I’m with ya on that. Envelope either. Every time I need to see this communication I have to go to Zk.

Soze

I just grabbed this one quickly. There should be another horizontal fold above the ones already there – roughly equidistant. AFAICT.

Thank you thank you thank you

To write the word ‘need’ like ‘nead’ must have come either from Mr. Superdyslexia or any other really uneducated, stupid guy..I wonder what of the both Z actually had been? I mean dyslexia, ok, but to write the word need as nead? Wondering..

QT

I wonder what he was gonna write originally in place of the word THING..did he just write over it and capitalize the T, is that the general consensus among Z investigators?

I wonder what he was gonna write originally in place of the word THING..did he just write over it and capitalize the T, is that the general consensus among Z investigators?

Wow, very good obsevation..looks like a 9 or so on the upper left side, like some upward tail on the lower right side of the ‘T’. All other letters appear to simply follow the fat ‘T’. But he clearly corrected himself with the first letter..

QT

Trav—–

Thank You!! A huge help. Do you know who "determined" that those were the correct fold placements? Was that you? Do you know if there is an exact image of this document without the red printing/imaging?

I wonder what he was gonna write originally in place of the word THING..did he just write over it and capitalize the T, is that the general consensus among Z investigators?

Cool! Thanks…I overlooked that. I need to study it more.

I think Zodiac probably had written a lower case T and decided to change it to an upper case T and that caused him to thicken the rest of the letters in the word to try to cover the change.

I think Zodiac probably had written a lower case T and decided to change it to an upper case T and that caused him to thicken the rest of the letters in the word to try to cover the change.

I agree too. Makes you wonder though why he felt the nead to even make the word "thing" capitalized.

Soze

Trav—–

Thank You!! A huge help. Do you know who "determined" that those were the correct fold placements? Was that you? Do you know if there is an exact image of this document without the red printing/imaging?

Yeah that red document is nothing official. It was something I threw together as part of a discussion on one of the threads. It was made using the colour image of the 340 that I have also posted here. There are fold marks on the 340 but unfortunately it’s not easy to reliably assess where they are. The colour image of the 340 is, I believe, a scan from a photograph and as such was most likely taken from under glass and possibly vacuum to hold it flat. That, combined with the fact that the image isn’t hi-res as we would understand it, means we’re guessing at some of it if they were fold marks. Some most likely are so I think those are the ones marked on the red image and decided on through consensus.

Trav—–

Thank You!! A huge help. Do you know who "determined" that those were the correct fold placements? Was that you? Do you know if there is an exact image of this document without the red printing/imaging?

Yeah that red document is nothing official. It was something I threw together as part of a discussion on one of the threads. It was made using the colour image of the 340 that I have also posted here. There are fold marks on the 340 but unfortunately it’s not easy to reliably assess where they are. The colour image of the 340 is, I believe, a scan from a photograph and as such was most likely taken from under glass and possibly vacuum to hold it flat. That, combined with the fact that the image isn’t hi-res as we would understand it, means we’re guessing at some of it if they were fold marks. Some most likely are so I think those are the ones marked on the red image and decided on through consensus.

Trav—-

Thank you again— for clarifying this for me. I do appreciate your work that you have done over the years—and I have found quite a lot of it very useful…..when I need to research and review information….your work is always so very helpful.

Thanks again and thanks for taking the time to respond.

bmichelle

Concerning the 340 cypher:

We briefly glanced over the page and found that one of the symbols was miswritten. In the 6th row, 12th column. It was replaced with a backward K, but can anyone make out what it used to be?

Concerning the 340 cypher:

We briefly glanced over the page and found that one of the symbols was miswritten. In the 6th row, 12th column. It was replaced with a backward K, but can anyone make out what it used to be?

Yep. It was a regular K replaced by a backward K.