The methodology discussion

Q4T
Visit The Secret Wiki.

Re: The methodology discussion

Postby maltedfalcon » Fri Feb 15, 2019 5:30 pm

BINGO wrote:As far as the length of the “walking path” from iconic image to casque site, there are people who simply don’t believe that it needs to be a walking path at all.


Well I came up with the theory and even I don't think "walking path" is accurate. I said there is a path from an iconic image in the painting to the first spot in the verse.
it seems to be straight or only have a few turns. But outside of a method for identifying the casque site area, I don't think there really is any point in actually trying to
walk the path.

This shows true in Chicago and Cleveland

and looks to be true in
SF
Milwaukee
St Augustine
New York
New Orleans
Charleston

Possibly in
Roanoke
Montreal
Boston

But does not seem to be true in
Houston

I suspect though it is true in Houston, Roanoke, Montreal and Boston, but things have changed so much it is too difficult to identify the "path" anymore.
User avatar
maltedfalcon
Adler
Adler
 
Posts: 2509
Joined: Mon May 19, 2003 9:29 pm
Location: Northern California

Re: The methodology discussion

Postby gManTexas » Fri Feb 15, 2019 5:32 pm

maltedfalcon wrote:
BINGO wrote:As far as the length of the “walking path” from iconic image to casque site, there are people who simply don’t believe that it needs to be a walking path at all.


Well I came up with the theory and even I don't think "walking path" is accurate. I said there is a path from an iconic image in the painting to the first spot in the verse.
it seems to be straight or only have a few turns. But outside of a method for identifying the casque site area, I don't think there really is any point in actually trying to
walk the path.

This shows true in Chicago and Cleveland

and looks to be true in
SF
Milwaukee
St Augustine
New York
New Orleans
Charleston

Possibly in
Roanoke
Montreal
Boston

But does not seem to be true in
Houston

I suspect though it is true in Houston, Roanoke, Montreal and Boston, but things have changed so much it is too difficult to identify the "path" anymore.


Care to share some details for discussion?
gManTexas
Adler
Adler
 
Posts: 1234
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2018 12:26 am

Re: The methodology discussion

Postby maltedfalcon » Fri Feb 15, 2019 5:50 pm

gManTexas wrote:
Care to share some details for discussion?


viewtopic.php?f=32&t=6345
User avatar
maltedfalcon
Adler
Adler
 
Posts: 2509
Joined: Mon May 19, 2003 9:29 pm
Location: Northern California

Re: The methodology discussion

Postby Spiritr » Fri Feb 15, 2019 5:59 pm

maltedfalcon wrote:
BINGO wrote:As far as the length of the “walking path” from iconic image to casque site, there are people who simply don’t believe that it needs to be a walking path at all.


Well I came up with the theory and even I don't think "walking path" is accurate. I said there is a path from an iconic image in the painting to the first spot in the verse.
it seems to be straight or only have a few turns. But outside of a method for identifying the casque site area, I don't think there really is any point in actually trying to
walk the path.

This shows true in Chicago and Cleveland

and looks to be true in
SF
Milwaukee
St Augustine
New York
New Orleans
Charleston

Possibly in
Roanoke
Montreal
Boston

But does not seem to be true in
Houston

I suspect though it is true in Houston, Roanoke, Montreal and Boston, but things have changed so much it is too difficult to identify the "path" anymore.


it's good to see these changes
User avatar
Spiritr
Watson
Watson
 
Posts: 541
Joined: Wed May 30, 2018 9:05 pm

Re: The methodology discussion

Postby gManTexas » Fri Feb 15, 2019 6:03 pm

maltedfalcon wrote:
gManTexas wrote:
Care to share some details for discussion?


viewtopic.php?f=32&t=6345


I like a lot of that, and I would assume this is what got distilled down to "start at such and such, then make one turn and you're there."

On a broader scale, I believe there are paths or entry points in the puzzles. For example, I believe that we are encouraged to take the old Cooper River (Grace Memorial) bridge into Charleston. In NY we are instructed to to take the Verrazzano-Narrows bridge (maybe Brooklyn bridge). It is probable in SF that we come in over the Golden Gate bridge on Route 101.

Not to focus solely on bridges, but they popped into my head. The building seem a bit tougher, since you may be on foot. All of the buildings, like Milwaukee City Hall, Cleveland Terminal Tower, and the Chicago Water Tower are some distance from the respective parks. Maybe it is a driving thing.

I think your theory has a lot of merit though.
gManTexas
Adler
Adler
 
Posts: 1234
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2018 12:26 am

Re: The methodology discussion

Postby GoldenMartyr » Fri Feb 15, 2019 6:33 pm

BINGO wrote:
GoldenMartyr wrote:Please stop trying to hurt my feelings. That hint is my only hope that is still intact.

;D
Look at the keywords. Regardless of how you interpret them, it would be quite difficult to create a hint without giving them away.
Paint happy trees not casques
User avatar
GoldenMartyr
Moriarty
Moriarty
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:25 pm

Re: The methodology discussion

Postby Guardian » Sat Feb 16, 2019 3:43 am

maltedfalcon wrote:
BINGO wrote:As far as the length of the “walking path” from iconic image to casque site, there are people who simply don’t believe that it needs to be a walking path at all.


Well I came up with the theory and even I don't think "walking path" is accurate. I said there is a path from an iconic image in the painting to the first spot in the verse.
it seems to be straight or only have a few turns. But outside of a method for identifying the casque site area, I don't think there really is any point in actually trying to
walk the path.

