1,2,3......Another Bomb IS Dropped!

[TN_Guest1523]

Jean, math is considered a perfect science. Did you know that, and do you know why it is considered a perfect science? You should look into it sometime. And as for brainwashing, well, hey, Jean, you're the guy who was begging for a job with the NSA, not me. Live your dream, man. Live your dream.

I got a job Bro, I have a few . Why would I need to work for the NSA, CIA or other Government position ?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[TN_Guest1523]

BS on a thread a bit ago .

As already stated many times, there is no "conclusive proof" either way, but there is strong evidence that supports the fictional dime novel theory. Pretending it's not there doesn't change the fact that it exist so fiction theorist do have, perhaps, more supporting evidence then any other theory in the field, part of this largely due to the fact that the other field of theories have no conclusive evidence at all that the narration was anything else. You want cold hard facts and here you have just been handed some. Just saying, a very good case can be made for those who support the fiction theory.


Proof is a document that makes a statement, and with no proof it is fiction it stands on its own . Simple Facts Bro !

The Beale Papers stand on there own as proof of an event ! Your fantasies don't change that Bro .

The Beale Papers are a Historical Document as per definition, nothing you invent can change that .

 

[bigscoop]

BS on a thread a bit ago .

As already stated many times, there is no "conclusive proof" either way, but there is strong evidence that supports the fictional dime novel theory. Pretending it's not there doesn't change the fact that it exist so fiction theorist do have, perhaps, more supporting evidence then any other theory in the field, part of this largely due to the fact that the other field of theories have no conclusive evidence at all that the narration was anything else. You want cold hard facts and here you have just been handed some. Just saying, a very good case can be made for those who support the fiction theory.


Proof is a document that makes a statement, and with no proof it is fiction it stands on its own . Simple Facts Bro !

The Beale Papers stand on there own as proof of an event ! Your fantasies don't change that Bro .

The Beale Papers are a Historical Document as per definition, nothing you invent can change that .

I stand by those words...thanks for re-posting them.
As for your logic, it's your dream man, live it however you desire.
Would it help if I used a big animal cracker, a small animal cracker, and a tiny animal cracker?

 

[bigscoop]

The other traps that you have manufactured yourself involve that whole unintelligible missing piece of paper issue that your author has clearly outlined.
A) You can't explain how your author knew about this missing piece of of unintelligible paper, and B) you can't explain how he knew that it would be unintelligible to his readers. All of this he clearly points out in his narration. And, another trap you have clearly created for yourself, you have avoided addressing the author's claim that after decoding C2 he, "had no difficultly in mastering the others" What others, Jean?

 

[TN_Guest1523]

The other traps that you have manufactured yourself involve that whole unintelligible missing piece of paper issue that your author has clearly outlined.
A) You can't explain how your author knew about this missing piece of of unintelligible paper, and B) you can't explain how he knew that it would be unintelligible to his readers. All of this he clearly points out in his narration. And, another trap you have clearly created for yourself, you have avoided addressing the author's claim that after decoding C2 he, "had no difficultly in mastering the others" What others, Jean?

A. That they would attach no importance to a seemingly unintelligible writing seems quite natural; but their attention being called to them by the publication of this narrative, may result in eventually bringing to light the missing paper The only time missing appears in the Papers .

B. (unintelligible missing piece of paper) is out of context . This statement dose not exist within the Beale Papers in this manner .

1. That they would attach no importance to a seemingly unintelligible writing seems quite natural; but their attention being called to them by the publication of this narrative, may result in eventually bringing to light the missing paper.

2. During that year I had the lock broken, and with the exception of the two letters addressed to myself, and some old receipts, found only some unintelligible papers, covered with figures, and totally incomprehensible to me.

3. You will find, in addition to the papers addressed to you, other papers which will be unintelligible without the aid of a key to assist you. Such a key I have left in the hands of a friend in this place, sealed, addressed to yourself, and endorsed not to be delivered until June, 1832. By means of this you will understand fully all you will be required to do.

4. The papers enclosed herewith will be unintelligible without the key, which will reach you in time, and will be found merely to state the contents of our depository, with its exact location, and a list of the names of our party, with their places of residence, etc.

As best that I can see you have blended 2-3 sentences to invent a quote that dose not exist . One of these 4 times the word unintelligible is used, what are you referencing 1, 2, 3 or 4 ?

 

[TN_Guest1523]

The other traps that you have manufactured yourself involve that whole unintelligible missing piece of paper issue that your author has clearly outlined.
A) You can't explain how your author knew about this missing piece of of unintelligible paper, and B) you can't explain how he knew that it would be unintelligible to his readers. All of this he clearly points out in his narration. And, another trap you have clearly created for yourself, you have avoided addressing the author's claim that after decoding C2 he, "had no difficultly in mastering the others" What others, Jean?

