*
The most fruitful exchanges on the subject of the presence (or
absence) of a poetry made up by Nostradamus of cryptic anagrams
in prose sometimes came from contributors to this Newsgroup most
opposed to that idea. Ten years ago, while commercial pilots were
grounded in Quebec due to a catastrophic episode of freezing
rain, one of them took it upon himself to 'play the anagram game'
and report his findings here.
*
This long re-post responds to two of his:
*>Newsgroups: alt.prophecies.nostradamus

From:

*
[QUOTE]
*
Responding to Zoltan in two posts, a long and a short:

Date: Mon, 09 Feb1998 15:32:58 -0500
From: "Z." <"\"wings "@ infobahnos.com\">
X-no-archive: yes
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: alt.prophecies.nostradamus
Subject: Re: Example of cryptic anagrams (VII-42)
References: <Eo2qIL.Er8.0.qu...@torfree.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Diso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.205.162.48
Message-ID: <34df681...@news.total.net>
Organization: TotalNet Inc.
Lines: 164

Claude, just found out I don't have to leave till after
tomorrow. We can do one more.

Claude Latremouille wrote:

[...]

First, let me tell you tht I have NEVER made an anagram using the
method you suggest, i.e., first mixing up the letters of the line
of poetry on which I was working, and then starting to do the
anagram. Had I done that, I would be the first to agree with you,
and with everybody who holds the same opinion, that what I would
have written using these mixed-up letters divorced from the
original poetry was a pure Claude Latr=E9mouille text.

ZOLTAN: Maybe I misunderstand cryptic anagrams.

CLAUDE: My impression from all of your posts on the subject so
far is that you do understand very well the mechanics of cryptic
anagrams, hence your insistence that one can make cryptic
anagrams out of any text, i.e., a list of ingredients on a cereal
box, for instance. And, of course, from a purely mechanical point
of view you are absolutely correct.

My impression is, however, that although, mechanically, the
anagrams end up being done as a result of a mere displacement of
letters, a true fact, the intellectual content of such a
displacement of letters was not foremost in your mind when you
wrote what you wrote.

ZOLTAN: Could you give a demonstration, step-by-step, letter by
letter, on how you get from this:

Original quatrain for March in the Almanach for 1566:

Les seruants des eglises leurs Seigneurs trahiront
D'autres Seigneurs aussi par l'indiuis des champs,
Voisins de presche et messe entre eux querelleront.
Rumeurs, bruits augmenter =E0 mort plusieurs couchants

to this:

Decrypted version of this Pr=E9sage 121 by Claude Latr=E9mouille:

La tr=E8s longue po=EBsie antique est durant des si=E8cles
Sans anagrame, plusieurs idiots du si Cher Pa=EFs la
Pensant une tr=E8s exacte V=E9rit=E9 sur n'importe quelle
Rumeur du futur accompli dans une tr=E8s grosse hyst=E9rie !

without mixing letters? Don't repeat the rules, I already know
them. Just a simple demo please. I hope you're not going to
give me a lecture on how "mixing" and "moving letters from one
place to the other" differ. That'd be awful.

CLAUDE: I have not broken your question into pieces, so as to
leave our readers with the full flavour of it. But because I need
to address many distinct points of your question, please allow me
to deal with them one at a time:

You ask: "Could you give a demonstration, step-by-step, letter by
letter, on how you get from this: [...] to this: [...] without
mixing letters?"

Perhaps I should have specified in my original post that I never
have mixed the letters of a given line before starting to think
about the anagram I was about to find. Of course, as soon as I
start on my first attempt at solving the puzzle, I have to move
letters around. Or, if you prefer, to mix them. (Although in my
vocabulary, mixing the letters would involve taking the entire
line of poetry, mixing up the entire package of letters, and
then, and only then, starting to make up words which happen to
match that meaningless package of letters, which is not what I
did.)

