The methodology discussion

[Choice]

nnooooo... don't goooo...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6aFdHZf-jY

[erexere]

This is sometimes a cold place.

I'm sure I've seen at least a couple worthy posts from Choice. The other 1338 posts are easy to dismiss.
By the same standard, I could dismiss 99% of my own posts. The list of other offenders might be considerably long.

Being insensitive, rude, nasty, or incessantly off-topic should be fixed with a ban, but these boards are just a repository of low to high quality content with bare minimum moderation. We've been told to behave or lose the boards permanently. That's the deal.

Maybe Choice is just trying to keep the conversation going, but it does seem like this bulletin board has morphed into a tweet hibrid. It's difficult to say what is right or wrong around here anymore.


Here's a topic of conversation. I noticed that nobody seems to be interested in digging into who was Edward Wilmot Blyden. Once he was identified as the best possible candidate for the subject of the Verse 6 line, Edwin and Edwina named after him, people seemed to just be content to say "yeah, Abroad in America, yeah...Charleston" and be done with it. Could there be more to do with researching this person and asking the question of why would Byron select this historic figure as a piece of the African Tree Spirit's puzzle to hide the April Diamond? There is a method to how these puzzles were designed, right?

[gManTexas]

This is sometimes a cold place.

I'm sure I've seen at least a couple worthy posts from Choice. The other 1338 posts are easy to dismiss.
By the same standard, I could dismiss 99% of my own posts. The list of other offenders might be considerably long.

Being insensitive, rude, nasty, or incessantly off-topic should be fixed with a ban, but these boards are just a repository of low to high quality content with bare minimum moderation. We've been told to behave or lose the boards permanently. That's the deal.

Maybe Choice is just trying to keep the conversation going, but it does seem like this bulletin board has morphed into a tweet hibrid. It's difficult to say what is right or wrong around here anymore.


Here's a topic of conversation. I noticed that nobody seems to be interested in digging into who was Edward Wilmot Blyden. Once he was identified as the best possible candidate for the subject of the Verse 6 line, Edwin and Edwina named after him, people seemed to just be content to say "yeah, Abroad in America, yeah...Charleston" and be done with it. Could there be more to do with researching this person and asking the question of why would Byron select this historic figure as a piece of the African Tree Spirit's puzzle to hide the April Diamond? There is a method to how these puzzles were designed, right?

Is there any hard evidence that there were two people named after Blyden? Would this be reasonably common knowledge in 1982? Is Blyden really the clue and why?

BTW, this forum has devolved into a shit show.

Also, wrong thread.

[erexere]

Methodology is always the right thread...whether its Byron's methodology or our own...doesnt seem to matter.

Yeah, the quotation in Abroad in America is the best we have. It's not great but it's worth looking into.

[renovator]

BTW, this forum has devolved into a shit show.

The forum simply reflects the current state of the hunt. Always has. Always will.

[Dominick]

Wow. This discussion about shadows got heated. You don't have to find a casque to prove the shadow theory. We have two found casques. What is the day and time for Chicago and Cleveland? We can verify if this works or not. There are searchers that will go to these locations to see if it works. If this is true than that would mean there are 2 times a year you can find the exact spot.

I want to know what all the zodiac signs are for all the puzzles. What are the dates for every puzzle? What is the object that cast the shadow for every puzzle? What was the object for Cleveland? Share everything. If you are right you will get all the credit you deserve. If you are wrong, it was still a good idea worth exploring. I just don't see it.

[erexere]

I like the possibility try of the Shadow theory. Even better, theres excellent justification given the interpretation of the book passages and the clock times painted on the casque. Yet t wo things bother me enough to be unconvinced in its correctness. 1) the exact position of the Chicago casque dig spot is in contention. No photos or measurements were taken in the original recovery, some are at the mercy of all sorts of b ou based recollection. I am not confident in their recreation of the spot.
2) Cleveland's wall is well defined by counting bricks, and doesnt assuredly present an object of reference. The Urns could be worked it it possibly?

I have not been to either site to really get a sense for how these puzzles worked and I'm not sure the finders arrived at their results by the means which were intended.

There is room for skepticism here.

[Merlot Brougham]

I have not been to either site to really get a sense for how these puzzles worked and I'm not sure the finders arrived at their results by the means which were intended.

