Let's see who.....

[bigscoop]

OK, I'm going to post a single paragraph from the narration and let's see who picks up on the real content/message of this text? Read it carefully!

"It will be seen by a perusal of Mr. Beale's letter to Mr. Morriss that he promised, under certain contingencies, 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."

I'm guessing none of you will even though it's all right there in front of you. So I'll give you a hint, it's not what you think it is. "Look deeper."

 

[bigscoop]

Come on, you can do this....your author is making a huge confession in the following statement;
"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,..."

 

[bigscoop]

"That they would attach no importance to a seemingly unintelligible writing seems quite natural;.."
The above context is past tense, suggesting that readers have previously attached no importance to a seemingly unintelligible writing.

"..but their attention being called to them by the publication of this narrative,..."
The above is present tense, suggesting that by presenting the ciphers the author is calling their attention to them.

Question; how could someone have previously paid no attention to something that they previously never had?
Also note that the author is describing the missing paper in singular form and that he is further describing it as being "seemingly unintelligible." So, how does your author know that this missing paper is seemingly unintelligible?

And the above isn't even the best part. You see, the author begins that entire statement in singular form, "a seemingly unintelligible paper" but then he ends the statement in plural form, with "them."

So quit clearly, for those of you who believe that you have cracked the codes in the remaining ciphers, well, you have simply duped yourselves.

 

[legrand]

"That they would attach no importance to a seemingly unintelligible writing seems quite natural;.."
The above context is past tense, suggesting that readers have previously attached no importance to a seemingly unintelligible writing.

"..but their attention being called to them by the publication of this narrative,..."
The above is present tense, suggesting that by presenting the ciphers the author is calling their attention to them.

Question; how could someone have previously paid no attention to something that they previously never had?
Also note that the author is describing the missing paper in singular form and that he is further describing it as being "seemingly unintelligible." So, how does your author know that this missing paper is seemingly unintelligible?

And the above isn't even the best part. You see, the author begins that entire statement in singular form, "a seemingly unintelligible paper" but then he ends the statement in plural form, with "them."

So quit clearly, for those of you who believe that you have cracked the codes in the remaining ciphers, well, you have simply duped yourselves.

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.

 

[bigscoop]

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.

....What's interesting is that someone claims the entire story to be fiction, all except the portion regarding an actual treasure, that just HAS TO BE TRUE! Talk about having, "agendas!" So focused "on a real physical treasure" from a story that one claims is "entirely fiction" presents something of a paradox, don't you think. It's like saying Santa isn't real and then this same person spending the rest of his life looking for Santa's real bag full of toys and his flying reindeer, his toy factory in the North Pole. It's absolutely ridiculous!

Second, you still just don't get it, or simply refuse to accept it, what is really contained in the information already posted.
You think on it a while longer and you just might understand it, but I doubt it as that would completely destroy what you've worked so long and so hard to manufacture.

 

[ECS]

So far, as with others before you, who have made similar claims concerning the Beale adventure and treasure, this grand revelation of Beale "solve and fruition" has been nothing more than just empty statements of hubris.

 

[bigscoop]

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....

The above is exactly why you're still having trouble finding a following, because rational people are quick to recognize the completely irrational. So no, while I can't speak for ECS and others I can tell you that I have no interest in participating in the manufacture of a complete fantasy unless I were writing a fictional fantasy novel.

 

[bigscoop]

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....

By the way, some FYI, you keep contradicting yourself in very noticeable fashion, First you claim that you have it all figured out, keep posting promise of the grand reveal. Then you turn right around and you keep inviting people to take part in your "think tank" so that it can be figured out. Do you really think people are missing these clear confession of yours?

 

[bigscoop]

Hopeful Beale remedies will always suffer from the same type of illness, this being that "oh-so close" progress and condition detailed numerous times before, all of these proposed remedies eventually falling doom to the same exact circumstance, "the lack of conclusive and/or convincing fact." It doesn't matter if the hopeful is working from just the ciphers, just the narration, or both, eventually the same train wreck will arrive, the proposed remedy/solve forever remaining in a state of that certain "oh-so close" situation. This is why hopeful decoders will never arrive at 100% grammatically correct solution and the same reason why other hopeful remedy proposals will never arrive at that conclusive and convincing end. Because in both cases neither exist. Try as you may, you cannot draw upon a 100% accurate remedy to something that begins and continues to survive in a 100% completely unknown state. This is why any accurate proposal only needs to present what has always been, and still is, lacking. All else is just meaningless smoke that will eventually lead into the inevitable train wreck.

 

[legrand]

Hopeful Beale remedies will always suffer from the same type of illness, this being that "oh-so close" progress and condition detailed numerous times before, all of these proposed remedies eventually falling doom to the same exact circumstance, "the lack of conclusive and/or convincing fact." It doesn't matter if the hopeful is working from just the ciphers, just the narration, or both, eventually the same train wreck will arrive, the proposed remedy/solve forever remaining in a state of that certain "oh-so close" situation. This is why hopeful decoders will never arrive at 100% grammatically correct solution and the same reason why other hopeful remedy proposals will never arrive at that conclusive and convincing end. Because in both cases neither exist. Try as you may, you cannot draw upon a 100% accurate remedy to something that begins and continues to survive in a 100% completely unknown state. This is why any accurate proposal only needs to present what has always been, and still is, lacking. All else is just meaningless smoke that will eventually lead into the inevitable train wreck.