Unmeaning, as this had hitherto been, it was now fully explained, and no difficulty was apprehended in mastering the others;

The only time Mastering is used in the Beale Papers, again you are manipulating text for your own use's .

 

[TN_Guest1523]

Unmeaning, as this had hitherto been, it was now fully explained, and no difficulty was apprehended in mastering the others;

The only time Mastering is used in the Beale Papers, again you are manipulating text for your own use's .

The word in context ! as found in the Introduction

Until the writer lost all hope of ultimate success, he toiled faithfully at his work; unlike any other pursuit with practical and natural results, a charm attended it, independent of the ultimate benefit he expected, and the possibility of success lent an interest and excitement to the work not to be resisted. It would be difficult to portray the delight he experienced when accident revealed to him the explanation of the paper marked "2." Unmeaning, as this had hitherto been, it was now fully explained, and no difficulty was apprehended in mastering the others; but this accident, affording so much pleasure at the time, was a most unfortunate one for him, as it induced him to neglect family, friends, and all legitimate pursuits for what has proved, so far, the veriest illusion.

 

[TN_Guest1523]

Parts of a Papers today, we can see how the Beale Papers were set up as a Paper .

 

[bigscoop]

Jean, you are certainly trying to dodge the obvious.

So after the author decoded C2, and it was fully explained to him, he experienced, "no difficulty was apprehended in mastering the others;"
So Jean, what others if not C1 & C3?

"That they would attach no importance to a seemingly unintelligible writing seems quite natural; but their attention being called to them by the publication of this narrative, may result in eventually bringing to light the missing paper."

I don't know what school you went to, but the above is one sentence, not multiple sentences. The author has clearly identified what his readers will see to be an "unintelligible writing" and in this same sentence he also clearly details that it is a missing paper. Hence= missing unintelligible paper.

One sentence providing a very clear statement about an unintelligible paper that is missing.

Dude, did you even go to school?

Another problem/trap you have manufactured for yourself is with the key, as he already has it which is why he was allegedly able to decode C2, so how does he know that there is another missing vital key or paper? Can you say, "Ut-oh! Bigscoop just shined more of that annoying bright factual light in my secret dark corner!"

So without all of the dodging and weaving what were, "the others that he had no difficulty in mastering?"
And, can you explain how the author knew about the missing paper and that it would appear unintelligible?

It's all clearly in the author's own words......so please, enlighten us.

 

[TN_Guest1523]

Jean, you are certainly trying to dodge the obvious.

So after the author decoded C2, and it was fully explained to him, he experienced, "no difficulty was apprehended in mastering the others;"
So Jean, what others if not C1 & C3?

"That they would attach no importance to a seemingly unintelligible writing seems quite natural; but their attention being called to them by the publication of this narrative, may result in eventually bringing to light the missing paper."

I don't know what school you went to, but the above is one sentence, not multiple sentences. The author has clearly identified what his readers will see to be an "unintelligible writing" and in this same sentence he also clearly details that it is a missing paper. Hence= missing unintelligible paper.

One sentence providing a very clear statement about an unintelligible paper that is missing.

Dude, did you even go to school?

Another problem/trap you have manufactured for yourself is with the key, as he already has it which is why he was allegedly able to decode C2, so how does he know that there is another missing vital key or paper? Can you say, "Ut-oh! Bigscoop just shined more of that annoying bright factual light in my secret dark corner!"

So without all of the dodging and weaving what were, "the others that he had no difficulty in mastering?"
And, can you explain how the author knew about the missing paper and that it would appear unintelligible?

It's all clearly in the author's own words......so please, enlighten us.

It will be seen by a perusal of Mr. Beale's letter to Mr. Morriss that he promised, under certain contingences, such as failure to see or communicate with him in a given time, to furnishing a key by which the papers would be fully explained. As the failure to do either actually occurred, and the promised explanation has never been received, it may possibly remain in the hands of some relative or friend of Beale's, or some other person engaged in the enterprise with him. That they would attach no importance to a seemingly unintelligible writing seems quite natural; but their attention being called to them by the publication of this narrative, may result in eventually bringing to light the missing paper.

 

[TN_Guest1523]

It will be seen by a perusal of Mr. Beale's letter to Mr. Morriss that he promised, under certain contingences, such as failure to see or communicate with him in a given time, to furnishing a key by which the papers would be fully explained. As the failure to do either actually occurred, and the promised explanation has never been received, it may possibly remain in the hands of some relative or friend of Beale's, or some other person engaged in the enterprise with him. That they would attach no importance to a seemingly unintelligible writing seems quite natural; but their attention being called to them by the publication of this narrative, may result in eventually bringing to light the missing paper.