Back to your question. There are certain things I cannot give
you, because I do not have them myself. Here are a few:

1. As I first decrypted the quatrain above on October 25, 1995,
and corrected it on April 7, 1997, I do not remember what mental
processes triggered the version of it which you are now able to
read, as I did not write these down.

2. Since I never write down a failed attempt at constructing an
anagram (i.e., a version which does not obey the rules or a
version which does but does not make sense), I do not know by
what intellectual route I was led to the one I finally found.

What I can tell you about these specific anagrams, is that I had
understood at one point that the version in anagram of the
Pr=E9sages yielded for the greatest part a sentence about the
circumstances of the destruction of Paris. I was therefore the
first surprized that this Pr=E9sage 121 yielded something else.

This may help you see that - even if I have my own little idea
about what I expect to find in a given quatrain, the end result
does not automatically depend on that preconceived notion, but
does depend on what Nostradamus did hide in his poetry.

What I must also add, given that you selected the only Pr=E9sage
which I have published, is that - for reasons known only to
himself, Nostradamus used dodecasyllabic lines in his last two
Almanachs (from which the Pr=E9sages are taken), rather than
decasyllabic lines which he uses almost everywhere else.

The practical result of this was to create a slightly longer line
of poetry, thereby increasing the number of its letters, and
logically, the number of letters in the anagram flowing from it,
and possibly the number of words to be found in it, therefore
increasing the number of permissible "missing" letters.

This being said, I can only give you what I have, that is the
replacement scheme for these four anagrams. As is my usual
practice, the missing letters are in parentheses and the unused
letters are in capitals at the far right side of the decrypted
line.

ORIGINAL LINE 1
Les seruants des eglises leurs Seigneurs trahiront
DECRYPTED LINE 1
L(a) tr(=E8)s l(o)ngue (p)o=EBsie anti(q)ue est duran(t) (d)es
si=E8(c)les GHRRRSSS
ORIGINAL LINE 2
D'autres Seigneurs aussi par l'indiuis des champs,
DECRYPTED LINE 2
S(a)ns anagrame, plusieurs idi(o)ts du si Cher P(a)=EFs (l)a
DESU
ORIGINAL LINE 3
Voisins de presche et messe entre eux querelleront.
DECRYPTED LINE 3
Pens(a)nt (u)ne (t)r=E8s ex(a)cte V=E9ri(t)=E9 sur (n)'im(p)orte
quelle DEENOSS
ORIGINAL LINE 4
Rumeurs, bruits augmenter =E0 mort plusieurs couchants
DECRYPTED LINE 4
Rumeur (d)u (f)utur accompli (d)ans un(e) tr(=E8)s grosse
h(y)st=E9rie ! ABMTU

[...]

I am not too sure if you consider the original poetry by
Nostradamus to be a prophecy, or merely meaningless gobbledygook
in which anyone can find anything (your favourite theme), I
cannot determine if your (honest) belief that the anagrams cannot
be the prophecy in prose flows from that first denial (sorry for
that word, but it does seem to be good English, and does seem to
mean what I intend to mean... if you have a better word for it,
please suggest one, as I would certainly consider improving the
language I use in a.p.n.),

ZOLTAN: Ok. How about a "total lack of confidence in your
method's ability to yield dependable results", then.

CLAUDE: Fair enough. My only confidence in the cryptic anagrams I
have found rests on the consistency of the end result, i.e., a
consistent style, vocabulary, spelling, etc., not to mention the
very consistent description of the circumstances of the
destruction of Paris, something about which I knew nothing before
I started on this incredible journey.

[...]

3. You did produce anagrams which prove only one thing: anyone
who wishes to write any meaningless thing can use any set of
letters to write just about any meaningless thing. I believe I
found anagrams which constitute the prophecy in prose hidden
by Nostradamus.

The fundamental question is not whether someone other than
Nostradamus can write any meaningless thing he or she wishes,
using the letters of each line of Nostradamus' poetry, but
whether Nostradamus himself did use the method of cryptic
anagrams to hide his prophecy. And the experiment you have
carried out during the blackout does not assist us in answering
that fundamental question.