OK...I see. Confusion abounds. Here goes.

No..., an alluring "paradox," Bigscoop. Alluring is important here. It's in this paradox, this miasma of confusion, that the puzzle resides. THE ENTIRE STORY IS FICTION - INCLUDING THE TREASURE REPORTED WITHIN. The treasure that I have not confirmed, denied or validated to you yet is not that which is described in the Beale Papers fictional story. It's with this topic that you are confused: the ciphered "treasure" is not the gold & silver & jewels of the Beale Papers fictional story ! It is something else that has not been confirmed, denied or validated. And, I have a following.., Bigscoop (not that it's all that important to me); made up of those who wish to know the truth! Once again, false story...false description of a treasure in that story = a cipher that hides another type of treasure that has not been confirmed, denied or validated by me. Your "rational people" are as duped by the story as you are to how clever the fictional story is! Suggesting "manufacture" on my part is irrational - that would make me a "faker," which I am not. It is "figured out" - "grand reveal" soon to commence and... an invitation to a "think tank" to see how to proceed with the discovery and what is already figured out! This is why I offered a think tank because I wished to share the discovery with others. It is probably good to repeat here now that I have worked this project to several locations of hidden wealth suspected. THESE PLACES ARE NOT ONE IN THE SAME WITH THE TREASURE THAT IS NOT DESCRIBED IN THE FICTIONAL STORY BUT IS LOCATED WITH THE FICTIONAL STORY (that I cannot confirm, deny or validated at this time).

Do you finally understand? And, do you understand now why the "a" and "them," (and other tricky phraseology anomalies) etc., in the story are not important to the methodology of cipher in this fictional story?

Essentially, this is why no one has ever solved the Beale. Until now.

 

[bigscoop]

OK...I see. Confusion abounds. Here goes.

No..., an alluring "paradox," Bigscoop. Alluring is important here. It's in this paradox, this miasma of confusion, that the puzzle resides. THE ENTIRE STORY IS FICTION - INCLUDING THE TREASURE REPORTED WITHIN. The treasure that I have not confirmed, denied or validated to you yet is not that which is described in the Beale Papers fictional story. It's with this topic that you are confused: the ciphered "treasure" is not the gold & silver & jewels of the Beale Papers fictional story ! It is something else that has not been confirmed, denied or validated. And, I have a following.., Bigscoop (not that it's all that important to me); made up of those who wish to know the truth! Once again, false story...false description of a treasure in that story = a cipher that hides another type of treasure that has not been confirmed, denied or validated by me. Your "rational people" are as duped by the story as you are to how clever the fictional story is! Suggesting "manufacture" on my part is irrational - that would make me a "faker," which I am not. It is "figured out" - "grand reveal" soon to commence and... an invitation to a "think tank" to see how to proceed with the discovery and what is already figured out! This is why I offered a think tank because I wished to share the discovery with others. It is probably good to repeat here now that I have worked this project to several locations of hidden wealth suspected. THESE PLACES ARE NOT ONE IN THE SAME WITH THE TREASURE THAT IS NOT DESCRIBED IN THE FICTIONAL STORY BUT IS LOCATED WITH THE FICTIONAL STORY (that I cannot confirm, deny or validated at this time).

Do you finally understand? And, do you understand now why the "a" and "them," (and other tricky phraseology anomalies) etc., in the story are not important to the methodology of cipher in this fictional story?

Essentially, this is why no one has ever solved the Beale. Until now.

And in your reply is said train wreck that will always exist in each and every proposed remedy when pushed for any type of actual provenance, this version even going as far as to evade the entire “fictional narration” so one can arrive at numerous scattered treasures that MUST exist in relation to this “completely fictional” tale. You don't realize it, my friend, but you just continue to admit that you have 100% manufactured and fabricated your entire fantasy treasure remedy.

In order to prove this to yourself, which you obviously need to do since you have obviously avoided doing so, select another publication of similar tale and then set out to achieve the same goal you had long ago set upon with this tale. In the end you will discover that you can “manufacture & fabricate” similar results. This is what you're not understanding about your proposed remedy. The “certainty principle” in all of its self induced illusions has firm grasp and control over your rationale and logic.

i.e., "The story of Santa is complete fiction but all of his toys were real and they still remain scattered and hidden about." Sounds absolutely ridiculous but if one's goal is to create evidences of the existence of those scattered and hidden toys somewhere within the tale then they can certainly achieve such in their own mind.

 

[ECS]

OK...I see. Confusion abounds. Here goes.

... It's in this paradox, this miasma of confusion, that the puzzle resides. THE ENTIRE STORY IS FICTION - INCLUDING THE TREASURE REPORTED WITHIN...

Essentially, this is why no one has ever solved the Beale. Until now.

