Let's see who.....

[ECS]

This is dumb.

"Like everyone, he(Ward) was ignorant of this episode..."-THE BEALE PAPERS
Ward was also probably ignorant of the idle punctilio of Grand Fret epitaphs and the ever popular ere fen due red knee tarantulas the cause of so many candles being burnt for the game of creating new fiction from the old.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[bigscoop]

Wow.

I did, in fact, know of the link to OREZ, Bigscoop. You still have not reread the link to know the other subject matter contained within it. I stand that I have not answered your question.

You do not know what you're talking about.

Just don't blow a gasket on my account, OK?

You can keep trying to dodge, change directions, but you've pretty much buried your credibility and your fantasy theory in recent post.
Not a single direct connection to your "completely fictional" narration.
A failed attempt of deception with the posted image of a coin.
"OREZ"...an urban slang (not even a real word) from a fantasy video game jargon world.
The false claim that your remedy has been generated by a cryptologist (a cryptologist will gladly explain to you why you can easily create type of illusion you're presenting. You should consult one.)
Pretty obvious to most at this point what kind of make believe world you're operating within.
You should have left post #4 alone, never invited yourself to face such self-defeating exposures.

PS: I have a lot more waiting for you if wish to continue with your fantasy presentation, other giveaways you have provided in your many ill-advised post. My advice, save what little remains and let it go.

 

[legrand]

You can keep trying to dodge, change directions, but you've pretty much buried your credibility and your fantasy theory in recent post.
Not a single direct connection to your "completely fictional" narration.
A failed attempt of deception with the posted image of a coin.
"OREZ"...an urban slang (not even a real word) from a fantasy video game jargon world.
The false claim that your remedy has been generated by a cryptologist (a cryptologist will gladly explain to you why you can easily create type of illusion you're presenting. You should consult one.)
Pretty obvious to most at this point what kind of make believe world you're operating within.
You should have left post #4 alone, never invited yourself to face such self-defeating exposures.

PS: I have a lot more waiting for you if wish to continue with your fantasy presentation, other giveaways you have provided in your many ill-advised post. My advice, save what little remains and let it go.

If this were a "fantasy presentation," at least it is "Orwellian" according to ECS. Apparently, however, it has severely jerked your chain.
"Buried my credibility"...only per your word and maybe ECS. I haven't seen any other poster say the same...?
The coin was used as an attention getting device. The treasure has yet to be revealed to anyone...
"Orez"...hey, you used the reverse...not me.
OK...not cryptologist....how about master of steganography. Get busy on that one, Bigscoop.
"Self-defeating exposure" ...you're that...? Now that's funny.

OrwelLegrand.

 

[legrand]

If this were a "fantasy presentation," at least it is "Orwellian" according to ECS. Apparently, however, it has severely jerked your chain.
"Buried my credibility"...only per your word and maybe ECS. I haven't seen any other poster say the same...?
The coin was used as an attention getting device. The treasure has yet to be revealed to anyone...
"Orez"...hey, you used the reverse...not me.
OK...not cryptologist....how about master of steganography. Get busy on that one, Bigscoop.
"Self-defeating exposure" ...you're that...? Now that's funny.

OrwelLegrand.

Yep...post #4:

Bigscoop...the phraseology that you painstakingly outline here is moot as is the entire story, in general,...it is fiction. What I am saying is the story, itself as constructed, has the special encoding (using the ciphers too) to lead to the location of interest. You do not discuss this concept almost to the point where it appears you have agenda to dissuade others away from its truth by focusing on an interpretation of the story as factually written. Odd, when you, yourself, feel the story is fiction...? And, both you and ECS never commented on the invitation to a think tank to reveal the grand revelation of Beale solve and fruition. Interesting....

I hear you Reb.

Right on.
As in your words...bet you'll dodge this.

