No what is important is the individual. Why? Because we have to prove that there has never a literary genius such as Shakespeare. And the key to this all is that he is English. If it turns out that his works are a collection of works of many, well there goes our literary genius.
Once when I was attending a science and engineering research council conference the speaker gave us this resounding summary, “we English are a nation of inventors and then others (hint, USA) market our inventions…”
No what is important is the individual. Why? Because we have to prove that there has never a literary genius such as Shakespeare. And the key to this all is that he is English. If it turns out that his works are a collection of works of many, well there goes our literary genius.
Once when I was attending a science and engineering research council conference the speaker gave us this resounding summary, “we English are a nation of inventors and then others (hint, USA) market our inventions…”
If they can date artifacts, there is a way to date DNA and also most DNA can be eliminated by nonrelation. But again, why really care?
Jabs, one person is many people. The work is important, that is the contribution to humanity.
You can’t date DNA as you think you can.
Dating an artifact requires the destruction of a small amount of the object.
DNA analysis does not render sufficient material for dating.
Furthermore - such dating methods are not accurate enough to distinguish from one generation to another.
Trust me, I’m an archaeologist
Ok good then since no certifiable, verifiable, noncontraversial evidence can be found then the argument is moot and the work gets the importance. 
Right. Why should we care if those plays were written by Bacon, Marlowe or a Shakespeare club?
We really should not care.
You are very right who cares who wrote them, it is their human value that we should be interested in, but some people do care about who wrote them because that way they fly the nationalistic flag.
Vanity generally does cause problems. Is a perfect beautiful copy any less than the original? Only vanity makes the original work more valuable, monetarily wise that is. I have beautiful first edition books and original art. Only for the money. I have copies that I enjoy for enjoyment.
Here’s a list of people who literally shat on Shakespeare for maybe not all diversity of work (although some clearly did have diversity of thought coming out their wing wangs) but for sheer numbers of published works:
Isaac Asimov 506
Kutekei Bakin born 1767: 470+ published works
Alexander Dumas: 1802: 277 published works
Charles Hamilton : 1876 : 1200+ published works
Nicolea Iorga: 1871: 1359+ published works
Rolf Kamuczak: 1934: 2900+ published works
Ursula Bloom: 1892: 500+ published works
Corin Tellado: 1946: 4000+ novellas but we wont hold that against him now will we?
Mohammed Shirazi: 1928: 1150+
Lope De Vega: 1562: ~2200 plays
Shakespeare: 1654: 37 plays:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prolific_writers
Why don’t you people who mock, chastise all creative people while you are at it, and be consistent in that jibe. Start on these authors, some of them wrote on so many themes that it would bewilder you to even imagine one person could learn so much. Mohammed Shirazi wrote for example about such subjects as jurisprudence and theology to politics, economics, law, sociology and human rights. A broad body of work I think you will agree? What is the problem here seriously, I don’t get it? Are you just really just incredulous of of a person who wrote a smaller number of things about a smaller number of subjects than thousands of other authors who did far more and in some cases in a shorter time period, well are you?
And what have we got to show for this this: a load of conjecture a load of what if DNA magically appeared on originals that don’t even exist, a load of well if this happened and magically we knew this then, frankly this thread is a bit of a joke, I haven’t seen anything more than conjecture, word play or any logical semblance of anything remotely approaching a solidly evidential or logical argument since it started. It’s not big and clever to mock at a person with nothing substantial to show for it.
I tell you what tomorrow tackle all of the great and fecund writers not just these few who exceeded Shakespeare, let’s tackle every single one of them born before the 19th century, and then use the fact that no reliable exact published data exists as a means to demean creativity to all the people who surpassed Shakespeare without breaking a sweat. Let’s do that, let’s demean the whole creative process. ;D
No I don’t care if he wrote them, but so far I have seen absolutely no reason at all even remotely to imagine he did not. Would I care if he did not, no, I really wouldn’t, but I would like to see something more than well what ifs and if we had, and what if the magic texts and so on. Stroll on I think. 
Vanity is another nail in the coffin of reason, I suspect many people here are too vain to imagine anything more than their own small conceits: I cannot imagine one man could write 37 plays, well 4000+ works is going to take some people some time to encompass, and well 2200 plays near 100 years before Shakespeare was born, well I think that’s going to at least make people think especially given the sheer breadth and diversity of that man’s works. One can but live in hope. They were special you are not, I am not, it happens, some people are just unimaginably creatively clever. Live with it. 
oh dude I am extremely special. But, if my gifts can benefit humanity, I would obscure my name happily.
There never was any real doubt about the provenance of Shakespeare’s work.
Objections only surfaced 100s of years after when people realised that he was a commoner.
They were all classist and malicious.
Because they were not written by Bacon, Marlowe, Cervantes or God. They were written by a commoner - Shakespeare.
There are no valid doubts. None.
I wrote them all last week in my lunch times, and sent them in a time-worm to Shakepeare with strict instructions to claim them as his own.
Asimov wrote lots. Much of which I read when I was a little boy. More is not better.
More turds is just more shit.
I would not trade 506 Asimov stories for one of WS’s sonnets.
There is a good reason no one ever heard of Lope De Vega, and WS is widely regarded as one of the greatest writers of all time.
A Play by Helofalotofshite.
Act 1
Black guy zips in on his parachute.
H&HW: Hi everyone. I’m the smartest guy on earth and I am going to dazzle you all with my wit.
Black guy clicks furiously on his gun. BLAM BLAM BLAM. (empties the clip)
H&HW: Impressed?
(GRINS). Exeunt stage top.
CROWD: EH? What was that?
Puzzled looks of incredulity.
ACT 2
There is no Act 2
END
Completed play 3424, of 4,000
Oh my God you really do have a bee in your bonnet, you are now attacking someone who is on your side.
Ah fer fucks sake get over it.
It’s called humour.
Make it clear then. There are emoticons, you’ve just spent the last 48 hours attacking every post I write on every thread with this stuff, I am supposed to suddenly get after days of abuse in pm and threads you are now joking after what you have now done? Really suddenly you are joking with this? Jesus H Corbett, I am not psychic.
