A new link to share.

Give me that link juice.

Paper:  https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=6266638

Code:  https://github.com/dstampher/zodiac-z32-cipher

Keep telling yourself the triangle is natural in origin @shaqmeister

Great debunk buddy

I guess the other forum admin has been covering this case for like 30 years.  Will be strange if they censored the correct Z32 solution, yikes.

Shouldn’t have bet against the triangle landmark.

We are in this together, and I will win.  That isn’t natural, or a cow watering hole.  Matches the ciphertext.  Woops.

He was more interested in the Black Dahlia rumor, compared to the 100 foot triangle landmark by LHR that appears in ’68.

Experts these days.   It boggles the mind how someone could follow the case for that long and yet be so apparently ignorant of the Zodiac.  I guess he doesn’t know the significance of this road?  That cannot be.  Perhaps he thinks it is a coincidence.  Well, that is extremely low probability.

We’ve got some that have bet on the landmark (that would be me) most choose silence, the rest say natural origin.

And not much else.  I am very curious about the silent majority.  I haven’t heard of any critical problems since December.  It is just internet forum debunks only so far.  Things like coming up with alternative origins for the landmark.

These are tricks meant to ignore the rest of the evidence, and only focus on the origin of the landmark.  They will also argue strongly but incorrectly, and I often don’t feel like correcting them (it never resolves anything).  

Basically this environment is not well suited, at all, for proper engagement with what I have shared.  And yet there are very options for places to go for this to occur.

I say this because there is almost no one here, and the ones that are, all have presented alternative solutions to this cipher.  Their methods and solutions are not in the same league as what I have (sorry but it is true).  Oliv92 came the closest, but no critical ranking step.  They picked the wrong solution as their “favorite”.  

Also I saw a ton of oversight from years ago regarding this cipher.  The community doesn’t seem like it was built for collaboration, and it seems many went without engagement.  I have also experienced this.  It is a problem for someone that actually solves Z32, as I have done.

Many were working alone but posting on here, just spamming their own threads mostly.  Well add me to the list.

But I found the triangle landmark, and I am still here, posting away about it.  

This would have been solved a long time ago with better collaboration and engagement (and computers, you cannot avoid this).  They would have to essentially write the same code I did, then they’d solve Z32.

That isn’t my fault.

But I did solve it in December 2025, and am awaiting the scan results.

Also the difficulty was overhyped by experts.

They couldn’t solve it so just said “too short”.  He gave so many clues with this cipher, totally solvable, and I solved it.

If they were able to solve it they would have done so, and would have found this same landmark.  But they weren’t able to solve it, so they didn’t, and I did.

That is just the historical fact, co-pilot aside. They had the same tools available, and this was solvable a long time ago without them.

And so it has been fascinating to see all of the little ways internet forum users attempt to discredit the personally confirmed solution.  None of which have proven anything wrong whatsoever.  In their efforts to sow doubt, they have even suggested the landmark should never be scanned due to the privacy of the cows.  Yes this was an argument that was used.

And so, how will that look if something is found there @shaqmeister ?  What would you say then?  Natural origin?

The experts take 4 months to review 77 lines of Python code (original codebase size).  I didn’t know this going in.  Code is actually pretty simple honestly.  Haversine is standard here.