General Discussion

If you're going to quote something and put it in bold, then expect people to check the context in the original. Your emboldened part is followed by (still in the same paragraph) "This seems unlikely given the apparent existence of a subsurface air gap above material that is both mixed but also approaches the soil beneath in its relative permittivity (cf Figures 8 and 12)." If you're going to try and pretend the "this seems unlikely ..." doesn't exist by cutting off the paragraph, then you're cherry-picking. That is not a responsible attitude to history, and that what's makes this thread ironic and comic.

Yes, they don't think they used coffins. From the same source: " The change in fashion from burying in a shroud to using a wooden coffin occurs around the period of these burials". So it wouldn't be surprising either way. The disturbance of one end of the grave lends credence to a story that someone had taken the skull (nearly 200 years after he died). That, however, is not "Shakespeare isn't buried there. It's empty", and it's an extremely minor bit of late 18th century history. For that to be the centrepiece of your OP "other people aren't taking history scientifically enough" is, frankly, poppycock.