A couple of more "OH NO!" details for true believers....

[franklin]

Folks like you? Who elected you guardian over the Internet?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[bigscoop]

Folks like you? Who elected you guardian over the Internet?

Franklin, these are public forums, the purpose of which to present ideas and to hold reasonable discussion and debate. When theories or claims are presented one can expect, and should actually hope for, the presentation of contrary fact and information as this is the only path to the possible truth. However, as is often the case, when contrary point and/or fact is often presented, and quite often regardless how it is presented, "a lot" of people react with aggressive resentment simply because that contrary information or fact was presented at all. This is the problem, it is not the contrary information or fact that was presented or the person who presented it.

Like you, ECS has as times dogged me to death over some things I have posted in these forums where I was mistaken or where i was taking it out of context and while it was frustrating at the time it is fully appreciated now as he was correct in his assessments. So maybe step back, do some new fact finding and new researching and accept that there's a chance that you are wrong, or that the information you're providing as fact is flawed, and why or where. This is how true progress is made, and it is the only way it is made. And this is all I can really suggest to you because as long as folks make or present inaccurate information or claims in these forums that contrary information and fact is always going to follow in suit just as it should. That is the purpose of these public forums.

 

[ECS]

... The issue is that you and others are trying to push blind speculation off on others as if it is fact, when it clearly is not...
Theories are fine as long as they are presented as such, but to claiming those theories to cold hard facts and actual provenance is quite something different.
So keep it real and keep things in perspective, stop with all of the lore, romance, myth, legend etc., as if it is all cold hard etched in stone fact...

This pushing of speculation, theories, lore, romance, myth, legend, etc is the root cause of all the controversy on these Beale threads, for when it is questioned and/or corrected by the posting of real facts, the insults fly and the complaining about certain TN members commence.
A forum is designed for pro and con discussions, and often fiction is discarded when hard fact is presented proving said fiction is fiction, be it speculation, theory, romance, myth, legend- but on these Beale threads, factual evidence causes friction and arguments,followed with attempts at discarding fact in favor of the fabricated fiction with altruistic claims of finally solving the Beale treasure mystery.
Fiction has never solved any mystery, but only further clouds the facts from discovery.

 

[franklin]

You two have at it. You do not need any of us around. I have seen other forums and they are friendly. Bite the bones in your own backyards. I am not going to let you in my yard anymore. You need to find you a debate club and stay there. Intelligent people like to be around intelligent people. I am going to talk to the most intelligent person I know------------myself. Good day to you two whatever it is you are trying to do..

 

[bigscoop]

You two have at it. You do not need any of us around. I have seen other forums and they are friendly. Bite the bones in your own backyards. I am not going to let you in my yard anymore. You need to find you a debate club and stay there. Intelligent people like to be around intelligent people. I am going to talk to the most intelligent person I know------------myself. Good day to you two whatever it is you are trying to do..

Now see, this is what TH is talking about, those pointless stabs at other members rather then presenting points relevant to the debate. Or, were you simply suggesting that we need to find intelligent people to be around? Either way you're attacking members instead of presenting points of debate at issue. Why go there?

 

[Rebel - KGC]

Go ahead, make up your own minds, that's not the issue. The issue is that you and others are trying to push blind speculation off on others as if it is fact, when it clearly is not. If not for folks like me then deceivers and schemers would free to sell whatever they wanted to folks without fear of ever being exposed. Theories are fine as long as they are presented as such, I even do this myself, but to claiming those theories to cold hard facts and actual provenance is quite something different. So keep it real and keep things in perspective, stop with all of the lore, romance, myth, legend etc., as if it is all cold hard etched in stone fact. Accept the contrary as it it really is, accept what the author has written just as he has written it and presented it. Do this and you will then be dealing in facts and presenting facts.

And as for not being children, then quit acting like children, understand the contrary points and accept the facts as they are. This is what adults typically do. Children chase fairy-tales, those things that are fantasy. Adults have the option not to believe in things that they can't establish as even being real and most depend on facts to make those decisions.

Thought POLICE, eh...?

 

[ECS]

...
Alleged contents of the iron box according to Beale in his May 9[SUP]th[/SUP] letter to Morriss; “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.”

Alleged quote from Morriss in regards to the contents of the iron box; “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.”

Alleged contents of the iron box according to the author after gaining possession; “The two letters given above were all the box contained that were intelligible; the others, consisted of papers closely covered with figures, which were, of course, unmeaning until they could be deciphered.”

What's missing? And why is there no consistency in these three alleged statements? Beale's alleged statement is vague. The alleged Morriss statement includes old receipts. And the alleged author statement includes no such “old receipts.”

And if you really want a HUGE tell-tell, just read the following alleged letter to Morriss, a letter that by its contents directly contradicts the entire narration. Who can spot it?