 

[bigscoop]

Yep...post #4:

Bigscoop...the phraseology that you painstakingly outline here is moot as is the entire story, in general,...it is fiction. What I am saying is the story, itself as constructed, has the special encoding (using the ciphers too) to lead to the location of interest. You do not discuss this concept almost to the point where it appears you have agenda to dissuade others away from its truth by focusing on an interpretation of the story as factually written. Odd, when you, yourself, feel the story is fiction...? And, both you and ECS never commented on the invitation to a think tank to reveal the grand revelation of Beale solve and fruition. Interesting....

I hear you Reb.

Right on.
As in your words...bet you'll dodge this.

...Good lord, man, you're still driving those nails; the very nature of what you're suggesting defying your own applied logic and claims. Sure, you produce all sorts of "data points" and other complicated nonsense that might fool and impress the knowledgeable, but read below as some of it pertains exactly to what you're trying so desperately to sell;

Below is the C1 cipher, a cipher that cannot produce a 100% grammatically correct clear text, the last 5 to 10% always resulting in the inevitable train wreck of incorrect alphabet placement in even the best of attempts. This is something that anyone with knowledge of this cipher readily accepts as fact these days.

So what generally happens is that the decoder starts making changes to the existing codes in this cipher and each time he does this he is, in reality, “writing new code” in place of “the original code.” So in essence he is manufacturing/creating new/replacement code to suit the clear text in progress. Hence my constant and persistent references to the manufacturing of solutions because that is really what is taking place. So instead of the original code producing a clear text what we end up with is “a new cipher in place of the original.” It doesn't matter if we change one code or several as any change at all results in the creating of a new cipher and the original C1 no longer exist. And when we do this, well, we no longer have a clear for the original C1, but rather we have a clear text for the new cipher we have written to take place of C1. And since we have no clear direction from the original author of the code then our proposed solutions can't possibly be accurate as they were simply implemented by our own completely blind needs.

This same reality exist in the story itself, the minute we change the nature of the narration then the original narration no longer exist, that tale having been replaced with one of our own designs and purpose. This is something else we see quite often and in fact we're seeing that very thing now in these very forums yet again, the nature of the original tale being replaced with something more convenient to the hopeful designs of the new creator's personal desires and agenda. These type of claims are almost always in connection with some complicated deciphering process “which requires the exact nature of the new tale that has been manufactured in place of the original to suit said agenda.”

The hard and cold bottom line here fellas is that the moment you make ANY change to the original codes or change the nature of the original story then “YOU HAVE MANUFACTURED NEW CODE AND/OR A NEW STORY TO SUIT A PERSONAL DESIRE AND/OR AGENDA.” PERIOD! This is why I have been telling you that I can create whatever you want me to create, because I can, just as everyone else has and still is. .....is anyone home?

