The "Conditions" of the remaining two ciphers

Status
Not open for further replies.

bigscoop

Gold Member
Jun 4, 2010
13,437
8,835
Wherever there be treasure!
Detector(s) used
Older blue Excal with full mods, Equinox 800.
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
Why did I use the word, "conditions?" I used it for a specific reason, these conditions being that without a working key there is no known starting point, or no existing conditions, thus every resulting condition is simply a condition that has been created by the decoder. So from the very moment the decoder sits down to start working on these two remaining cipher solutions he/she is, in effect, actually creating the conditions that manifest themselves into his/her conclusion/solution. Every aspect of the resulting solution has been created by the decoder, not the coder. This is the grand illusion, the trickery that compels hopeful decoders to place trust in their progressive solutions, and they continue to do this without ever realizing that THEY are the ones creating the conditions within their solution, and not the coder.

The Freemasons, Frances Beacon, Edger Allen Poe, the French, the KGC, and so and so on....all of them being conditions that were simply created by the decoder, the same thing being said of all the presented supporting evidence. The simple thruth is that until the day comes that a working key or documented confession is discovered, if such a key or confession even exist, and only if the remaining ciphers do in fact hold clear text, then every solution out there is simply a different product of an individual decoder's imagination. Sad but true, my friends. I wish it weren't so, but it is, and I think all of the different solutions over the years stand as solid supporting evidence to this obvious depressing fact. :thumbsup:
 

ECS

Banned
Mar 26, 2012
11,639
17,694
Ocala,Florida
Primary Interest:
Other
...or the DOI solved C2 was presented as "bait" for the purpose of luring buyers for the job pamphlet- remember the price was a costly 50 cents in 1885.
 

Rebel - KGC

Gold Member
Jun 15, 2007
21,680
14,740
Why did I use the word, "conditions?" I used it for a specific reason, these conditions being that without a working key there is no known starting point, or no existing conditions, thus every resulting condition is simply a condition that has been created by the decoder. So from the very moment the decoder sits down to start working on these two remaining cipher solutions he/she is, in effect, actually creating the conditions that manifest themselves into his/her conclusion/solution. Every aspect of the resulting solution has been created by the decoder, not the coder. This is the grand illusion, the trickery that compels hopeful decoders to place trust in their progressive solutions, and they continue to do this without ever realizing that THEY are the ones creating the conditions within their solution, and not the coder.

The Freemasons, Frances Beacon, Edger Allen Poe, the French, the KGC, and so and so on....all of them being conditions that were simply created by the decoder, the same thing being said of all the presented supporting evidence. The simple thruth is that until the day comes that a working key or documented confession is discovered, if such a key or confession even exist, and only if the remaining ciphers do in fact hold clear text, then every solution out there is simply a different product of an individual decoder's imagination. Sad but true, my friends. I wish it weren't so, but it is, and I think all of the different solutions over the years stand as solid supporting evidence to this obvious depressing fact. :thumbsup:

HA! YOU are focusing ONLY on the CIPHERS/CODES!
 

OP
OP
bigscoop

bigscoop

Gold Member
Jun 4, 2010
13,437
8,835
Wherever there be treasure!
Detector(s) used
Older blue Excal with full mods, Equinox 800.
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
...or the DOI solved C2 was presented as "bait" for the purpose of luring buyers for the job pamphlet- remember the price was a costly 50 cents in 1885.

True or not, there's no doubting that is was the designed bait.
 

OP
OP
bigscoop

bigscoop

Gold Member
Jun 4, 2010
13,437
8,835
Wherever there be treasure!
Detector(s) used
Older blue Excal with full mods, Equinox 800.
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
It's interesting when we examine the actual properties of C1 VS all of the proposed solutions that have come about over the years.


First, due to the manner in which the ciphers were numbered by the author, (according to their length), nobody can even be certain which of the remaining two ciphers is C1 or C3. Could be the author got it wrong and C1 is actually C3. Folks have to remember that, according to the author, the original coder never assigned any physical numbers to the codes, C2 only referencing them as 1 & 3 without any physical identification as to which one was which? It is only after the author numbered these ciphers according to their length that they actually had physical identifying numbers attached to them from that point forward. Could be, a 50-50 chance, that the author got it wrong. Yet everyone is so darn certain that the identified C1 holds the solution to the location of the fabulous promised treasure.


So the only way the author could be so darn certain that he had the two remaining ciphers numbered correctly is if he already knew their correct identity “before” he ever numbered them, this then making his claim of having numbered them according to their length a complete fabrication. Period! And yet, it appears that all of these C1 decoders are so darn certain that C1 is in fact the correct C1. Appears to me that by making this assumption then these decoders are also, and apparently unknowingly, agreeing that the author's claim of numbering them according to their length is, well, a completely bogus claim. And yet they still believe. The question is, why?


And from here things really start to mutate. Operating on complete assumption these would-be decoders proceed to produce all sorts of wild and entertaining C1 solutions as to the location of the vault when C1 could actually hold the names and residences of those involved and not the location at all. Add to this that, and without the aid of a working key or any direct evidence, these entirely created solutions incriminate everything and everyone from KGC to the Freemasons, who as we are all well aware, are all referenced in the Beale Pamphlet, right? No, of course not.


When we step back and really examine the truth to the situation it becomes this – C1 & C3 simply represent two pieces of paper with random numbers that harbor no certain identification or purpose, and yet a quantity of fabulous and accurate solutions are still being produced. How can this be? Answer – it can't be, and yet it is, or so they say. So have at it, without a working key or certain identification and purpose you are free to create whatever you like, however you like. The problem with this is that many actually believe in the solutions "they alone have created." :thumbsup:
 

ECS

Banned
Mar 26, 2012
11,639
17,694
Ocala,Florida
Primary Interest:
Other
INDEED! LOL!
Someone is taking posts from TN's Beale treads and creating a site.
Hey, I am quoted as an expert! LOL!
What is next?
The JAMES BEVERLY WARD PAPERS?
The CLAYTON I HART PAPERS?
The walking dead invade 1820's Bedford county because of Beale?
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Top