St. Louis, Mo., May 9th, 1822.
Robt. Morris, Esq.:

My Esteemed Friend: - Ever since leaving my comfortable quarters at your house I have been journeying to this place, and only succeeded in reaching it yesterday. I have had altogether a pleasant time, the weather being fine and the atmosphere bracing. I shall remain here a week or ten days longer, then "ho" for the plains, to hunt the buffalo and encounter the savage grizzlies. How long I may be absent I cannot now determine, certainly no less than two years, perhaps longer...


Read the opening paragraph, Beale says, “I shall remain here a week or ten days longer, then "ho" for the plains, to hunt the buffalo and encounter the savage grizzlies.” What the hell happened to his all-important and hugely wealthy mining enterprise?”
The author really blew it here...

When one reads the Beale Papers with a critical eye, many conflicting statements become apparent as plausible but are placed as purposeful discrepancies that the targeted buying public of 1885 Lynchburg would have been aware.

 

[legrand]

Good thread. But, it seems to me that everyone, if they were all discussing feet for instance, is concentrating on the shoes and the feet...when it's the socks they should be focusing on.

Walk tall and carry a large solution.

Soon.

 

[ECS]

Are you claiming that Sarah Mitchell Morriss darned holes in Thomas J Beale socks before he "ho" for the plains to hunt the buffalo and encounter the savage grizzlies?

 

[ECS]

Franklin, these are public forums, the purpose of which to present ideas and to hold reasonable discussion and debate.
When theories or claims are presented one can expect, and should actually hope for, the presentation of contrary fact and information as this is the only path to the possible truth.
However, as is often the case, when contrary point and/or fact is often presented, and quite often regardless how it is presented, "a lot" of people react with aggressive resentment simply because that contrary information or fact was presented at all.
This is the problem, it is not the contrary information or fact that was presented or the person who presented it.

Like you, ECS has as times dogged me to death over some things I have posted in these forums where I was mistaken or where i was taking it out of context and while it was frustrating at the time it is fully appreciated now as he was correct in his assessments.
So maybe step back, do some new fact finding and new researching and accept that there's a chance that you are wrong, or that the information you're providing as fact is flawed, and why or where.
This is how true progress is made, and it is the only way it is made.
And this is all I can really suggest to you because as long as folks make or present inaccurate information or claims in these forums that contrary information and fact is always going to follow in suit just as it should.
That is the purpose of these public forums.

...and I might add, if one is so insecure in "facts" that one has presented, or holds the belief that they are above question, discussion, and debate, then one should not post their theories and opinions if they can't undergo scrutiny of actual documented provenance as backing evidence.
True factual statements can stand up to scrutiny, fanciful embellishment of basic known information shaken, stirred, and mixed with unrelated information of the same period, does not.

 

[legrand]

Are you claiming that Sarah Mitchell Morriss darned holes in Thomas J Beale socks before he "ho" for the plains to hunt the buffalo and encounter the savage grizzlies?

Silly comments adversely affect your credibility, ECS.
I have everything you require concerning provenance.
R,espect me...

 

[ECS]

Are you sure about that?
A little comic relief has never affected anyone's credibility on these threads, its the endless posting of unsupported and unresolved claims.
...but I reckon, of that you are well aware.

 

[legrand]

Are you sure about that?
A little comic relief has never affected anyone's credibility on these threads, its the endless posting of unsupported and unresolved claims.
...but I reckon, of that you are well aware.

Why "offset more serious issues" ...the definition of "comic relief"?
I said "silly" not "funny" comments. At least, that's what I meant. A little levity, I admit, is needed in tenuous situations.
T, heory no longer is the basis for provenance. I can see this has their attention...the audience.

 

[ECS]

There is humor in the endless lack of claims unresolved.

 

[legrand]

There is humor in the endless lack of claims unresolved.

I guess I agree with this...more specifically, however, I feel sorry for all the people who have tried so hard to solve. They deserve a great deal.
Then a great deal they soon shall have.

 

[ECS]

In the words of Michael Valentine Smith of Heinlein's STRANGER IN A STRANGE LAND: "Waiting is".

 

[bigscoop]

At this juncture, it's either possessed or it ain't. We're now way-way past just claiming that ever-missing direct connection is possessed. That same horn has been blown so many times that horn no longer carries tune.

 

[ECS]

.... Intelligent people like to be around intelligent people. I am going to talk to the most intelligent person I know------------myself...

...and how is that working for your objectivity in discussing this and other subjects?

 

[franklin]

Quite well actually.

 

[bigscoop]

I think folks need to remember that all of the advanced advertising for the narration was from a source that was known to routinely produce dime novels, this being Mr. Sherman. So was it any great surprise on the local home front that this same source was advertising yet another story/dime novel, the Beale Papers? One also has to consider the cost of all that advertising to anyone other then the producer of that paper, the only practical source who could ever hope to recover all of the cost of that heavy advanced advertising, and also the publishing, this all due to far less out of pocket expenses.