ZOLTAN: It was not meant to answer that fundamental question either.

CLAUDE: Understood.

[snip]

CLAUDE: It is not 'my' method. Do you deny that Nostradamus did
use cryptic anagrams to hide in his poetry his entire prophecy in
prose, or do you just deny that what I found comes from
Nostradamus? It would be useful to know in which category you
fall. And I repeat that I value very much your ideas about this
subject. Few people, so far, have taken the time to go beyond a
mere approval or disapproval of it.

ZOLTAN: Probably the right attitude at the moment, IMO.

Just because someone can make so called "cryptic anagrams" out of
Nostradamus' prophecies, it does *not* mean that N in fact put
them there, unless you, the discoverer of the method can prove it
by some logical means. IMO, you've not proven it so far by your
"cryptic anagrams" because of other possible variants of same,
all saying different things.

CLAUDE: First, two things:

As to your "Just because someone can make so called "cryptic
anagrams" out of Nostradamus' prophecies, it does *not* mean that
N in fact put them there", I fully agree. And you will also agree
that it does not mean that N in fact *did not* put them there.

As to your "unless you, the discoverer of the method can prove it
by some logical means.", I can only "prove" the method by
applying it. Which I have done rather consistently. I cannot
think of a manner in which pure logic can prove it. I certainly
cannot prove it mathematically, and this seems to be the closest
one can come to pure logic.

Perhaps an analogy can help. Suppose that the letter "e" is in
fact the most frequent letter in the French language. Suppose
that I wish to demonstrate this statement by counting the
frequency of the letter "e" in Nostradamus and compare it to his
use of other letters. Would you not be entitled to say (even
though the admitted fact is true) that I have not proved it, as
there are many more authors who may or may not have used the
letter "e" the most frequently? I see in this analogy a parallel
between what you are requiring of me and what I actually can
deliver.

ZOLTAN: OTOH, if you're asking me to prove that N did *NOT* hide
his prophecies in "cryptic anagrams", you'll be disappointed.
That is like asking me to prove to you that there are *no*
subatomic CLAT particles. And how can I even be accused of
"denying" them when I'm simply stating that the method by which
you arrive at confirming their presence has a major hole.

CLAUDE: I have known for quite some time that proving a negative
is impossible. As to your last sentence, the fact that the method
I use to find these anagrams is not satisfactory even to me does
not prevent me from saying: Although this method is not
satisfactory to even a good hair-splitting Virgo like myself, it
is consistent with everything I know about what Nostradamus
wrote, so I cannot discard it on the sole ground that I,
personally, would have used a much more conclusive method to hide
my prophecy, had I been obligated, as Nostradamus was, to do so.

[snip]

So, why not show that you are a good sport and promptly give your
contribution to the discovery of the two (2) cryptic anagrams
from the invented name:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1617
M I C H E L N O S T R A D A M U S

ZOLTAN: I will Claude, I will. During the next blackout. I'm
certain we both hope it ain't too soon.

CLAUDE: It's funny, Zoltan, but when I wrote the above, I
thought that is what you would respond to it.

ZOLTAN: :)

See, you've been denying your own prophetic abilities all this
time. You may very well be a prophet. No denial here! :)

CLAUDE: I think Sandy (?not sure who?) also did that one on me
recently. Although your comment is tongue in cheek, allow me to
use it as a demonstration of how I think: my original statement
prompted in my mind the response that - were I Zoltan - I would
respond exactly in the manner you have responded.

Perhaps this ability I have (given enough text written by you) to
put myself in your place could also explain (given enough text
written by him) how I was able to put myself in Nostradamus'
place, and discover in the process how he did hide his prophecy?

[...]

It will be interesting to see, out of the few contributors to
a.p.n. who know enough French to solve the double cryptic anagram
above, how many will actually do it. As it is much easier to deny
the presence of cryptic anagrams in that invented name than to
confirm their presence.