71, 194, 38, 1701, 89, 76, 11, 83, 1629, 48, 94, 63, 132, 16, 111, 95, 84, 341, 975, 14, 40, 64, 27, 81, 139, 213, 63, 90, 1120, 8, 15, 3, 126, 2018, 40, 74, 758, 485, 604, 230, 436, 664, 582, 150, 251, 284, 308, 231, 124, 211, 486, 225, 401, 370, 11, 101, 305, 139, 189, 17, 33, 88, 208, 193, 145, 1, 94, 73, 416, 918, 263, 28, 500, 538, 356, 117, 136, 219, 27, 176, 130, 10, 460, 25, 485, 18, 436, 65, 84, 200, 283, 118, 320, 138, 36, 416, 280, 15, 71, 224, 961, 44, 16, 401, 39, 88, 61, 304, 12, 21, 24, 283, 134, 92, 63, 246, 486, 682, 7, 219, 184, 360, 780, 18, 64, 463, 474, 131, 160, 79, 73, 440, 95, 18, 64, 581, 34, 69, 128, 367, 460, 17, 81, 12, 103, 820, 62, 116, 97, 103, 862, 70, 60, 1317, 471, 540, 208, 121, 890, 346, 36, 150, 59, 568, 614, 13, 120, 63, 219, 812, 2160, 1780, 99, 35, 18, 21, 136, 872, 15, 28, 170, 88, 4, 30, 44, 112, 18, 147, 436, 195, 320, 37, 122, 113, 6, 140, 8, 120, 305, 42, 58, 461, 44, 106, 301, 13, 408, 680, 93, 86, 116, 530, 82, 568, 9, 102, 38, 416, 89, 71, 216, 728, 965, 818, 2, 38, 121, 195, 14, 326, 148, 234, 18, 55, 131, 234, 361, 824, 5, 81, 623, 48, 961, 19, 26, 33, 10, 1101, 365, 92, 88, 181, 275, 346, 201, 206, 86, 36, 219, 324, 829, 840, 64, 326, 19, 48, 122, 85, 216, 284, 919, 861, 326, 985, 233, 64, 68, 232, 431, 960, 50, 29, 81, 216, 321, 603, 14, 612, 81, 360, 36, 51, 62, 194, 78, 60, 200, 314, 676, 112, 4, 28, 18, 61, 136, 247, 819, 921, 1060, 464, 895, 10, 6, 66, 119, 38, 41, 49, 602, 423, 962, 302, 294, 875, 78, 14, 23, 111, 109, 62, 31, 501, 823, 216, 280, 34, 24, 150, 1000, 162, 286, 19, 21, 17, 340, 19, 242, 31, 86, 234, 140, 607, 115, 33, 191, 67, 104, 86, 52, 88, 16, 80, 121, 67, 95, 122, 216, 548, 96, 11, 201, 77, 364, 218, 65, 667, 890, 236, 154, 211, 10, 98, 34, 119, 56, 216, 119, 71, 218, 1164, 1496, 1817, 51, 39, 210, 36, 3, 19, 540, 232, 22, 141, 617, 84, 290, 80, 46, 207, 411, 150, 29, 38, 46, 172, 85, 194, 39, 261, 543, 897, 624, 18, 212, 416, 127, 931, 19, 4, 63, 96, 12, 101, 418, 16, 140, 230, 460, 538, 19, 27, 88, 612, 1431, 90, 716, 275, 74, 83, 11, 426, 89, 72, 84, 1300, 1706, 814, 221, 132, 40, 102, 34, 868, 975, 1101, 84, 16, 79, 23, 16, 81, 122, 324, 403, 912, 227, 936, 447, 55, 86, 34, 43, 212, 107, 96, 314, 264, 1065, 323, 428, 601, 203, 124, 95, 216, 814, 2906, 654, 820, 2, 301, 112, 176, 213, 71, 87, 96, 202, 35, 10, 2, 41, 17, 84, 221, 736, 820, 214, 11, 60, 760

 

[bigscoop]

If this were a "fantasy presentation," at least it is "Orwellian" according to ECS. Apparently, however, it has severely jerked your chain.
"Buried my credibility"...only per your word and maybe ECS. I haven't seen any other poster say the same...?
The coin was used as an attention getting device. The treasure has yet to be revealed to anyone...
"Orez"...hey, you used the reverse...not me.
OK...not cryptologist....how about master of steganography. Get busy on that one, Bigscoop.
"Self-defeating exposure" ...you're that...? Now that's funny.

OrwelLegrand.

You're doing "exactly" as was predicted long ago, following the same pattern of most of the other "certain claimants" who, when pressed, couldn't produce any type of direct connection or provenance, instead you proceed to launching insults, posting phony images/pictures, and reacting in complete desperation to try to save face. And I totally agree, you did post that image as "an attention getter" because you thought it might provide your fantasy tale some measure of provenance but then that seriously backfired on you, someone exposed it for what it really was. And as for "Orez"....the link you posted, you need to go back and review the context applied in the definition presented..........just so you'll fully understand what you posted. Geeezzzz......and I don't even have to provide the nails anymore!
Y

 

[legrand]

...Good lord, man, you're still driving those nails; the very nature of what you're suggesting defying your own applied logic and claims. Sure, you produce all sorts of "data points" and other complicated nonsense that might fool and impress the knowledgeable, but read below as some of it pertains exactly to what you're trying so desperately to sell;

Below is the C1 cipher, a cipher that cannot produce a 100% grammatically correct clear text, the last 5 to 10% always resulting in the inevitable train wreck of incorrect alphabet placement in even the best of attempts. This is something that anyone with knowledge of this cipher readily accepts as fact these days.

