Now That Someone Has Decoded The Beale Papers As OF Jan 2014

[TN_Guest1523]

Correct, the author did say that he laid them out according to their length and then he numbered them. However, this isn't true, can't be, not by any case. You see, the clear text of C2 is the only source he had that specifically detailed what was contained in each remaining cipher, and even more importantly....."C2 clearly states that the remaining ciphers had already been numbered 1 & 3." But let's assume they weren't, just as the author claims, there is no way he could be certain that simply laying them out in order of their length was guarantee that he had the right order, yet he is certain. Given that there are numerous ways names and addresses can be presented, such as several people residing at the same location, there is no way he could be certain his order was correct unless he already knew what that order was. There's just no getting around this very well defined and established fact. Our author didn't tell the truth about his knowledge of the order of the ciphers or the manner in which they were numbered. Period.

Having said all of this, it is possible that he had reason for this deception, and others, but the problem with this is that he is also bringing his credibility and the credibility of his story into serious question.

I would say he renumbered them after finding C2 . Not like he carved the numbers is rock. 20 years before he made the papers he had some time to work on them and more than likely did not wright all that was done in that time frame. The index were he stated that explanation of the paper 2 was made 20 years or so after he found it . The 700+ cipher was #1 and after decoding stated it was C2. Just that simple folks.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[TN_Guest1523]

...and that is the heart of the matter-if the story contained in the Beale Papers is not credible (it reads good but has no evidence to substantiate that it happened), the credibility of the ciphers is highly questionable.

The only evidence you have that the papers are not credible is the Beale Papers.

 

[TN_Guest1523]

...and that is the heart of the matter-if the story contained in the Beale Papers is not credible (it reads good but has no evidence to substantiate that it happened), the credibility of the ciphers is highly questionable.

The Crackpot Index

 

[doverturtle]

What else is funny is that on these TN Beale topic threads, there are four current claims of the ciphers solved-You, Enigmatist, Eldo, and Legrand, and ALL four are very different from each other. There have been many others in the past who have also claimed to have solved these ciphers, and their solutions also differ from other solutions.
What does that tell you, Laf?
Those who work the codes find what they expect to find-"diabolical ingenuity, specifically designed to lure the unwary reader"-William Friedman.
It is also funny that the NSA did not take you up on a job offer- sometimes the grapes are not sweet.

You are forgetting Franklin. That makes five.

 

[bigscoop]

I would say he renumbered them after finding C2 . Not like he carved the numbers is rock. 20 years before he made the papers he had some time to work on them and more than likely did not wright all that was done in that time frame. The index were he stated that explanation of the paper 2 was made 20 years or so after he found it . The 700+ cipher was #1 and after decoding stated it was C2. Just that simple folks.

So, after 20 years of working on the ciphers, he makes the mistake in his book of claiming that the ciphers were numbered according to their length, this resulting in the 700 + plus cipher being number 2 instead of one or three? And you forget, C2 was allegedly written many years prior, allegedly by a different hand, and it clearly states in it's clear text that the remaining two ciphers were already identified as 1 & 3. So what we end up with is the 700+ plus cipher being number 2 instead of 1 or 3, which defies all manner of numbering them according to any length, and we have a claimed system of numbering them that is obviously neither accurate or true. Without question the author has been caught in his own deceptions and all credibility is thus damaged.

There's just no getting around this fact regardless how folks continue to try to find alternate explanation. And yes, the Beale Pamphlet itself is the only evidence that the story is a complete fabrication, but keep in mind, by itself it presents a very-very strong case, and if it is all fiction, then this also explains why the Beale Papers are the only evidence supporting the fiction theory. So I wouldn't be to quick in dismissing the fiction theory, not at all as it is very-very likely. Where ECS and I differ in supporting the possibility of this theory is in our opinions of what constitutes conclusive proof of that theory.

 

[ECS]

The only evidence you have that the papers are not credible is the Beale Papers.

No evidence outside of the Beale Papers exists that makes the tale credible.

 

[ECS]

You are forgetting Franklin. That makes five.

Franklin's solution was several years ago, I only listed the current claimants.
I do find Franklin's the most plausible.

 

[TN_Guest1523]

So, after 20 years of working on the ciphers, he makes the mistake in his book of claiming that the ciphers were numbered according to their length, this resulting in the 700 + plus cipher being number 2 instead of one or three? And you forget, C2 was allegedly written many years prior, allegedly by a different hand, and it clearly states in it's clear text that the remaining two ciphers were already identified as 1 & 3. So what we end up with is the 700+ plus cipher being number 2 instead of 1 or 3, which defies all manner of numbering them according to any length, and we have a claimed system of numbering them that is obviously neither accurate or true. Without question the author has been caught in his own deceptions and all credibility is thus damaged.