ZOLTAN: On the contrary, it is *very difficult* to deny the
presence of cryptic anagrams in *any* combination of words, since
they contain quite a few.

CLAUDE: Yes they do, as I have discovered for myself while
finding these anagrams. But, just the same, I wish they would try
doing it. Maybe one of them will 'hit the jackpot'...

ZOLTAN: Not meaning to say by any means that Nostradamus put them
there.

CLAUDE: Understood.

ZOLTAN: They are just facts of life.

CLAUDE: They are indeed a fact of life, but... I am not sure of
the "just"... :-)

ZOLTAN: However if Nostradamus did use such a method, we're up
the proverbial creek, because we'll never know which version he
meant. Simple.

CLAUDE: Well, to be a pure cynic, I would say that you will
certainly find out, Paris time, at 3:53 a.m. on Sunday, August
13, 2017! But I would dearly wish that you and others find out
much earlier than that... <sigh>

ZOLTAN: And, as always, you'll have the last word.

CLAUDE: Not if you die after me, Zoltan! :-)

ZOLTAN: I hope Claude that you'll live a very long and happy
life.

CLAUDE: Thank you Zoltan, and I wish you a happy flight, waiting
for your return to the strange world of a.p.n.

Z.

AND FROM YOUR OTHER POST
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Date: Mon, 09 Feb1998 23:40:44 -0500
From: "Z." <"\"wings "@ infobahnos.com\">
X-no-archive: yes
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: alt.prophecies.nostradamus
Subject: Re: Example of cryptic anagrams (VII-42)
References: <Enwsqx.G7y.0.qu...@torfree.net>
<slrn6dk4oc.tq.ja...@usm-41-122.wans.net>
<34da80f...@news.total.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.205.11.29
Message-ID: <34dfda5...@news.total.net>
Organization: TotalNet Inc.
Lines: 16

I wrote:

(re Claude)

When he misses a date in his prophecy, he does what Turi and other
prophetic fac-simili have done thoughout the ages: wiggle out
of it.

Having just now found (and read) the circumstances of Claude's
retraction re: December 1997 prophecy, I withdraw the above
comment.

Of course, if it hadn't been for the capricious nature of
"cryptic anagrams", Claude wouldn't need to retract a prophecy,
nor would I need to withdraw a comment.

Z.

CLAUDE: True, Zoltan, I too would wish that what I did was pure
certainty, with only one possible solution, thereby preventing
honest mistakes (garbage in) from producing the flawed anagrams
(garbage out) which I had produced prior to my discovery of the
gross factual mistake I had made and on which I had based a
number of these (now corrected) anagrams.

I thank you, Zoltan, for the retraction, as only a good
understanding of what I did can lead one to correct conclusions
about what I did.

As you can see from the example above (my missing of that date),
I can learn from my mistakes, and if the mistake is caught in
time, I can even show the difference between what I view as
"garbage in, garbage out", and an anagram which may either come
from me, or... from the good doctor himself.

As you may even agree that - if I make a mistake in the
decrypting job, that mistake cannot be evidence that Nostradamus
did not encrypt his entire prophecy, nor can it be evidence that
he did, but that I did goof. It can only be evidence for what it
was, i.e., a honest (but very stupid) mistake which produced
anagrams which obeyed the rules, but contained garbage.

And as I wrote at the time, learning can often be a painful
experience. Painful, not because 'the boys of a.p.n.' are still
having fun about it at my expense (that was to be expected), but
because I would have much preferred not to have made the mistake
in the first place!

Happy travelling, Zoltan!
*
[END OF QUOTE]
*
------------------- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Claude Latr=E9mouille % -- "Claude! There ain't no stinkin' -- %
Le 10 f=E9vrier 1998- % cryptic anagrams in them dang verses,- %
APNCL#0150 -------- % ya hear?!" (A chorus of a.p.n. voices) %
------------------- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
*
=3D=3D=3D