Originally Posted by GurnBlanston

Someone mentioned conspiracy theories and then went on to state the Shakespeare 'conspiracy' as being the most ridiculous.
As an avid sceptic, I have to say, this particular subject is very interesting not because of the so-called evidence but because of the sheer number of Shakespearean scholars there are that subscribe to it.
It's one I've known about for a long time and once considered myself well versed in the Bacon-Shakespeare theory.
Now I've never thought of it as a conspiracy until someone here included it as a conspiracy. I guess it could be but, I've always considered the Shakespeare story (the accepted history as it is written now) as manufactured history simply because of the back story of this historic figure and parts played by the players of the day.
I could sit here and go through all the talking points but, instead I want to hear from the doubter.
Remember, I am a confessed conspiracy denier. Prove it before I believe it. I've always been skeptic but, through a Masonic history in my family, the story of Bacon and Shakespeare is pretty simple and direct. However, it takes a knowledge and acceptance of the Templar/Masonic connection via the Rosicrucians (the real ones, not the ones around today). All the plays written seem to be alagoric stories symbolizing the degrees of Freemasonry. Even some wording is particualarly distinct to only each other (that undiscovered country from whose bourne no traveler returns).
So I want to hear some opinions as to why this is bogus (or not).