So what generally happens is that the decoder starts making changes to the existing codes in this cipher and each time he does this he is, in reality, “writing new code” in place of “the original code.” So in essence he is manufacturing/creating new/replacement code to suit the clear text in progress. Hence my constant and persistent references to the manufacturing of solutions because that is really what is taking place. So instead of the original code producing a clear text what we end up with is “a new cipher in place of the original.” It doesn't matter if we change one code or several as any change at all results in the creating of a new cipher and the original C1 no longer exist. And when we do this, well, we no longer have a clear for the original C1, but rather we have a clear text for the new cipher we have written to take place of C1. And since we have no clear direction from the original author of the code then our proposed solutions can't possibly be accurate as they were simply implemented by our own completely blind needs.

This same reality exist in the story itself, the minute we change the nature of the narration then the original narration no longer exist, that tale having been replaced with one of our own designs and purpose. This is something else we see quite often and in fact we're seeing that very thing now in these very forums yet again, the nature of the original tale being replaced with something more convenient to the hopeful designs of the new creator's personal desires and agenda. These type of claims are almost always in connection with some complicated deciphering process “which requires the exact nature of the new tale that has been manufactured in place of the original to suit said agenda.”

The hard and cold bottom line here fellas is that the moment you make ANY change to the original codes or change the nature of the original story then “YOU HAVE MANUFACTURED NEW CODE AND/OR A NEW STORY TO SUIT A PERSONAL DESIRE AND/OR AGENDA.” PERIOD! This is why I have been telling you that I can create whatever you want me to create, because I can, just as everyone else has and still is. .....is anyone home?

71, 194, 38, 1701, 89, 76, 11, 83, 1629, 48, 94, 63, 132, 16, 111, 95, 84, 341, 975, 14, 40, 64, 27, 81, 139, 213, 63, 90, 1120, 8, 15, 3, 126, 2018, 40, 74, 758, 485, 604, 230, 436, 664, 582, 150, 251, 284, 308, 231, 124, 211, 486, 225, 401, 370, 11, 101, 305, 139, 189, 17, 33, 88, 208, 193, 145, 1, 94, 73, 416, 918, 263, 28, 500, 538, 356, 117, 136, 219, 27, 176, 130, 10, 460, 25, 485, 18, 436, 65, 84, 200, 283, 118, 320, 138, 36, 416, 280, 15, 71, 224, 961, 44, 16, 401, 39, 88, 61, 304, 12, 21, 24, 283, 134, 92, 63, 246, 486, 682, 7, 219, 184, 360, 780, 18, 64, 463, 474, 131, 160, 79, 73, 440, 95, 18, 64, 581, 34, 69, 128, 367, 460, 17, 81, 12, 103, 820, 62, 116, 97, 103, 862, 70, 60, 1317, 471, 540, 208, 121, 890, 346, 36, 150, 59, 568, 614, 13, 120, 63, 219, 812, 2160, 1780, 99, 35, 18, 21, 136, 872, 15, 28, 170, 88, 4, 30, 44, 112, 18, 147, 436, 195, 320, 37, 122, 113, 6, 140, 8, 120, 305, 42, 58, 461, 44, 106, 301, 13, 408, 680, 93, 86, 116, 530, 82, 568, 9, 102, 38, 416, 89, 71, 216, 728, 965, 818, 2, 38, 121, 195, 14, 326, 148, 234, 18, 55, 131, 234, 361, 824, 5, 81, 623, 48, 961, 19, 26, 33, 10, 1101, 365, 92, 88, 181, 275, 346, 201, 206, 86, 36, 219, 324, 829, 840, 64, 326, 19, 48, 122, 85, 216, 284, 919, 861, 326, 985, 233, 64, 68, 232, 431, 960, 50, 29, 81, 216, 321, 603, 14, 612, 81, 360, 36, 51, 62, 194, 78, 60, 200, 314, 676, 112, 4, 28, 18, 61, 136, 247, 819, 921, 1060, 464, 895, 10, 6, 66, 119, 38, 41, 49, 602, 423, 962, 302, 294, 875, 78, 14, 23, 111, 109, 62, 31, 501, 823, 216, 280, 34, 24, 150, 1000, 162, 286, 19, 21, 17, 340, 19, 242, 31, 86, 234, 140, 607, 115, 33, 191, 67, 104, 86, 52, 88, 16, 80, 121, 67, 95, 122, 216, 548, 96, 11, 201, 77, 364, 218, 65, 667, 890, 236, 154, 211, 10, 98, 34, 119, 56, 216, 119, 71, 218, 1164, 1496, 1817, 51, 39, 210, 36, 3, 19, 540, 232, 22, 141, 617, 84, 290, 80, 46, 207, 411, 150, 29, 38, 46, 172, 85, 194, 39, 261, 543, 897, 624, 18, 212, 416, 127, 931, 19, 4, 63, 96, 12, 101, 418, 16, 140, 230, 460, 538, 19, 27, 88, 612, 1431, 90, 716, 275, 74, 83, 11, 426, 89, 72, 84, 1300, 1706, 814, 221, 132, 40, 102, 34, 868, 975, 1101, 84, 16, 79, 23, 16, 81, 122, 324, 403, 912, 227, 936, 447, 55, 86, 34, 43, 212, 107, 96, 314, 264, 1065, 323, 428, 601, 203, 124, 95, 216, 814, 2906, 654, 820, 2, 301, 112, 176, 213, 71, 87, 96, 202, 35, 10, 2, 41, 17, 84, 221, 736, 820, 214, 11, 60, 760