There is room for skepticism here.

I have been to both and while not necessarily "the means which were intended" may not have been followed down to the letter, I do not see where the shadow theory fits to either location.

[Kang]

Agree with erexere and MB here. While I am open to the possibility of the theory, it doesn't seem to work for either Cleveland or Chicago. Via logic or method.

Chicago – appears to fail by method, at least for the dig spot tested.
Putting aside the HUGE issue of confidence in the location of the exact dig spot. (Which is a real question depending on which telling of the events you'd like to go with). Let's go with the most current telling of the location - essentially the spot shown on EXU. (which gives this method the best coutcome as it get's you the closest).

Shadow caster: Fence icon.
OP does not explain any method for determining what should be the OTG shadow caster (as pointed out by 421). But hey, the fence icon is in the painting and in the final area, so let's just run with it.

I followed the OP's original instructions, went to the website indicated and filled in the parameters.
Not knowing the exact height of the middle post, I gave it a generous estimate of 5 feet tall (taller being better = longer shadow.
The website returned a shadow length of 7.68 feet (2.34m).


That is WELL short of the spot shown on EXU, as they are standing a known 30 feet from the wall and maybe 20 feet from the fence.



Cleveland – appears to have a hole in logic/solvability.
Shadow caster: ?
OP uses the urn at top of the right column. BUT that urn does not appear in the painting nor verse that I know of. Nor is any other explanation given as to how the solver was supposed to intuit what OTG object to use. So given hindsight it is all too possible to pick an object that will cast a shadow onto the spot we know it was found.

I’m not saying this is not a valid way to solve theory. Only constructive criticism that there’s a missing piece of info for Cleveland – how to determine the shadow caster object. And that for Chicago, it doesn’t seem to work for the spot tested. (Given that there is reason to debate the spot to begin with, there still at least a chance to make the theory workable).

Keep hunting, keep digging everyone…

[Choice]

One could use a shadow pointer in conjunction with an arrow pointer to narrow the search area. It may work with images with shadow present.
For example in image 4 shadow is present on both columns. However the right column shadows create an arrow point where the left one is rounded.
That's a shadow pointer. Then the arrow pointer would be the triangle in circle.

[renovator]

Only constructive criticism...

It's only constructive if the OP is willing to engage and debate the shortcomings of the theory that you and others have pointed out. Of course, the best theories need no defense. They are self-evident and stand on their own.

[Choice]

Only constructive criticism...

It's only constructive if the OP is willing to engage and debate the shortcomings of the theory that you and others have pointed out. Of course, the best theories need no defense. They are self-evident and stand on their own.

Here's a constructive criticism; pls include person's handle you're quoting.

[DustinTheWhite]

Kang,

Please come find me on Facebook messenger. I'd be happy to explain our theories with you there. :-)

[Doghousereiley]

Kang,

Please come find me on Facebook messenger. I'd be happy to explain our theories with you there. :-)

dustin or hang. would you please explain or repost your theories here. that is what a forum is for. to post information to benefit all and not have to rely on second hand info

it would be much appreciated. I know some who are q4t but not on facebook. also facebook is divided into cities (most of which I am not a member) and threads are hidden often and hard to find

thank you

[DustinTheWhite]

Doghousereiley,

I have tried to have conversations on Q4T. There seems to be good people here. But there are quite a few bad apples here too. I don't have time for bad apples, I live in Washington State where we have the best apples in the world.

Feel free to join our Facebook group, it's not divided into cities, it's just a place where people can share their ideas without the fear of being ridiculed or put down. That happens way too often on the internet, look how I've been treated here for a perfect example.

Here's the link to the group my wife and I created where the ideas are flowing like the finest of wines: https://www.facebook.com/groups/thesecretatreasurehunt/

On Facebook, you can't hide behind anonymity like you can here. Well, you technically can but once you show your true colors it's extremely easy to kick the fraud right out of there and block them from benefiting from any contributions made by the many productive members of the community there. There are places for internet trolls, our group isn't that place. Plus, Facebook is a much easier place to share anything, very user friendly!

Here is one thing I'll share with you guys since it just came out today, a new idea in an article that I'm sure won't be received well here but... meh, why not share, you know?

https://mysteriouswritings.com/have-add ... een-found/

Enjoy and I'll see you on Facebook if you want to chat!!