There's just no getting around this fact regardless how folks continue to try to find alternate explanation. And yes, the Beale Pamphlet itself is the only evidence that the story is a complete fabrication, but keep in mind, by itself it presents a very-very strong case, and if it is all fiction, then this also explains why the Beale Papers are the only evidence supporting the fiction theory. So I wouldn't be to quick in dismissing the fiction theory, not at all as it is very-very likely. Where ECS and I differ in supporting the possibility of this theory is in our opinions of what constitutes conclusive proof of that theory.

I am taking an objective view of how the author may have done what he said he did . As for what he did we will never know for it is not in the decoded text I have from Beale what the author did 60 years or so later. I am only thankful to have the papers that we now have . With what I have uncovered in the text there is no way this is a hoax . No Worries Bro if the author made mistakes or not the ciphers are real. The work it would take to make the ciphers is extraordinary.

I think a lot of people are jumping on board the gravy train with all the books. They think no one will ever decode the ciphers witch in turn lets them wright anything they want with no one to tell them they a not correct . I do not read there books just work with what I have.

I am going to wright a book about how I found the sites were the items are and how I decoded the ciphers after I find what is there.

 

[TN_Guest1523]

No evidence outside of the Beale Papers exists that makes the tale credible.

Not worth the time!

 

[ECS]

...
I think a lot of people are jumping on board the gravy train with all the books. They think no one will ever decode the ciphers witch in turn lets them wright anything they want with no one to tell them they a not correct . I do not read there books just work with what I have.

I am going to wright a book about how I found the sites were the items are and how I decoded the ciphers after I find what is there.

The "gravy train" may well be the real Beale treasure.

 

[bigscoop]

I am taking an objective view of how the author may have done what he said he did . As for what he did we will never know for it is not in the decoded text I have from Beale what the author did 60 years or so later. I am only thankful to have the papers that we now have . With what I have uncovered in the text there is no way this is a hoax . No Worries Bro if the author made mistakes or not the ciphers are real. The work it would take to make the ciphers is extraordinary.

I think a lot of people are jumping on board the gravy train with all the books. They think no one will ever decode the ciphers witch in turn lets them wright anything they want with no one to tell them they a not correct . I do not read there books just work with what I have.

I am going to wright a book about how I found the sites were the items are and how I decoded the ciphers after I find what is there.

"The work it would take to make the ciphers is extraordinary." Well let's hope it isn't too extraordinary.

 

[ECS]

Not worth the time!

So the flame is not worth the candle.

 

[TN_Guest1523]

No evidence outside of the Beale Papers exists that makes the tale credible.

Seems to me you don't believe in anything but having another beer. You have no positive outlook at all. If I say the wall is white you say it is black. What have we agreed upon in the last year of my posting. You seem to be a programmed zombie with a mind full of mush .

 

[TN_Guest1523]

"The work it would take to make the ciphers is extraordinary." Well let's hope it isn't too extraordinary.

Beale was a very smart man . The three ciphers must have been made in the winter months .

 

[ECS]

Seems to me you don't believe in anything but having another beer. You have no positive outlook at all. If I say the wall is white you say it is black. What have we agreed upon in the last year of my posting. You seem to be a programmed zombie with a mind full of mush .

Laf, don't get upset with me because there is NO evidence that confirms the Beale story.
"zombie with a mind full of mush"- What's up with that?

 

[TN_Guest1523]

Laf, don't get upset with me because there is NO evidence that confirms the Beale story.
"zombie with a mind full of mush"- What's up with that?

Is that a computer automated response to every thing or what ?

 

[TN_Guest1523]

Laf, don't get upset with me because there is NO evidence that confirms the Beale story.
"zombie with a mind full of mush"- What's up with that?

No time to get you to understand what I know is true. You seem to follow the leaders of the hoax party . Good luck with that !

 

[TN_Guest1523]

You are forgetting Franklin. That makes five.

That as a fictional work !

 

[Rebel - KGC]

Laf, don't get upset with me because there is NO evidence that confirms the Beale story.
"zombie with a mind full of mush"- What's up with that?

An INSULT!

 

[TN_Guest1523]

An INSULT!

Minds full of mush, is a quote ! look it up