Good post, Bigscoop. Grand effort. I'll disregard the reference to "nonsense". I have to ask though, if I'm trying to "fool and impress the knowledgeable"...what camp are you in?

That said, if I may address the paragraph you wrote here:

So what generally happens is that the decoder starts making changes to the existing codes in this cipher and each time he does this he is, in reality, “writing new code” in place of “the original code.” So in essence he is manufacturing/creating new/replacement code to suit the clear text in progress. Hence my constant and persistent references to the manufacturing of solutions because that is really what is taking place. So instead of the original code producing a clear text what we end up with is “a new cipher in place of the original.” It doesn't matter if we change one code or several as any change at all results in the creating of a new cipher and the original C1 no longer exist. And when we do this, well, we no longer have a clear for the original C1, but rather we have a clear text for the new cipher we have written to take place of C1. And since we have no clear direction from the original author of the code then our proposed solutions can't possibly be accurate as they were simply implemented by our own completely blind needs.

"Writing new code" is dabbling in the subjective, Bigscoop. This where I'm at. The fictional story intends for the person cracking it to delve into the subjective or "writing new code". What if it is supposed to occur in this fashion; I mean, what if the author intended for the cryptanalyst to "manufacture" the solution that leads to what the author hid? What if the real treasure is found by this manner of deciphering the fictional story? Why are you so h*ll bent on a letter for letter air tight plain text from C1? Stop and think on this; my point may hit home, Bigscoop.

This is why no one has solved the Beale to a location until now. The answer is in the subjective and this is what I've been professing all along here.

 

[ECS]

"Writing new code" is dabbling in the subjective... This where I'm at. The fictional story intends for the person cracking it to delve into the subjective or "writing new code". What if it is supposed to occur in this fashion; I mean, what if the author intended for the cryptanalyst to "manufacture" the solution that leads to what the author hid? What if the real treasure is found by this manner of deciphering the fictional story?...

Well Legrand, you have successfully explained why all the claimed "solutions" have all been different.

 

[bigscoop]

Good post, Bigscoop. Grand effort. I'll disregard the reference to "nonsense". I have to ask though, if I'm trying to "fool and impress the knowledgeable"...what camp are you in?

