Its End Game

[bigscoop]

Well, it is very easy to look at and figure out . I have shown you 3 different ways how the cipher order has become what it is and can not make it simple enough .

But lets look at it again shall we !
Plan A
1. Paper with 71 comes first for it starts with a number lower then <100 .
2. Paper with 115 comes next for it starts with a number lower the <300 .
3. Paper with 317 comes last for it starts with a number over 300> .

Plan B Crypto Strand
1. The page with 71 comes first for it has a 1 as the second digit .
2. The page with 11 and a 5 comes next for it is a roman numeral for 2 .
3. the page with 317 is last because of the 3 and the 17 .


71 = 7 1
115= 2 II
317= 3 3 and

71> II <17


Plan C According to length

500 + #1
600 + #2
700 + #3

Then the person finds 700+ to be #2 as the decoded cipher states this .

500 + #1
700 + #2
600 + #3

As left by the person that decoded the 700 + page

No. Your author is very-very clear in his claim that he simply laid them out according to their length and then he blindly numbered them according to their length, this before he had ever decoded the first cipher so he was clearly looking at three lengths of cipher in the beginning, three lengths of completely unknown cipher and composition and yet he was able to arrange the ciphers in perfect order with the original coder. Jean, buddy, what he is proposing to his readers in impossible, period! Not only this, but unless he had been shown all of the decoded ciphers there is no possible way that he could confirm his order. What you keep trying to use in defense of these cold hard facts is simply something you fellas have arranged after the fact because it's something you think workouts. Your author had to do what he says he did "ahead of the order" not after the order that "he is telling you is the correct order." The plain and simple truth is that there is no possible way he could know that for sure unless he already knew exactly what was in each cipher and how it had been worded. In other words, he would have to have seen all three clear text first in order to be certain, or he would have to be acting on the guidance from someone who had seen all three clear text. This isn't even close to what he suggest.

But the true caper in all of this is the required unintelligible missing piece of paper that he later references. How did he know about it? And how did he know that it would be unintelligible to his readers? So you see, in the author's own words he is exposing his own prior lies. PERIOD!

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Treasure of Victoria Peak - Grab it through Amazon!

[TN_Guest1523]

No. Your author is very-very clear in his claim that he simply laid them out according to their length and then he blindly numbered them according to their length, this before he had ever decoded the first cipher so he was clearly looking at three lengths of cipher in the beginning, three lengths of completely unknown cipher and composition and yet he was able to arrange the ciphers in perfect order with the original coder. Jean, buddy, what he is proposing to his readers in impossible, period! Not only this, but unless he had been shown all of the decoded ciphers there is no possible way that he could confirm his order. What you keep trying to use in defense of these cold hard facts is simply something you fellas have arranged after the fact because it's something you think workouts. Your author had to do what he says he did "ahead of the order" not after the order that "he is telling you is the correct order." The plain and simple truth is that there is no possible way he could know that for sure unless he already knew exactly what was in each cipher and how it had been worded. In other words, he would have to have seen all three clear text first in order to be certain, or he would have to be acting on the guidance from someone who had seen all three clear text. This isn't even close to what he suggest.

But the true caper in all of this is the required unintelligible missing piece of paper that he later references. How did he know about it? And how did he know that it would be unintelligible to his readers? So you see, in the author's own words he is exposing his own prior lies. PERIOD!

Plan C According to length

500 + #1
600 + #2
700 + #3

Then the person finds 700+ to be #2 as the decoded cipher states this .

500 + #1
700 + #2
600 + #3

As left by the person that decoded the 700 + page

 

[TN_Guest1523]

No. Your author is very-very clear in his claim that he simply laid them out according to their length and then he blindly numbered them according to their length, this before he had ever decoded the first cipher so he was clearly looking at three lengths of cipher in the beginning, three lengths of completely unknown cipher and composition and yet he was able to arrange the ciphers in perfect order with the original coder. Jean, buddy, what he is proposing to his readers in impossible, period! Not only this, but unless he had been shown all of the decoded ciphers there is no possible way that he could confirm his order. What you keep trying to use in defense of these cold hard facts is simply something you fellas have arranged after the fact because it's something you think workouts. Your author had to do what he says he did "ahead of the order" not after the order that "he is telling you is the correct order." The plain and simple truth is that there is no possible way he could know that for sure unless he already knew exactly what was in each cipher and how it had been worded. In other words, he would have to have seen all three clear text first in order to be certain, or he would have to be acting on the guidance from someone who had seen all three clear text. This isn't even close to what he suggest.