This shows true in Chicago and Cleveland

and looks to be true in
SF
Milwaukee
St Augustine
New York
New Orleans
Charleston

Possibly in
Roanoke
Montreal
Boston

But does not seem to be true in
Houston

I suspect though it is true in Houston, Roanoke, Montreal and Boston, but things have changed so much it is too difficult to identify the "path" anymore.


If you want the exact spot to minimize your digging time, you definitely need the walking path. Houston’s a problem, though. When I walked it last month, I found there’s now an obstacle, so I can’t be sure I went where I wanted to go. The rest was still walkable.
Guardian
Lestrade
Lestrade
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 7:18 pm

Re: The methodology discussion

Postby GoldenMartyr » Tue Feb 19, 2019 2:41 pm

I have a feeling there isn’t much left to the images as far as traditional onsite matches. We seem to be beating a dead horse here. Cleveland and Chicago were found because there are so many onsite image matches. The rest likely have different methods.

There are three things I believe we should shift our focus to in the images.

1. Map waypoints or map related objects.
2. What am I’s- think Lincoln in SF or Mace in Roanoke.
3. Mini Puzzles- Montreal’s "find me here" finger pointing in the GSM, Sf’s 3/4 finger pointing.
Paint happy trees not casques
User avatar
GoldenMartyr
Moriarty
Moriarty
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:25 pm

Re: The methodology discussion

Postby GoldenMartyr » Tue Feb 19, 2019 2:47 pm

One thing I do feel that all puzzles may have in common is text matches on site. All verses besides 2, 7, 8, 10 have words or portions of the verse that have been found on physical objects in their respective cities. Image 7 adds NOLA to the list(Preservation). So, 9 of 12 cities have words from the puzzle that appear onsite. That is 75% of our cities that fit the pattern. Could we be missing onsite text in SF, MKE, and NYC?
Paint happy trees not casques
User avatar
GoldenMartyr
Moriarty
Moriarty
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:25 pm

Re: The methodology discussion

Postby gManTexas » Tue Feb 19, 2019 3:07 pm

GoldenMartyr wrote:One thing I do feel that all puzzles may have in common is text matches on site. All verses besides 2, 7, 8, 10 have words or portions of the verse that have been found on physical objects in their respective cities. Image 7 adds NOLA to the list(Preservation). So, 9 of 12 cities have words from the puzzle that appear onsite. That is 75% of our cities that fit the pattern. Could we be missing onsite text in SF, MKE, and NYC?


If we take "the sign" in Verse 10 literally, then we should be looking for a sign that wither contains words from the Verse, the Image, or a derivation of the meaning of the words in the Verse.
gManTexas
Adler
Adler
 
Posts: 1234
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2018 12:26 am

Re: The methodology discussion

Postby GoldenMartyr » Tue Feb 19, 2019 3:13 pm

The best find there seems to be the Fraunces Tavern sign.
Paint happy trees not casques
User avatar
GoldenMartyr
Moriarty
Moriarty
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:25 pm

Re: The methodology discussion

Postby gManTexas » Tue Feb 19, 2019 3:15 pm

GoldenMartyr wrote:The best find there seems to be the Fraunces Tavern sign.


Can you elaborate on that? Reasoning and how the location relates to the puzzle?
gManTexas
Adler
Adler
 
Posts: 1234
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2018 12:26 am

Re: The methodology discussion

Postby GoldenMartyr » Tue Feb 19, 2019 3:21 pm

You mentioned taking the sign literally. Fraunces Tavern has a sign that speaks of Indies native. It was discussed a lot years ago but fell off with the changing of the guard.

It's claimed to be "the oldest building in NYC" and is a couple blocks east of Battery Park.
Paint happy trees not casques
User avatar
GoldenMartyr
Moriarty
Moriarty
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:25 pm

Re: The methodology discussion

Postby gManTexas » Tue Feb 19, 2019 3:24 pm

GoldenMartyr wrote:You mentioned taking the sign literally. Fraunces Tavern has a sign that speaks of Indies native. It was discussed a lot years ago but fell off with the changing of the guard.

It's claimed to be "the oldest building in NYC" and is a couple blocks east of Battery Park.


This assumes that we are looking in lower Manhattan for the casque, correct?
gManTexas
Adler
Adler
 
Posts: 1234
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2018 12:26 am

Re: The methodology discussion

Postby GoldenMartyr » Tue Feb 19, 2019 3:47 pm

gManTexas wrote:This assumes that we are looking in lower Manhattan for the casque, correct?

I'm making zero assumptions. Assumptions are a problem IMO.

My original comment was that there may be text onsite for NYC, MKE, and SF, given there is text onsite for 9 of the 12 puzzles(methodology). You brought up the fact that we may be looking for a literal sign in NY, to which I then replied about Fraunces Tavern.

I feel that some puzzles have been narrowed down to a specific area using logic. Others, not so much. The way I approach the puzzles which I feel have not been proven to be in a more specific area, is to look at the best possible interpretation of the clues in their respective cities.

If Fraunces Tavern were an acceptable interpretation to a treasure hunter then it would point to lower Manhattan. That would be better suited as a V10 discussion....we sort of crossed over from methodology.
Paint happy trees not casques
User avatar
GoldenMartyr
Moriarty
Moriarty
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:25 pm

PreviousNext

Return to The Secret

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: burnstyle and 6 guests