That said, if I may address the paragraph you wrote here:

So what generally happens is that the decoder starts making changes to the existing codes in this cipher and each time he does this he is, in reality, “writing new code” in place of “the original code.” So in essence he is manufacturing/creating new/replacement code to suit the clear text in progress. Hence my constant and persistent references to the manufacturing of solutions because that is really what is taking place. So instead of the original code producing a clear text what we end up with is “a new cipher in place of the original.” It doesn't matter if we change one code or several as any change at all results in the creating of a new cipher and the original C1 no longer exist. And when we do this, well, we no longer have a clear for the original C1, but rather we have a clear text for the new cipher we have written to take place of C1. And since we have no clear direction from the original author of the code then our proposed solutions can't possibly be accurate as they were simply implemented by our own completely blind needs.

"Writing new code" is dabbling in the subjective, Bigscoop. This where I'm at. The fictional story intends for the person cracking it to delve into the subjective or "writing new code". What if it is supposed to occur in this fashion; I mean, what if the author intended for the cryptanalyst to "manufacture" the solution that leads to what the author hid? What if the real treasure is found by this manner of deciphering the fictional story? Why are you so h*ll bent on a letter for letter air tight plain text from C1? Stop and think on this; my point may hit home, Bigscoop.

This is why no one has solved the Beale to a location until now. The answer is in the subjective and this is what I've been professing all along here.

No, what you are confessing, and continuing to do so, is that, "you have written new tale in place of the original to suit." Since you could make no sense from the original narration/tale and ciphers, and your thirst for treasure and solve was so great, you proceeded to write new tale to suit desired remedy. This is the cold hard truth my friend, matters not if you realize it. This is why you're still holding off on the big reveal and why you can't produce anything other failed pictures & insults in place of actual provenance. You will always be in a state of "I'm very-very close to the end now" and there is sound and factual reason for this. At best, come the big reveal you produce only an empty nest, again, for sound and factual reason. There is no blind guessing to this, as you likely suspect, never has been.

Now for a moment anyway, back to the subject of this thread...."Why would you show three of something if you were only attempting to draw attention to one?"

 

[legrand]

Well Legrand, you have successfully explained why all the claimed "solutions" have all been different.

What if it's found with this manner, ECS?

 

[legrand]

No, what you are confessing, and continuing to do so, is that, "you have written new tale in place of the original to suit." Since you could make no sense from the original narration/tale and ciphers, and your thirst for treasure and solve was so great, you proceeded to write new tale to suit desired remedy. This is the cold hard truth my friend, matters not if you realize it. This is why you're still holding off on the big reveal and why you can't produce anything other failed pictures & insults in place of actual provenance. You will always be in a state of "I'm very-very close to the end now" and there is sound and factual reason for this. At best, come the big reveal you produce only an empty nest, again, for sound and factual reason. There is no blind guessing to this, as you likely suspect, never has been.

Now for a moment anyway, back to the subject of this thread...."Why would you show three of something if you were only attempting to draw attention to one?"

But the "nest" is the treasure, Bigscoop. Empty as it may be, you have the "thirst for treasure".

 

[ECS]

When it comes to the Beale adventure treasure story its ALWAYS what if, could be, and maybe that how people are able to generate "solutions" to the ciphers and "historical" connections that don't exist, but that has never stopped anyone from publishing a book- didn't cause James Beverly Ward no pause.

 

[bigscoop]

Good post, Bigscoop.

"Writing new code" is dabbling in the subjective, Bigscoop. This where I'm at.

"Exactly! Thank you! Glad to see you're finally getting it! Subjective to complete unknowns, right? Of course, "so what are you being subjective to?" ECS is 100% correct when you says that you have just explained exactly why there have been so many different solutions, you're just not understanding why that is even though you keep right on confessing to doing exactly that. "You've written a new tale and manufactured new code to suit based from complete unknowns." Thus, the only knowns can only be the ones you created. Exactly, now you're finally understanding what you've really done, and how and why.

