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

[bigscoop]

This is how the author claims he numbered the ciphers, according to their length, this he claims he did before he proceeded to attempt to decode them. But here's the thing, how did he know that the original coder had even numbered the ciphers 1,2,3? As far as he knew before this point is that inside the iron box there would be some letters and some unintelligible pieces of paper that, only with the correct key, would they direct him to the vault's location and the residences of those who were deserving. Let's see, that's only two pieces of information and no specific references at all to 1,2,3. This 1,2,3 reference doesn't come along until after he claims that he decoded C2, only then did he encounter references to numbered ciphers. So how did the pamphlet author even know that the ciphers were numbered, or that they needed to be numbered? Did Beale tell him in one of his letters that inside the box would be found cipher 1, cipher 2, and cipher 3, and then go on to explain exactly which cipher contained what? NO!!!!!

In fact, Beale never even offers hint as to how many pieces of unintelligible papers would be in the iron box. So "hook, line, and sinker," as even today true believers are still taking the bait and being reeled into the net and carted away onto to the frying pan.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Rebel - KGC]

This is how the author claims he numbered the ciphers, according to their length, this he claims he did before he proceeded to attempt to decode them. But here's the thing, how did he know that the original coder had even numbered the ciphers 1,2,3? As far as he knew before this point is that inside the iron box there would be some letters and some unintelligible pieces of paper that, only with the correct key, would they direct him to the vault's location and the residences of those who were deserving. Let's see, that's only two pieces of information and no specific references at all to 1,2,3. This 1,2,3 reference doesn't come along until after he claims that he decoded C2, only then did he encounter references to numbered ciphers. So how did the pamphlet author even know that the ciphers were numbered, or that they needed to be numbered? Did Beale tell him in one of his letters that inside the box would be found cipher 1, cipher 2, and cipher 3, and then go on to explain exactly which cipher contained what? NO!!!!!

In fact, Beale never even offers hint as to how many pieces of unintelligible papers would be in the iron box. So "hook, line, and sinker," as even today true believers are still taking the bait and being reeled into the net and carted away onto to the frying pan.

HA! NO proof of ANY "unintelligible papers" indicated... MOOT POINT!

 

[bigscoop]

HA! NO proof of ANY "unintelligible papers" indicated... MOOT POINT!

Wrong again......

[FONT=Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Times]"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." Notice also that he refers to a singular unintelligible missing paper as them, as in the plural form. So from this one sentence we are told that a single and unintelligible missing paper is more then one. [/FONT]

 

[ECS]

...

In fact, Beale never even offers hint as to how many pieces of unintelligible papers would be in the iron box. So "hook, line, and sinker," as even today true believers are still taking the bait and being reeled into the net and carted away onto to the frying pan.

...or into black iron cooking pots!

 

[Rebel - KGC]

Wrong again......

"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." Notice also that he refers to a singular unintelligible missing paper as them, as in the plural form. So from this one sentence we are told that a single and unintelligible missing paper is more then one.

There is NO physical EVIDENCE that this "letter" EVER existed... therefore, your "bomb" is a DUD!

 

[bigscoop]

There is NO physical EVIDENCE that this "letter" EVER existed... therefore, your "bomb" is a DUD!

Reb, it is straight from the pamphlet, in the author's own words.

 

[TN_Guest1523]

This is how the author claims he numbered the ciphers, according to their length, this he claims he did before he proceeded to attempt to decode them. But here's the thing, how did he know that the original coder had even numbered the ciphers 1,2,3? As far as he knew before this point is that inside the iron box there would be some letters and some unintelligible pieces of paper that, only with the correct key, would they direct him to the vault's location and the residences of those who were deserving. Let's see, that's only two pieces of information and no specific references at all to 1,2,3. This 1,2,3 reference doesn't come along until after he claims that he decoded C2, only then did he encounter references to numbered ciphers. So how did the pamphlet author even know that the ciphers were numbered, or that they needed to be numbered? Did Beale tell him in one of his letters that inside the box would be found cipher 1, cipher 2, and cipher 3, and then go on to explain exactly which cipher contained what? NO!!!!!

In fact, Beale never even offers hint as to how many pieces of unintelligible papers would be in the iron box. So "hook, line, and sinker," as even today true believers are still taking the bait and being reeled into the net and carted away onto to the frying pan.

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.

This was on one part of the Two letters that was in the box . If a person found this with 3 ciphers, the logical conclusion is that the 3 papers of cipher were the above reference content !

 

[bigscoop]

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.

This was on one part of the Two letters that was in the box . If a person found this with 3 ciphers, the logical conclusion is that the 3 papers of cipher were the above reference content !