Essentially, you are stating that you are creating fiction from fiction in that Orwellian doublespeak post.

 

[bigscoop]

Essentially, you are stating that you are creating fiction from fiction in that Orwellian doublespeak post.

Again, they just keep making claims that 100% support the fact that you can take any subject matter you desire and then you can set out to manufacture all manner of seemingly related evidence to support such claim. The problem is, and always has been, the eventual train wreck the always arrives from all of this manufactured and self-inflicted deception and illusion. It just keeps happening over and over and over again. "You simply can't manufacture a reality from complete unknowns other then in your own mind."

 

[legrand]

Again, they just keep making claims that 100% support the fact that you can take any subject matter you desire and then you can set out to manufacture all manner of seemingly related evidence to support such claim. The problem is, and always has been, the eventual train wreck the always arrives from all of this manufactured and self-inflicted deception and illusion. It just keeps happening over and over and over again. "You simply can't manufacture a reality from complete unknowns other then in your own mind."

OK...you still don't understand.

Let's say that in 1861 there was a coin treasure, one coin. It was hidden in the right box. A cryptogram or pesher or some type of veiled writing was left behind and that clear text from this hidden communication said: "Look in the left box". So, the contemporary cryptanalyst finds and looks in the left box and does not find anything but a note that says go 40 paces south and dig under the oak tree to find the mate to this "left" box. The cyrptanalyst does just that and finds the right box, the treasure...see(?), you have found the treasure as you've been lead to the correct box. See how complicated and intricate hidden writing can be...? Now, your kind will demand provenance....I guess being the revelation of said treasure by posting picture or something of it. However, doesn't one see that the treasure is in fact the process of locating the correct box...this is the treasure. You're too focused on the spoils which will come to those eyes who are worthy: the eyes that have traveled the enigma to truth. So, to satisfy your kind...I will post a picture of the fictitious coin from the fictitious hidden communication...any coin will do as it is not important as to what the spoils are: remember once you've located the treasure, the fun is over...




The cryptanalyst did find a treasure...


















Treasure communication = Fiction
Discovery procedure = Non Fiction
Treasure = Non Fiction

This is the breakdown of this little parable.

 

[bigscoop]

OK...you still don't understand.

Let's say that in 1861 there was a coin treasure, one coin. It was hidden in the right box. A cryptogram or pesher or some type of veiled writing was left behind and that clear text from this hidden communication said: "Look in the left box". So, the contemporary cryptanalyst finds and looks in the left box and does not find anything but a note that says go 40 paces south and dig under the oak tree to find the mate to this "left" box. The cyrptanalyst does just that and finds the right box, the treasure...see(?), you have found the treasure as you've been lead to the correct box. See how complicated and intricate hidden writing can be...? Now, your kind will demand provenance....I guess being the revelation of said treasure by posting picture or something of it. However, doesn't one see that the treasure is in fact the process of locating the correct box...this is the treasure. You're too focused on the spoils which will come to those eyes who are worthy: the eyes that have traveled the enigma to truth. So, to satisfy your kind...I will post a picture of the fictitious coin from the fictitious hidden communication...any coin will do as it is not important as to what the spoils are: remember once you've located the treasure, the fun is over...




The cryptanalyst did find a treasure...


















Treasure communication = Fiction
Discovery procedure = Non Fiction
Treasure = Non Fiction

This is the breakdown of this little parable.

I have several old coins that I could claim to have arrived at the same way. I could even arrange for the tale to lead me somewhere so that any old coin I found there could be claimed as such. Again, by your own words, you are taking a 100% fiction tale and spinning it into something else by whatever means you can. I found an old gold ring in the bottom of a lake the other night, several of them this year, bet I can figure out how to arrange the story to have lead me to each and every one of them. In fact, I know I can. And your point?

 

[legrand]

I have several old coins that I could claim to have arrived at the same way. I could even arrange for the tale to lead me somewhere so that any old coin I found there could be claimed as such. Again, by your own words, you are taking a 100% fiction tale and spinning it into something else by whatever means you can. I found an old gold ring in the bottom of a lake the other night, several of them this year, bet I can figure out how to arrange the story to have lead me to each and every one of them. In fact, I know I can. And your point?

But...Is your old ring one of a kind? And would its value be anywhere near that of a "real" $20 CSA gold piece? Your point?

 

[legrand]

Can't confirm, deny or validate that...

 

[bigscoop]

But...Is your old ring one of a kind? And would its value be anywhere near that of a "real" $20 CSA gold piece? Your point?

And your point? This reply has absolutely ZERO bearing on anything........as if the age and value of some of my 1700-1088's stuff even plays into things? Again, flawed logic and flawed point of debate.

 

[ECS]

Can't confirm, deny or validate that...

Then why post all this nonsense?
...and doing it for 7 years, no less.

 

[legrand]

And your point? This reply has absolutely ZERO bearing on anything........as if the age and value of some of my 1700-1088's stuff even plays into things? Again, flawed logic and flawed point of debate.

Apparently my point is sharper that yours is. What's "1700-1088's stuff" BTW?