Acidus wrote:

Chabrery wrote:
I deciphered the paper N 1 of the treasure of Beale. 2 years of effort.
And now, what to do ?
To indicate here the place ? Bof, I would just as soon go there, but I live in France.
To write a book ? I wrote already one on decipherings in Roman art, another on decipherings in Bible and one more on the magic square in Melancolia of Albrecht Dürer.
Have you an idea ?
The final thing : in Beale, there is well a deciphering and there is well a place to discover.

Chabrery Emmanuel

Talk to Elonka, of Kyrotos fame (and active Memestreamer).

Can you provide more info? I believe someone did a statistical analysis a few years back of the Beale Ciphers and made a good case that they were not enciphered text.

I get emails from people every week or so, claiming that they've "solved" a famous code. They almost never pan out. Usually it's a case that someone moved some letters around, Scrabble-style, and they found the word "the" or something, and so they feel that they've solved the code, and it's up to other people at that point to "finish the job". ;)

Sometimes people come up with a random set of characters and type it into Google, and find out that it means something, so again they think they've "solved" a code.

And often they just move letters around to form an anagram of some phrase, and then conveniently disregard the rest of the unused letters.

To really mark a code as solved, we need:
* A readable plaintext
* A method by which the plaintext was derived
* Sufficient information about the method, such that an independent third party can duplicate the method, generate the same plaintext, and confirm that it is a solution (I once had a guy write to me with complete gibberish plaintext, but he argued that since it was duplicatable gibberish, it should count as a solution). ;)

If anyone can come up with a plausible plaintext and method, I'm interested in looking at it. But just "claiming" that a code is solved? Sorry, talk is cheap. ;)

Elonka :)

RE: Beale's treasure