bigscoop
Gold Member
- Jun 4, 2010
- 13,535
- 9,072
- Detector(s) used
- Older blue Excal with full mods, Equinox 800.
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
Jean, Legrand, Masterpoe, Franklin, and others who have dabbled at trying to decode C1, you folks need to read this and understand these existing conditions.
C1, C2, C3, lay them all next to each other and then take note of their differences. In C3 we have no 4 digit codes, in C2 we have only one, this being used for the letter “x” as there are no words in the DOI/key that begin with x so 1000 was used to express the letter x. In C1, however, we find 19 four digit codes. The question you should now ask yourselves is, “why are there 19 four digit codes in C1 and none in the other ciphers?” This question has lead to some profound discoveries that I'm going to share with you now.
C1, computer anaylisis of this cipher has concluded that C1 CAN'T POSSIBLY CONTAIN A GRAMMATICALLY CORRECT CLEAR TEXT as it is presented, 132 years of thousands of trial and error attempts also serving to establish this cold hard fact. However, and due to those 19 four digit codes, this doesn't mean that no grammatically correct clear text can exist in C1. Confused? Then allow me to explain further.
Right from the very start code-breaking hopefuls have ASSUMED that similar C2 process was to be used to decode C1, but what if the author of these three ciphers was counting on that very thing? In recent post I have often said that I can't think of a single hiding place that I couldn't tell you about in a single sentence, the average English sentence being between 13 & 20 words. So let us assume that our coder used four digit codes to create that single sentence and then he simply hid that coded sentence within a bunch of randomly selected code “that could never produce a grammatically correct clear text.” In this scenario hopeful decoders would spend the rest of their lives trying to produce a clear text where none can't exist, the coder's real message safe and sound within all of his randomly placed bait, the bait he has even made certain that everyone would continue to chase due to his C2 example.
Now then, and swallowing our prides for just a moment, if we know beyond a shadow of a doubt that all of the other codes in C1 can't possibly contain a grammatically correct clear text, which we do know now, then where else might that clear text be hidden in C1 if it indeed contains such a clear text?
Still doubt this very real possibility? Then consider that other unintelligible missing piece of paper that the author referenced in his narration, what dare I ask, other purpose could it have served if C1 can't possibly contain a grammatically clear text by the same process as C2? Could that unintelligible missing paper have contained random words with four digit codes assigned to each? If there is any hope that true clear text exist in C1 then this is that only hope as all existing evidence points to this very thing.
How absolutely brilliant would this have been, the hiding of something so short and exact in the midst of so many totally meaningless codes. Of course the only way to know for sure is by finding that unintelligible missing piece of paper the author claims he was hoping to bring to light. And by the way, how did he even know there was another unintelligible missing piece of paper?
So it is all of the above that renders all of these proposed solves totally meaningless and completely void of any accuracy or truth, all of them being the simple manufacture of those who created them. Nothing more. Science and cold hard facts simply mandate and expose all of this other none-sense for what they are, “simple human creations.” Your author tells you that you MUST first possess that unintelligible missing piece of paper and none of you have it. How do you explain all of this away?
C1, C2, C3, lay them all next to each other and then take note of their differences. In C3 we have no 4 digit codes, in C2 we have only one, this being used for the letter “x” as there are no words in the DOI/key that begin with x so 1000 was used to express the letter x. In C1, however, we find 19 four digit codes. The question you should now ask yourselves is, “why are there 19 four digit codes in C1 and none in the other ciphers?” This question has lead to some profound discoveries that I'm going to share with you now.
C1, computer anaylisis of this cipher has concluded that C1 CAN'T POSSIBLY CONTAIN A GRAMMATICALLY CORRECT CLEAR TEXT as it is presented, 132 years of thousands of trial and error attempts also serving to establish this cold hard fact. However, and due to those 19 four digit codes, this doesn't mean that no grammatically correct clear text can exist in C1. Confused? Then allow me to explain further.
Right from the very start code-breaking hopefuls have ASSUMED that similar C2 process was to be used to decode C1, but what if the author of these three ciphers was counting on that very thing? In recent post I have often said that I can't think of a single hiding place that I couldn't tell you about in a single sentence, the average English sentence being between 13 & 20 words. So let us assume that our coder used four digit codes to create that single sentence and then he simply hid that coded sentence within a bunch of randomly selected code “that could never produce a grammatically correct clear text.” In this scenario hopeful decoders would spend the rest of their lives trying to produce a clear text where none can't exist, the coder's real message safe and sound within all of his randomly placed bait, the bait he has even made certain that everyone would continue to chase due to his C2 example.
Now then, and swallowing our prides for just a moment, if we know beyond a shadow of a doubt that all of the other codes in C1 can't possibly contain a grammatically correct clear text, which we do know now, then where else might that clear text be hidden in C1 if it indeed contains such a clear text?
Still doubt this very real possibility? Then consider that other unintelligible missing piece of paper that the author referenced in his narration, what dare I ask, other purpose could it have served if C1 can't possibly contain a grammatically clear text by the same process as C2? Could that unintelligible missing paper have contained random words with four digit codes assigned to each? If there is any hope that true clear text exist in C1 then this is that only hope as all existing evidence points to this very thing.
How absolutely brilliant would this have been, the hiding of something so short and exact in the midst of so many totally meaningless codes. Of course the only way to know for sure is by finding that unintelligible missing piece of paper the author claims he was hoping to bring to light. And by the way, how did he even know there was another unintelligible missing piece of paper?
So it is all of the above that renders all of these proposed solves totally meaningless and completely void of any accuracy or truth, all of them being the simple manufacture of those who created them. Nothing more. Science and cold hard facts simply mandate and expose all of this other none-sense for what they are, “simple human creations.” Your author tells you that you MUST first possess that unintelligible missing piece of paper and none of you have it. How do you explain all of this away?