But the true caper in all of this is the required unintelligible missing piece of paper that he later references. How did he know about it? And how did he know that it would be unintelligible to his readers? So you see, in the author's own words he is exposing his own prior lies. PERIOD!

There is no order, #2 yes everyone knows that is correct but how do you know the rest are in order ? You have no clue bro and nether did the one who put them in that order .
Unless you can decode them you do not have a clue . But someone who has decoded them can tell you if they are in order

 

[ECS]

There is no order, #2 yes everyone knows that is correct but how do you know the rest are in order ? ...

The DOI solved C2 was provided as bait to buy the Beale Papers and play the cipher parlor game.

 

[ECS]

View attachment 1285480

Laf, did the Beale expedition pack animal crackers for their perilous adventure?

 

[bigscoop]

There is no order, #2 yes everyone knows that is correct but how do you know the rest are in order ? You have no clue bro and nether did the one who put them in that order .
Unless you can decode them you do not have a clue . But someone who has decoded them can tell you if they are in order

WRONG! Because according to the author, without the unintelligible missing piece of paper nobody can decode them. You really need to stop and take the time to investigate the merits of the story that you claim the story stands on.

"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."

The above is pure author fabricated blunder. First he calls the paper "unintelligible writing" and "missing" and yet just prior and even in the same sentence he refers to "them" as if speaking in plural. So in this single sentence the author has claimed that the unintelligible writing won't even be recognized by his readers and that it is still missing and that this unintelligible writing and missing paper is more then one.

And since you are still completely oblivious to the obvious let me ask you this, how did the original coder of the ciphers in 1822 know that some unknown decoder was going to number the ciphers 1,2,3 some 40 years later without any guidance or help whatsoever? Because according to the details in the author's narration that original coder had to know. Obviously there's no possible way that he could know this.

 

[TN_Guest1523]

The DOI solved C2 was provided as bait to buy the Beale Papers and play the cipher parlor game.

Wow, just wow !

 

[bigscoop]

Wow, just wow !

Not really a "wow" at all......just a fair opinion based on all of the details and discrepancies and conclusive facts that exist within the narration and the total lack of any real evidence to much of anything else.

 

[ECS]

There is no order, #2 yes everyone knows that is correct but how do you know the rest are in order ? You have no clue bro and nether did the one who put them in that order .
Unless you can decode them you do not have a clue . But someone who has decoded them can tell you if they are in order

Is you name also in this version of your "solved" ciphers, or are you just "stringing" us along?

 

[Rebel - KGC]

Laf, did the Beale expedition pack animal crackers for their perilous adventure?

Well... there IS a buffalo; the crackers helped 'em identify "strange animals", then they ate 'em...

 

[TN_Guest1523]

WRONG! Because according to the author, without the unintelligible missing piece of paper nobody can decode them. You really need to stop and take the time to investigate the merits of the story that you claim the story stands on.

"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."

The above is pure author fabricated blunder. First he calls the paper "unintelligible writing" and "missing" and yet just prior and even in the same sentence he refers to "them" as if speaking in plural. So in this single sentence the author has claimed that the unintelligible writing won't even be recognized by his readers and that it is still missing and that this unintelligible writing and missing paper is more then one.

And since you are still completely oblivious to the obvious let me ask you this, how did the original coder of the ciphers in 1822 know that some unknown decoder was going to number the ciphers 1,2,3 some 40 years later without any guidance or help whatsoever? Because according to the details in the author's narration that original coder had to know. Obviously there's no possible way that he could know this.

At the time of 1822-1832 there was a flood in the the area of St Louis, it is possible that a letter that was set to be sent out at a certain time was destroyed and so did not make it to Mr Morriss at the time indicated by Beale's letter . The flood is recorded on the NSA page for Beale .