Not quite. The logical conclusion is that the person would have 3 sheets of unintelligible papers with various amounts of numbers on them to which he would have absolutely no way of determining their order or even knowing that there was a numerical order until after decoding C2, which your author claims he didn't do until after he had numbered all of the ciphers. So you see, once again you have presented example of how your logic is seriously flawed and simply manufactured around what you want to believe instead of what the narration states. This is why your manufactured explanation as to how the ciphers were numbered will never ever fly.

 

[TN_Guest1523]

This is how the author claims he numbered the ciphers, according to their length, this he claims he did before he proceeded to attempt to decode them. But here's the thing, how did he know that the original coder had even numbered the ciphers 1,2,3? As far as he knew before this point is that inside the iron box there would be some letters and some unintelligible pieces of paper that, only with the correct key, would they direct him to the vault's location and the residences of those who were deserving. Let's see, that's only two pieces of information and no specific references at all to 1,2,3. This 1,2,3 reference doesn't come along until after he claims that he decoded C2, only then did he encounter references to numbered ciphers. So how did the pamphlet author even know that the ciphers were numbered, or that they needed to be numbered? Did Beale tell him in one of his letters that inside the box would be found cipher 1, cipher 2, and cipher 3, and then go on to explain exactly which cipher contained what? NO!!!!!

In fact, Beale never even offers hint as to how many pieces of unintelligible papers would be in the iron box. So "hook, line, and sinker," as even today true believers are still taking the bait and being reeled into the net and carted away onto to the frying pan.

Yep, you dropped it !

 

[Rebel - KGC]

Reb, it is straight from the pamphlet, in the author's own words.

YEP! Right from the Beale PAPERS Pamphlet... seen the ACTUAL letters(s)...?

 

[bigscoop]

Yep, you dropped it !

View attachment 1286215

You see Jean, these type of replies are so typical from those who can no longer support their claims in the face of contrary evidence and facts.
People do notice when claimants have obviously painted themselves into corners that they can no longer escape. Sooner or later the same type of responses always come around for lack of anything else to support their claims with.

 

[ECS]

You see Jean, these type of replies are so typical from those who can no longer support their claims in the face of contrary evidence and facts...

Laf does respond with these replies often.
"Pressed rat and warthog, closed down their shop,
Didn't want to do it, it was that they got"- CREAM

 

[TN_Guest1523]

You see Jean, these type of replies are so typical from those who can no longer support their claims in the face of contrary evidence and facts.
People do notice when claimants have obviously painted themselves into corners that they can no longer escape. Sooner or later the same type of responses always come around for lack of anything else to support their claims with.

I was in a pot of gold one day and on the wall it said ( I just dropped a bomb ) . You thread just reminded me of that BS !

 

[TN_Guest1523]

Laf does respond with these replies often.
"Pressed rat and warthog, closed down their shop,
Didn't want to do it, it was that they got"- CREAM

Flashback for the 60's Bro,

 

[Old Silver]

The author stated that the papers were numbered when Morriss took them out of the iron box. He said that when he (the author) received them, he arranged them in order of their length and NUMBERED THEM. It sounds like he changed the way they had been numbered. But then he says he failed in that endeavor. Therefore, there is no mystery in the numbering by the author. It was just an experiment that didn't produce any results. So the plaintext mentioning paper "number 3 herewith" has confused a lot of people, because they think the numbering was done by the unknown author. But It seems that after his failure at numbering the papers according to their length, the author reverted back to the way they were numbered out of the box.

"All of this I did in the course of time, but failed so completely, that my hopes of solving the mystery were well nigh abandoned. My thoughts, however, were constantly upon it, and the figures in each paper, in their regular order, were fixed in my memory."

I think he numbered the papers himself, in a different order than what they were when taken out of the box, but then couldn't make anything work, and so reverted back to the original order.

 

[bigscoop]

The author stated that the papers were numbered when Morriss took them out of the iron box. He said that when he (the author) received them, he arranged them in order of their length and NUMBERED THEM. It sounds like he changed the way they had been numbered. But then he says he failed in that endeavor. Therefore, there is no mystery in the numbering by the author. It was just an experiment that didn't produce any results. So the plaintext mentioning paper "number 3 herewith" has confused a lot of people, because they think the numbering was done by the unknown author. But It seems that after his failure at numbering the papers according to their length, the author reverted back to the way they were numbered out of the box.

"All of this I did in the course of time, but failed so completely, that my hopes of solving the mystery were well nigh abandoned. My thoughts, however, were constantly upon it, and the figures in each paper, in their regular order, were fixed in my memory."

I think he numbered the papers himself, in a different order than what they were when taken out of the box, but then couldn't make anything work, and so reverted back to the original order.

Re-read his narration concerning the numbering of the ciphers as the author clearly claims that when he got them that the ciphers had no order, this being his reasons for laying them out according to their length and then numbering them so that they did have an order. This is made perfectly clear by the author.

