren't bees the original laborers of love? Okay. One more thing (at least for now :) … Do we think maybe Meres recognized from the dedications by Shax in V&A and Lucrece that he was writing “labors of love”? If you read the dedications as if written to God, they seem to just fall into place. Per Meres’ “mellifluous and hony-tongued” as well as “his sugred sonnets”… Aren’t bees the original laborers of love?

]]> Comment on The “Second Intention” of the Sonnets by Roger Stritmatter http://shake-speares-bible.com/2012/03/09/the-%e2%80%9csecond-intention%e2%80%9d-of-the-sonnets/comment-page-1/#comment-500 Roger Stritmatter Mon, 19 Mar 2012 14:57:42 +0000 http://shake-speares-bible.com/?p=4840#comment-500 If you email l me I'll send you a copy of James Warren's Oxfordian bibliography, which can give you the precise place to look for Barrell's articles. If you email l me I’ll send you a copy of James Warren’s Oxfordian bibliography, which can give you the precise place to look for Barrell’s articles.

]]> Comment on The “Second Intention” of the Sonnets by knitwitted http://shake-speares-bible.com/2012/03/09/the-%e2%80%9csecond-intention%e2%80%9d-of-the-sonnets/comment-page-1/#comment-499 knitwitted Mon, 19 Mar 2012 14:52:31 +0000 http://shake-speares-bible.com/?p=4840#comment-499 Ok kewl. Will see what I can find out... Thanks! Ok kewl. Will see what I can find out… Thanks!

]]> Comment on Anatomy of a Wikillusion Or, how to Rid Yourself of Embarrassing Footnotes in Three Easy Steps…. by knitwitted http://shake-speares-bible.com/2011/11/05/anatomy-of-a-wikipedia-delusion/comment-page-1/#comment-498 knitwitted Mon, 19 Mar 2012 14:50:39 +0000 http://shake-speares-bible.com/?p=4036#comment-498 Ok sure. I actually meant his *reason* for writing (his writing vs. his writings). And yes, I do agree the plays are political. And yes, enjoying my learning period! Appreciate you taking the time to post some further ideas... Many thank yous!! And now, back to the play... :) Which brings me back to “nothing truer than the truth”. We know Vere *means* truth but if we say "nothing truer than Vere" that doesn't quite play well. We also know God *is* truth. "Nothing truer than God" ... how's that for a motto that *no* one can ever defeat! "For man loketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord beholdeth the heart." I Saml 16.7 I don't think this means God is looking into our hearts; I think God is in our hearts. The inner truth is God; not de Vere. I'm just not seeing Will Shax ripping open his blouse to reveal some mutation of de Vere's head poking alien-like out of his chest. Ok sure. I actually meant his *reason* for writing (his writing vs. his writings). And yes, I do agree the plays are political.

And yes, enjoying my learning period! Appreciate you taking the time to post some further ideas… Many thank yous!! And now, back to the play… :)

Which brings me back to “nothing truer than the truth”. We know Vere *means* truth but if we say “nothing truer than Vere” that doesn’t quite play well. We also know God *is* truth. “Nothing truer than God” … how’s that for a motto that *no* one can ever defeat!

“For man loketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord beholdeth the heart.” I Saml 16.7
I don’t think this means God is looking into our hearts; I think God is in our hearts. The inner truth is God; not de Vere. I’m just not seeing Will Shax ripping open his blouse to reveal some mutation of de Vere’s head poking alien-like out of his chest.

]]>