 

[bigscoop]

At the time of 1822-1832 there was a flood in the the area of St Louis, it is possible that a letter that was set to be sent out at a certain time was destroyed and so did not make it to Mr Morriss at the time indicated by Beale's letter . The flood is recorded on the NSA page for Beale .

This has nothing at all to do with the issue at hand. The issue is how the ciphers became to be numbered, C2 clearly states that the ciphers were already assigned a numerical order before the author of the pamphlet claims he numbered them. This is author blunder #1.

The provided barn, seagull, lion test conclusively establishes that length plays absolutely no role whatsoever in determining the order of the ciphers unless the exact composition of each cipher is already known.

The entire source of everyone's claimed solves and solutions is the Beale narration and it has been conclusively proven that this narration isn't accurate nor truthful.

And in direct reply to your last post I can only tell you that it wouldn't matter if someone received the author's alleged missing paper/papers today if those papers/paper were unintelligible to them. And adding to this, if your author was honest, which he clearly wasn't, then why didn't he tell you that he had all of these papers and knowledge instead of lying and saying that he didn't? So even if what you hope to be the truth was real then it would only further establish that your author was a complete and untrustworthy liar.

 

[franklin]

The letter made it to Roanoke, Virginia where the two carrying the letter were killed and buried at the Blackhorse Tavern on Tinker Creek.

 

[Old Silver]

The Daily Dispatch, Richmond, VA., 1860.

Monroe Ward executive committee member in 1860?




The Daily Dispatch, Richmond, VA., 1884


For common council. Jackson Ward.




The Daily Times, Richmond, Va., 1886

Thomas J. Beale lived on North 5th street, and had a son named John, who lived in Texas.

 

[bigscoop]

View attachment 1292527 The Daily Dispatch, Richmond, VA., 1860.

Monroe Ward executive committee member in 1860?




View attachment 1292531 The Daily Dispatch, Richmond, VA., 1884


For common council. Jackson Ward.




View attachment 1292536 The Daily Times, Richmond, Va., 1886

Thomas J. Beale lived on North 5th street, and had a son named John, who lived in Texas.

Now you're talking!

 

[Rebel - KGC]

Hmmm... INTERESTING.

 

[Old Silver]

The times (Richmond, Virginia)., June 12, 1891, Page 4, Image 4

 

[Rebel - KGC]

This "Thread" has some good info on "JB" Ward & family...

 

[ECS]

There are a few things concerning J. B. Ward and his wife that you're not aware of. Once you discover this you'll start to reconsider the list I have presented.

That she was an Otey, related to the Buford's and raised "4 Miles from Buford's Tavern"?

 

[ECS]

ECS has often used a Doyle quote about the obvious remaining as the only conclusion. Truth is, he was spot on, it's just that none of us were listening, not even ECS. When this obvious finally slams you in the face don't say I didn't warn you in advance that it was coming. “Connections”...that's what the unknown author asked us to make and he put all the was required in his narration.


R. Morriss (and his description)
Clay
Coles
Witcher
Jackson
Chief Justice Marshall
J. B. Ward
Thomas J. Beale
Buford's
Sarah Morriss (and her description)
Max G. (and his description)
Santa Fe
Saint Louis
Richmond
1817
1863
1819
1821
“The company being formed...”
“Old Virginia”
“the candle worth the flame”
“from some western portion of the state”
“most distinguishing feature”
“Ten year term”
an anonymous author
“never recovered”
etc., etc., etc.


What is the one root common in all of these? And then the bigger question, how do they all tie together? And above all else, remember that the papers were not penned until just prior to the publication by someone who held a lot of accumulated knowledge about all of this. And this is all I can offer you, won't be allowed to tell you if your curiosities and suspicions are correct.

PS: If you're thinking in terms of treasure then you'll never be on the correct path.

The names on this list have been discussed many times, and their usage still leads us back to the adventure/treasure dime novel job pamphlet with parlor entertainment ciphers directed to the buying public of 1885 Lynchburg.
...and the families of Witcher, Coles, and Clay objected to the use of their forebears names being used in this dime novel, and then the unsolved copies burned in a fire.
Convenient but highly suspicious.