 

[legrand]

"Exactly! Thank you! Glad to see you're finally getting it! Subjective to complete unknowns, right? Of course, "so what are you being subjective to?" ECS is 100% correct when you says that you have just explained exactly why there have been so many different solutions, you're just not understanding why that is even though you keep right on confessing to doing exactly that. "You've written a new tale and manufactured new code to suit based from complete unknowns." Thus, the only knowns can only be the ones you created. Exactly, now you're finally understanding what you've really done, and how and why.

Right, that's what I've been saying all along (in various ways), but your strangled optic nerves have impeded your thinking apparatus the necessary stimuli to understand this. NOW, I pose the question to you that ECS did not answer:

What if the real treasure is found by way of the subject subjectivity?

 

[bigscoop]

But the "nest" is the treasure, Bigscoop. Empty as it may be, you have the "thirst for treasure".

I have thirst for real treasure, those that can be proven to exist. I have no thirst for imaginary, fantasy, unproven, or otherwise manufactured tales of treasures. This is why my nest isn't empty. Just plucked more gold treasure today because I know that these real treasures exist and where to find them. This one is 10k with diamond chips and into the real nest with all the others she goes.

 

[legrand]

I have thirst for real treasure, those that can be proven to exist. I have no thirst for imaginary, fantasy, unproven, or otherwise manufactured tales of treasures. This is why my nest isn't empty. Just plucked more gold treasure today because I know that these real treasures exist and where to find them. This one is 10k with diamond chips and into the real nest with all the others she goes.
View attachment 1475681

Finally........real treasure it is. You agree with the subjectivity thesis as long as it produces THE real Beale treasure ....COMING SOON TO A FORUM NEAR YOU! Good night boys.

 

[ECS]

... NOW, I pose the question to you that ECS did not answer:

What if the real treasure is found by way of the subject subjectivity?

ECS didn't answer that question based on the research he has posted Beale dime novel story with parlor entertainment ciphers that was written in first person to foster an aura of plausibility believability to the targeted 1885 Lynchburg audience.

PS, this reply was written in third person for literary effect.

 

[bigscoop]

Finally........real treasure it is. You agree with the subjectivity thesis as long as it produces THE real Beale treasure ....COMING SOON TO A FORUM NEAR YOU! Good night boys.

....."subjective thesis"....now it's just another subjective thesis? What happen to the "certain remedy/solve" of your prior claims? You've now realized that you can't produce accurate solve from complete unknowns, that's what happened, complete unknowns being all that anyone has. Your only source of provenance would be the recovery of said treasure, which is what your waiting for, a recovery that can never come because that treasure is simply the fictional product of the new tale you have manufactured in place of the original tale. So no, not even subjective.

 

[bigscoop]

Back to topic....maybe?
"...eventually bringing to light the missing paper."
So how does our author know that there is still a missing paper?
A) because he already knows there is a missing paper?
B) because he just wants people to assume that there is a missing paper?
C) because he can't get the one working key that he does have to work on the other ciphers?
The above are the only three possible answers to the question, so consider each possible answer and it's meaning carefully before you set off trying to find remedy.

 

[legrand]

....."subjective thesis"....now it's just another subjective thesis? What happen to the "certain remedy/solve" of your prior claims? You've now realized that you can't produce accurate solve from complete unknowns, that's what happened, complete unknowns being all that anyone has. Your only source of provenance would be the recovery of said treasure, which is what your waiting for, a recovery that can never come because that treasure is simply the fictional product of the new tale you have manufactured in place of the original tale. So no, not even subjective.

No. Not "another subjective thesis" ....THE (one and only concerning the revelation) subjective thesis. Your blind ambition to disrupt this subject matter causes you to mis-write words for other meaning. I'm not sure if this is intentional or by misunderstanding. Either way, you must open you mind to the subjective...that's where the puzzle reposes and will be solved to location (treasure). Accurate solve has come from the complete fictional story. Right ...the only source of provenance is the actual eyeballing of treasure...can't confirm, deny or validate that yet. The treasure is not fiction, only the tale or story of Beale.