What C2 is REALLY telling us!

[bigscoop]

Here's something you decoding hopefuls can take to the bank and it all begins with the following question. In the clear text of C2 why didn't the author simply use numbers when detailing the weights of the silver and gold, etc.? Why did he go through the extra labors to spell these things out? Trust me, the answer is absolutely HUGE and I'll be putting all of it out in the open for the very first time after you've had a chance to maul this question over.

 

[bigscoop]

Silver
3812
1288

Gold
1014
1907

Jewels
13000

Dates
1819
1821

Ciphers
1
3

 

[bigscoop]

Just look at all of those 4-digit codes, "something the author of the ciphers has already dedicated to C1." This is why the author of the ciphers had to spell out the weights etc., in C2, because he has already dedicated a 4-digit coding system to C1, in which there are 19 of them. If the author had simply left the weights etc., to numbers then he would have produced 4-digit codes, something he couldn't do because that additional coding system was already reserved for C1. This list of 4-digit codes IS the "missing paper" that the author was hoping to bring to light with his publication. This is also why he makes perfectly clear in his narration that after decoding C2 and his "master of the others" that he was still left with an illusion, because without that missing paper he still had no idea what vital words were contained in those 19 4-digit critical codes in C1.

The other problem he would have encountered is that 13000, for example, would have left him with one or two letters and three o's, and ciphers "one" and "three" would have left him with three 1 & 3 letters. So in all of this he was left with no choice but to spell it all out. This, among other factors, is how we know that all previous claims of solution are false, because the claimants simply failed to do their research into the narration and all of its elements before they began their fantastical chases.

 

[TN_Guest1523]

Silver
3812
1288

Gold
1014
1907

Jewels
13000

Dates
1819
1821

Ciphers
1
3

 

[bigscoop]

Exactly!

 

[TN_Guest1523]

Just look at all of those 4-digit codes, "something the author of the ciphers has already dedicated to C1." This is why the author of the ciphers had to spell out the weights etc., in C2, because he has already dedicated a 4-digit coding system to C1, in which there are 19 of them. If the author had simply left the weights etc., to numbers then he would have produced 4-digit codes, something he couldn't do because that additional coding system was already reserved for C1. This list of 4-digit codes IS the "missing paper" that the author was hoping to bring to light with his publication. This is also why he makes perfectly clear in his narration that after decoding C2 and his "master of the others" that he was still left with an illusion, because without that missing paper he still had no idea what vital words were contained in those 19 4-digit critical codes in C1.

The other problem he would have encountered is that 13000, for example, would have left him with one or two letters and three o's, and ciphers "one" and "three" would have left him with three 1 & 3 letters. So in all of this he was left with no choice but to spell it all out. This, among other factors, is how we know that all previous claims of solution are false, because the claimants simply failed to do their research into the narration and all of its elements before they began their fantastical chases.

 

[bigscoop]

I have no idea why you post such non-sense but if it's what you believe then I suppose it's just your thing?

 

[bigscoop]

There are 19 4-digit codes in C1. Have you figured this out yet?

 

[Rebel - KGC]

There are 19 4-digit codes in C1. Have you figured this out yet?

ORIGINAL "Zip-Codes"...? America was "smaller", then...

 

[TN_Guest1523]

I have no idea why you post such non-sense but if it's what you believe then I suppose it's just your thing?

I have no idea why you post such non-sense, that is what I was thinking about what you posted here .

 

[bigscoop]

I have no idea why you post such non-sense, that is what I was thinking about what you posted here .

Science is a wonderful thing. It often prevents fantasy from becoming reality.

 

[ECS]

Historical research also serves that purpose.

 

[Old Silver]

Historical research also serves that purpose.

Reading the adventures of Sherlock Holmes is not historical research.

 

[ECS]

Reading the adventures of Sherlock Holmes is not historical research.

somewhat amusing.

 

[Old Silver]

somewhat amusing.

I thought so too, especially when I saw you using it as evidence against the Beale Papers.

 

[ECS]

I posted those quotes as an aid for those who can't comprehend deductive reasoning.

 

[Old Silver]

I posted those quotes as an aid for those who can't comprehend deductive reasoning.

You sure did. And they're quotes by a fictional character in a novel. Novels don't pretend to be factual, and works that claim to be factual don't pretend to be novels.

 

[ECS]

If you say so...and?

 

[Old Silver]

If you say so...and?

And...deductive reasoning shows that the Beale Papers were GIVEN AS a true story, not fiction. AND...Sherlock Holmes couldn't have the answers, because he is a fictional character. And...

 

[ECS]

Are you sure? It has been mentioned that the only thing copyrighted by Ward was the title, not the manuscript, nor any description beyond the title that claimed to be "authentic statements", or in other words an original work, nothing more, nothing less.