Now was this the actual case? Of course not because the clear text of C2 was allegedly written some 40 years prior by a different hand and in that clear text it clearly identifies (1) and (3) and a numerical order. So regardless what one wishes to be the case one thing remains conclusive and obvious in this conundrum, that the pamphlet author wasn't telling the truth about the ciphers. On top of this, since he had no knowledge how each each cipher had been composed (worded) and no possible clue what was in a third cipher or how it may have been composed, then cipher length held absolutely no value whatsoever in determining the order of the ciphers, this even being true after he had allegedly decoded C2. So not a chance that he could have blindly assigned the correct numerical order to the ciphers and absolutely no chance at all that he could know that he had them in correct order unless he had seen the clear text (composition) of each, this being the only way he could be certain. PERIOD!

As sad as it is, and as cold as these facts are, this is conclusive information based directly on the author's own impossible details and the presented clear text of C2.

 

[Old Silver]

Well why did he say they were numbered, before he numbered them according to their length?
Before I found where he said this, I assumed the papers had just been taken out of the box, in order of the way they were stacked. It's like getting a letter from someone. When you open the envelop, you don't need to see numbers on the page to know that the one on top is #1, and the next one is #2, etc. But though this makes sense, he did say the papers were numbered already. Then he arranged them in order of their length. Nothing could be gained. But he said he couldn't get them out of his head, remembering them in their ORIGINAL order.

 

[TN_Guest1523]

Well why did he say they were numbered, before he numbered them according to their length?
Before I found where he said this, I assumed the papers had just been taken out of the box, in order of the way they were stacked. It's like getting a letter from someone. When you open the envelop, you don't need to see numbers on the page to know that the one on top is #1, and the next one is #2, etc. But though this makes sense, he did say the papers were numbered already. Then he arranged them in order of their length. Nothing could be gained. But he said he couldn't get them out of his head, remembering them in their ORIGINAL order.

Thanks for this posting Bro, its nice to see someone make sense for a change .

 

[bigscoop]

Thanks for this posting Bro, its nice to see someone make sense for a change .

Fellas, you're letting the simple human fascination with treasure cloud your thinking, per example;

"The vault is under the floorboards in the southeast corner of Billy Bob's barn."
In the above "single sentence" I just gave you the exact location of a secret vault.

The same can be said of thirty names and residences if those names were all related in some way and in the same location, or city. So very clearly, unless someone already knew the exact composition (wording) of the clear text in those ciphers there is no possible way that length can be applied to determine order. PERIOD!

On top of this the clear text of C2 already makes perfectly clear that the ciphers had already been assigned a numerical order. PERIOD!

So all of these other concocted reasons for how the ciphers came to be numbered, and why, are simple manufactured scenarios by folks who are still determined to cuddle the human fascination with treasure and the romance attached to the story in spite of the very clear facts detailed in the story and the only original source of the tale. This same thing keeps getting played out over and over again by the endless streams of manufactured cipher solutions that are simply the product of each individual's personal desires, hopes, and expectations.

Now does all of this conclude that the ciphers are a hoax? No, it simply, and quite conclusively, proves that none of these manufactured solutions can be correct because they have been manufactured and fabricated in complete denial of the facts within the original and only source. PERIOD!

 

[Old Silver]

Fellas, you're letting the simple human fascination with treasure cloud your thinking, per example;

"The vault is under the floorboards in the southeast corner of Billy Bob's barn."
In the above "single sentence" I just gave you the exact location of a secret vault.

The same can be said of thirty names and residences if those names were all related in some way and in the same location, or city. So very clearly, unless someone already knew the exact composition (wording) of the clear text in those ciphers there is no possible way that length can be applied to determine order. PERIOD!

On top of this the clear text of C2 already makes perfectly clear that the ciphers had already been assigned a numerical order. PERIOD!

So all of these other concocted reasons for how the ciphers came to be numbered, and why, are simple manufactured scenarios by folks who are still determined to cuddle the human fascination with treasure and the romance attached to the story in spite of the very clear facts detailed in the story and the only original source of the tale. This same thing keeps getting played out over and over again by the endless streams of manufactured cipher solutions that are simply the product of each individual's personal desires, hopes, and expectations.

Now does all of this conclude that the ciphers are a hoax? No, it simply, and quite conclusively, proves that none of these manufactured solutions can be correct because they have been manufactured and fabricated in complete denial of the facts within the original and only source. PERIOD!

I didn't say the length was used to determine order. I said the papers were numbered, and he (author) changes the 'regular' order to an order arranged by length. That's what I read in the writings of the agent. And that's why I can say I'm not letting human fascination with treasure cloud my thinking. I'm simply trying to follow the words as they were given. None of this means the treasure is real, so there is nothing much to be fascinated over.