CODEBREAKER COMMENTS ABOUT BEALE CIPHERS

[Treasure_Hunter]

Go off topic much?

He replied to comment made by ECS who is the op of thread....

In the 1960's, Carl Hammer of SPERRY UNIVAC using a supercomputer, concluded that C1 & C3 have statistical characteristics that are not actually encryptions of an English plaintext, and are NOT WORDS IN ENGLISH.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[ECS]

And Jean doesn't mind if he doesn't make the scene. He's got a daytime job, he's doing alright !

...and the Sultans of Swing play Creole, Creole.

 

[Rebel - KGC]

When Poe was a student at Mr. Jefferson's University, he PROBABLY studied the VARIOUS Codes of Thomas Jefferson... I can indicate where I found info on those codes for ALL. Alderman Library at UVA has the TJ's Books/Papers, in the basement... I was in there, MANY times (LOVE the scent of old books & papers). LOVE stacks BABY! Heh!

EAP started UVA on 02/14/1826; TJ was one of 2 men, who recommended EAP to study & enroll; TJ died on 7/04/1826, For MORE info on TJ's Codes & Ciphers, "Google" Thomas Jefferson's Codes & Ciphers: I (1783-1789), Thomas Jefferson's Codes & Ciphers: II (1790-1803), Thomas Jefferson's Codes & Ciphers: III (Miscellaneous); HH! Good Luck!

 

[Old Silver]

He replied to comment made by ECS who is the op of thread....

But it was off topic. Nothing had been said about who should get credit for computers, etc. But if no one else cares, then I don't either.

 

[ECS]

It was an interesting sidebar to the discussion, and was quite informative.

 

[Old Silver]

It was an interesting sidebar to the discussion, and was quite informative.

It had nothing to do with THE DISCUSSION.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

End the arguing..

 

[releventchair]

Go off topic much?

Often enough I suppose.
Is your quoted post off topic?

 

[ECS]

...

Do you suppose these people have to be right just because they are code breakers or doctors? There are other code breakers who say they believe the Beale story is true. Does that make it true? No, it doesn't, just like the opinions of those you cite doesn't make it false.

While on the subject of computer cipher analysis, lets take a gander at what the lads with the modern super computers have to relate concerning the Beale Papers:
https://www.nsa.gov/news-features/declassified-documents/beale-papers/index.shtml

 

[TN_Guest1523]

While on the subject of computer cipher analysis, lets take a gander at what the lads with the modern super computers have to relate concerning the Beale Papers:
https://www.nsa.gov/news-features/declassified-documents/beale-papers/index.shtml

Funny thing is, I have decoded the Beale Papers and not worried about there failed attempts .

 

[Old Silver]

While on the subject of computer cipher analysis, lets take a gander at what the lads with the modern super computers have to relate concerning the Beale Papers:
https://www.nsa.gov/news-features/declassified-documents/beale-papers/index.shtml

There are conflicting opinions, all from "professionals." Go ahead and SELECT the one's you like best.

 

[TN_Guest1523]

There are conflicting opinions, all from "professionals." Go ahead and SELECT the one's you like best.

If they can't decode it it must be not real, LOL

I just think that they had made up there minds it was a hoax before they even tried .

 

[Old Silver]

If they can't decode it it must be not real, LOL

I just think that they had made up there minds it was a hoax before they even tried .

What else can "professional" code breakers claim when they fail to break a code.

 

[ECS]

...or as many professionals have stated, C1 & C3 are not real valid ciphers, and those who claim a solution, reach their "solve" by preconceived expectations- which explains why all the claimed "solves" are different.

 

[Old Silver]

...or as many professionals have stated, C1 & C3 are not real valid ciphers, and those who claim a solution, reach their "solve" by preconceived expectations- which explains why all the claimed "solves" are different.

But what you're ignoring is that there is something else different. That would be opinion from professional. You cite many, but you ignore others. If all professionals are right, simply because they are professionals, then they would all agree.

 

[TN_Guest1523]

...or as many professionals have stated, C1 & C3 are not real valid ciphers, and those who claim a solution, reach their "solve" by preconceived expectations- which explains why all the claimed "solves" are different.

Name all the claimed ciphers solutions that you have seen, I bet you can't !

 

[ECS]

It is interesting that some on this thread consider our country's first line of intelligence defense, the super computers and those who analyze codes and ciphers in different languages of the NSA inadequate to "solve" the C1 & C3 Beale codes from an 1885 adventure treasure dime novel.
In the last 130 years NO conclusive evidence has ever been found or presented that can prove anything in the Beale Papers text narrative ever occurred.
If the Beale expedition and the other events related in the 1885 job pamphlet never happened, then the DOI "solved" C2 was provided as a lure for the unwary reader to buy into the story ad play along, while C1 & C3 contain no real message, as many professional codebreakers in the intelligence field have maintained.
To discount the efforts of the NSA supercomputers and analysts because their determination concerning the Beale ciphers doesn't match one's preconceived version, is pure hubris on their part.

 

[Old Silver]

It is interesting that some on this thread consider our country's first line of intelligence defense, the super computers and those who analyze codes and ciphers in different languages of the NSA inadequate to "solve" the C1 & C3 Beale codes from an 1885 adventure treasure dime novel.
In the last 130 years NO conclusive evidence has ever been found or presented that can prove anything in the Beale Papers text narrative ever occurred.
If the Beale expedition and the other events related in the 1885 job pamphlet never happened, then the DOI "solved" C2 was provided as a lure for the unwary reader to buy into the story ad play along, while C1 & C3 contain no real message, as many professional codebreakers in the intelligence field have maintained.
To discount the efforts of the NSA supercomputers and analysts because their determination concerning the Beale ciphers doesn't match one's preconceived version, is pure hubris on their part.

I'm not the one who said they couldn't crack the code. THEY are the one's who have made that determination.
So what about those same type of intelligent people who DO believe that the Beale codes hold some sort of message? How do you reconcile the two? Are the ones who believe in the codes less intelligent than the ones who don't? I will agree that To discount the efforts, EITHER WAY, of the NSA supercomputers and analysts because their determination concerning the Beale ciphers doesn't match one's preconceived version, is pure hubris on their part. That includes us all, ECS. But you are one way and that all it can possibly be, right?

As for NOTHING in the Beale papers being true, that's just plain wrong.

 

[ECS]

Notice I wrote "intelligence field" not intelligent people.
The NSA's position is there is no valid message in C1 & C3, not that they couldn't "crack it".
What in the BEALE PAPERS has been proven true that is related directly to the Beale story?

 

[Old Silver]

Notice I wrote "intelligence field" not intelligent people.
The NSA's position is there is no valid message in C1 & C3, not that they couldn't "crack it".
What in the BEALE PAPERS has been proven true that is related directly to the Beale story?

They are all in the same field. But you separate them into those who believe in the Beale Papers, and those who don't. How do you reconcile this?

There is much truth in the Beale papers. That doesn't mean the treasure is real, but a lot of things in there are true, like the characters, for instance.