Nuff SAID in GREEN !

 

[bigscoop]

It will be seen by a perusal of Mr. Beale's letter to Mr. Morriss that he promised, under certain contingences, such as failure to see or communicate with him in a given time, to furnishing a key by which the papers would be fully explained. As the failure to do either actually occurred, and the promised explanation has never been received, it may possibly remain in the hands of some relative or friend of Beale's, or some other person engaged in the enterprise with him. That they would attach no importance to a seemingly unintelligible writing seems quite natural; but their attention being called to them by the publication of this narrative, may result in eventually bringing to light the missing paper.

Yes! Exactly! Your author already has the key, this being how he was allegedly able to decode C2, this clear text then finally telling him that the ciphers had been numbered "just exactly" as he had allegedly numbered them.

And as you point out in your "green".....if he already possessed the key then how did he know there was another missing paper?

And last, which you're still avoiding at all cost, what "others" did he have "no difficulty mastering" after his decoding of C2 had revealed to him the explanation of that cipher?

Hook, line, and sinker! It's that plain and it's that simple regardless how, "you attempt to teach it."

 

[TN_Guest1523]

 

[Tnmountains]

This thread just keeps getting smaller and smaller. Keep insulting one another and it will cease to exist. Thanks!

 

[releventchair]

How long would you wait to open such a box?
10 years as instructed if you remembered.
I would think I'd remember.
What if Morris remembered.... and the lapse between 10 years and when he claimed to have remembered were occupied with the boxes contents?

 

[bigscoop]

How long would you wait to open such a box?
10 years as instructed if you remembered.
I would think I'd remember.
What if Morris remembered.... and the lapse between 10 years and when he claimed to have remembered were occupied with the boxes contents?

The standing story is that Morriss never heard from anybody, not even the guy who was suppose to have the key, so not only did the party all get killed by Indians...so did the guy in St. Louis with the key.

The ten-year term is also something folks never bother to consider as there were legal processes that could have been undertaken that would have insured the safety of the wealth and each man's share, including their heirs. This could have easily been done by the forming of a simple corporation, etc. This approach would have been far safer then entrusting a stranger with secret codes and hiding the wealth under Uncle Ralph's barn, or wherever. Unless of course there was already an illegal or unscrupulous issue that prevented these much smarter and much safer actions.

No doubt the story has several obvious flaws in its telling.

 

[Rebel - KGC]

Well, it COULDA been the CSA Treasury-WESTERN Virginia "portion" buried under Uncle Newton's barn... dunno.
NHH coulda had the three pages of FIGURES since 1865; NO Beale Expedition "story"... THAT came LATER, by 1882-84; released as Beale PAPERS Pamphlet in 1885.

 

[TN_Guest1523]

The standing story is that Morriss never heard from anybody, not even the guy who was suppose to have the key, so not only did the party all get killed by Indians...so did the guy in St. Louis with the key.

The ten-year term is also something folks never bother to consider as there were legal processes that could have been undertaken that would have insured the safety of the wealth and each man's share, including their heirs. This could have easily been done by the forming of a simple corporation, etc. This approach would have been far safer then entrusting a stranger with secret codes and hiding the wealth under Uncle Ralph's barn, or wherever. Unless of course there was already an illegal or unscrupulous issue that prevented these much smarter and much safer actions.

No doubt the story has several obvious flaws in its telling.

 

[TN_Guest1523]

The standing story is that Morriss never heard from anybody, not even the guy who was suppose to have the key, so not only did the party all get killed by Indians...so did the guy in St. Louis with the key.

The ten-year term is also something folks never bother to consider as there were legal processes that could have been undertaken that would have insured the safety of the wealth and each man's share, including their heirs. This could have easily been done by the forming of a simple corporation, etc. This approach would have been far safer then entrusting a stranger with secret codes and hiding the wealth under Uncle Ralph's barn, or wherever. Unless of course there was already an illegal or unscrupulous issue that prevented these much smarter and much safer actions.

No doubt the story has several obvious flaws in its telling.

A river flood could have destroyed the letter being kept by a person in Franklin Missouri . As per the papers above .

 

[bigscoop]

A river flood could have destroyed the letter being kept by a person in Franklin Missouri . As per the papers above .

The narration also "plants the thought" about Indian massacres. The only way we know that Indian massacres happened is because people spoke of them. So a number of men over at least a four year period repeatedly go back and forth between home and a fabulous mine, all of them eventually killed by murderous Indians and yet not a single word of concern from friends, family, etc., etc., etc.

Now another man involved with the secret enterprise is killed by a flood.....why not a buffalo stampede as buffaloes are also referenced in the tale. Thus is the power of suggestion. Illusionist and magicians employ it all of the time.