adicheo

turing

7 min read

The provided text, “Alan Turing was another Total Fraud” by Miles Mathis, argues that Alan Turing was not a genuine genius but rather a carefully constructed fraud. The author claims Turing’s prominence, evidenced by his placement on the £50 note, his rating as the most important person of the 20th century by the BBC, and his portrayal in the film The Imitation Game, is an intentional promotion of a fabricated figure.

Mathis asserts that Turing’s family background reveals connections to powerful and old merchant families, including Dutch and English East India Company and Phoenician Navy ties, placing him within a peerage from the Baronets of Foveran and Barons Congleton. He suggests Turing’s maternal grandfather, Edward Waller Stoney, was involved with the Madras Railway and Order of the Indian Empire. The author controversially posits that Turing’s parents, Julius and Ethel (suggested to be Julius and Ethel Rosenberg), were Jewish, despite being presented as Protestant gentry, linking them to the Goulds and Townshends.

The text questions Turing’s academic achievements, citing his alleged poor performance as a student and his Fellow of King’s College election for work already proven by Lindeberg. His PhD from Princeton is dismissed as questionable, with his influential 1936 paper on the halting problem and Turing machines being framed as a rehash of Godel’s work and a metaphysical fabrication that doesn’t reflect how real computers function. The author argues that Turing machines are not predecessors to modern computers and that his bombe codebreaker was a copy of a previous invention.

Mathis contends that Turing’s inclusion in the BBC’s list of most important 20th-century figures, alongside David Bowie, Muhammad Ali, Marilyn Monroe, Andy Warhol, Alfred Hitchcock, Billie Jean King, Pele, and Tanni Grey-Thompson, is a testament to the general lack of understanding of history. He also points to Turing’s association with other “phonies” like Ludwig Wittgenstein, John von Neumann, and Kurt Godel.

The author further scrutinizes the narrative around Bletchley Park and codebreaking during WWII. He suggests that WWII itself was a fabricated conflict managed by the same entities, rendering codebreaking unnecessary. The author claims Hitler was an actor set up by British Intelligence and that the families involved in funding both sides were inter-connected. The story of the Enigma machine’s breaking is dismissed as absurd, with Mathis highlighting the claims of poor German operating procedures as contradictory to their supposed discipline and suggesting the “breaking” was facilitated by spies and stolen information, not genius.

Mathis also questions the story of Turing burying silver bars and being unable to find them, interpreting it as further evidence of his incompetence. He points to the commercial availability of the Enigma machine as a reason for its supposed breaking. The author speculates that Bletchley Park, owned by Sir Herbert Leon, a financier and associate of Jewish families like the Samuel, Viscounts Bearsted, Beddington, Moses, Montagus, Goldsmid, Montefiore, Rothschild, and Barent Cohens, was chosen due to its aristocratic connections rather than strategic necessity. He suggests the lack of photographic evidence from Bletchley is suspicious, and that the codebreakers, including Stuart Milner-Barry, Dilly Knox, Oliver Strachey, Hugh Alexander, and Turing himself, were part of an privileged, interconnected group.

The author links the Leon family to actors, including the 4th Baronet John Standing, and to Hollywood, suggesting their involvement in fabricating the codebreaking narrative. He dismisses the workings of the bombe as unscientific and argues that the number of machines supposedly used is implausible given the space at Bletchley. Mathis notes that Turing was not involved with the Colossus computer and instead worked on “Turingery,” a teleprinter rotor cipher attachment.

Finally, the text discusses Turing’s prosecution for homosexuality, suggesting it was a staged event leading to a “transition” to a woman, possibly as a way to fake his death and continue in intelligence as “Alana Turing.” The circumstances of his death, attributed to cyanide poisoning and speculated to be a reenactment of Snow White, are also presented as suspicious, with the author favoring the idea of a staged death to further conceal him within intelligence circles.

Summary with marked entities:

The provided text argues that Alan Turing was a fabricated figure, a “Total Fraud,” despite his BBC-rated importance as the most significant person of the 20th century and his depiction on the £50 note and in the film The Imitation Game. The author, Miles Mathis, claims Turing’s family ties to old Scottish merchants with Dutch and English East India Company and Phoenician Navy connections, and his peerage from the Baronets of Foveran and Barons Congleton, are indicative of his manufactured status. Turing’s maternal grandfather, Edward Waller Stoney, associated with the Madras Railway, and his parents, Julius and Ethel (likened to Julius and Ethel Rosenberg), are suggested to be Jewish, connecting to groups like the Goulds and Townshends.

Mathis questions Turing’s academic and scientific achievements, including his election to King’s College for work already proven by Lindeberg, his Princeton PhD, and his influential 1936 paper on Turing machines. He dismisses Turing machines as not being precursors to modern computers and views Turing’s bombe as a copy of an earlier invention. The author suggests Turing’s fame, alongside figures like David Bowie, Muhammad Ali, Marilyn Monroe, Andy Warhol, Alfred Hitchcock, Billie Jean King, Pele, and Tanni Grey-Thompson, is undeserved. Turing’s association with Ludwig Wittgenstein, John von Neumann, and Kurt Godel is also criticized.

The text strongly disputes the narrative of WWII codebreaking at Bletchley Park, asserting that the war was a manufactured conflict and codebreaking was unnecessary. Hitler is described as an actor controlled by British Intelligence, and the inter-connectedness of the families funding both sides is highlighted. The story of the Enigma machine’s breaking is called absurd, with espionage and stolen information being proposed as the real methods, not Turing’s alleged genius. The author also doubts the story of Turing burying and failing to recover silver bars.

Mathis points to Bletchley Park’s ownership by Sir Herbert Leon and its connections to Jewish families like the Samuel, Viscounts Bearsted, Beddington, Moses, Montagus, Goldsmid, Montefiore, Rothschild, and Barent Cohens as a reason for its selection, rather than military necessity. The lack of photographic evidence from Bletchley Park is considered suspicious, and the individuals involved, including Stuart Milner-Barry, Dilly Knox, Oliver Strachey, Hugh Alexander, and Turing, are presented as part of an elite, interconnected group. The Leon family’s ties to actors like John Standing and Hollywood are seen as further evidence of fabricated narratives.

The author dismisses the functionality of the bombe and questions the logistics of its operation at Bletchley Park. He states Turing’s involvement was with “Turingery,” not the Colossus computer. Finally, Turing’s prosecution for homosexuality is portrayed as a staged event, possibly a “transition” to a woman (“Alana Turing”) to facilitate a fake death and continued clandestine work within intelligence. His death is also deemed suspicious, with the narrative of suicide by cyanide poisoning questioned.

List of Subjects, Names, References, Locations, Companies, etc.:

Graph View