Haversine wins, @DMW loses on the projection accuracy. You need to point to the right place. Very important. I have done that, which is why we see the landmark on the ground.
And if you don’t understand why I am unhappy @DMW pointed to a suspects house with the correct plaintext, that is a comprehension issue on your end. A correct plaintext with a wrong projection is not good. His methodology is not as strong as you are claiming @shaqmeister, it was guesswork.
So you could argue that the code model you offered, being simplified by one step which it is not indicated anywhere in the author’s instructions that we should apply – nor have you supported its inclusion anywhere in your pre-research write-up – that your code supports, in this manner, DMW’s solution, slightly better than it does yours.
And this part?
“This isn’t right! It’s not even wrong!”—Wolfgang Pauli (1900–1958)
His methodology was like yours, manual and based on feelings. That is how most of these are. Like your feeling that he didn’t use the word radians in the plaintext. Maybe you will change your mind about that some day, we will see.
If it is verified it will be funny because he made it obvious with his hints, but it still took forever. He made it obvious because he wanted it to be solved. You don’t make the 100 foot triangle landmark unless you want someone to find it, lol.
Misusing the word radians was the curveball.
Here we see homophonic substitution, yet again. But no transposition.
And after 55 years, I did find it, as he intended and designed, unfortunately.
Four months later, crickets still chirping.
I’m going to go ahead and pat myself on the back for finding the Zodiac’s triangle landmark after 55 years.
That isn’t natural in origin.
I couldn’t have done it without advanced technology. A special thanks for Alan Turing. Cribs still work well.
I’d also like to thank the chief architects of the underlying CSP framework for their contribution to humanity. Powerful stuff.
Like your feeling that he didn’t use the word radians in the plaintext. Maybe you will change your mind about that some day, we will see.
Already treated, no ‘feelings’ required, here.
I am sure it as objective as your cow theory. Anyways, the triangle I found proves you wrong pretty sure. We will see. Clock is ticking.
Natural origin is for the flat Earthers. My code assumes a spherical Earth, which is actually wrong, but close enough to work well.
The earth is not flat, @shaqmeister
He made it obvious because he wanted it to be solved.
Couldn’t he have just encoded “BACKWHEREITALLSTARTED” using triangle symbols for all the ‘A’s (and maybe cow-hoofs for the ‘E’s) if, once you get there, it’s that obvious?
“This isn’t right! It’s not even wrong!”—Wolfgang Pauli (1900–1958)
He made it obvious because he wanted it to be solved.
Couldn’t he have just encoded “BACKWHEREITALLSTARTED” using triangle symbols for all the ‘A’s (and maybe cow-hoofs for the ‘E’s) if, once you get there, it’s that obvious?
He could have encoded cow theory is for morons, but I think it is IN THREE AND THREE EIGHTHS RADIANS TEN.
Clock is ticking.
Only it’s not. And this is the point I was making earlier. We’ve arrived. This is where we get off.
“This isn’t right! It’s not even wrong!”—Wolfgang Pauli (1900–1958)
Clock is ticking.
Only it’s not. And this is the point I was making earlier. We’ve arrived. This is where we get off.
You’ve been getting off on bad debunks for weeks. It is pretty obvious you don’t want that thing scanned, I wonder why that is. Maybe because I could be right? I literally recall you citing the privacy of the cows as a reason not to scan it.
I referred to it as a bad joke, and it still is.
These are the types of arguments you find on internet forums in general. But I will keep repeating that some people were very nice with how they approached what I shared. Plenty of good people out there following the case, but there is a ton of nonsense I’ve found. When/if this is verified I will feel good about my contribution and move to greener pastures.
