How would a mathematician rate the strength of this encryption?

I believe you refer to this portion:

the true author of the Vuvuzela Concerto also knows how to decrypt this number

32,667,412,814,139,852,730,752,490,966,405,430,384,344,518,561,830,544,512,803,828,149,073,891,719,578,179,112

in such a way that their answers to the questions above are confirmed as correct.

That 83 digit number probably requires 256 bits to represent in binary, or perhaps slightly more. It could be very weak "encryption" such as reading 8 bit ASCII characters from the binary string that results from converting decimal to binary. Or it might be that a binary string representing ASCII characters was XOR'd with some simple pattern. Or it might be the result of using a strong encryption algorithm, such as AES, on a string of text. One can't infer the method used by simply looking at the result. One might have a clue if they went to the trouble to convert the decimal number to binary.

Biologists see various info meaning that 6000-365 days Creationism is fake. Mathematicians see types interior the behaviour of believers which advise that concept improves lives. EDIT: @Skyhawk - mathematicians spend a lot of their time proving issues by contradiction. Biologists have not got that luxurious; they word the worldwide and base theories on that. EDIT: @Torpex2002 - yet there have been no pirates whilst there became no anthropogenic worldwide warming. EDIT: @Crazyworld - what does that would desire to do with mathematicians? @Invisible Talker - without understanding approximately Canadian universities, over right here mathematicians decide for bigger rankings to get into arithmetic classes than biologists. The eighty% of Canadians weren't all destiny college attendees. purely by using fact there are idiots who believe a factor, does no longer mean that arriving on an identical place quite is impossible.