"Have the courage to read; understanding may ensue. I will keep it simple this time. Shakspere couldn't write and was not a writer. A pseudonymous name, later also adopted by him, printed on a title page or ten thousand does not anyone's identity prove. Evidence is universally understood to be probative information bearing on a question. Evidence regarding identity does not necessarily need to follow that utilized regarding a putative crime. It is cumulative and necessarily cicumstantial, though circumstantial evidence applies in 90% of crimes. However an identity search does follow empirical logic. If you cannot write, leave nothing written, and was never known to have anything to do with writing, and your name nevertheless resembles that of a known poet and writer, you are not him. In brief, don't be fooled. Though the suggested reading below be (predictably) dismissed, sight unseen in this instance, perhaps someone else will be interested who does not feel as adamantly an impulse to pre-emptively deny what he has not yet learned. To quote a forgotten thinker, Herbert Spencer, "There is a principle which is a bar to all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance; this principle is contempt prior to investigation."