13/10/2022 - Enregistrement n° 44 - 01:01:40 :40: SS - Completely different from the first 9 puzzles
(Q - minicos: we've already talked about that, I asked you a question about it, saying that possibly the gear change mechanism could be underlying the enigmas, you told me
answered no, I still have this doubt a little, not like a common thread…)
MB : underlying, what do you mean by underlying the puzzles?
(Q - minicos: I think who could... let's admit that you are in Roncesvaux, and that you arrive in Carignan, in an axis, there you go, isn't there something behind Who can justify this and who would be outside the solution but who could contribute to the reasoning of the Super Solution? That, we long-time researchers, we have plenty of reasoning like that and we find it hard to let go of the fact that all of this could be false? that we move on to a completely brutal gear change that happened in 650, and not the result of a reasoning that we could have already perceived in the enigmas before, you know what I mean?)< /u>
MB : I see very well, but you are in denial of what I have been trying to do for months. Max was a completely ordinary guy, he was not at all the genius we imagine, he had never done that in his life, and when he did it later, he used other people's ideas, it It's proven, demonstrated, well I mean, you look, you take the madits again, you have in the madits all the findings, the suppositions, which were reused in all the hunts of Max Valentin behind to perfect the enigmas.
I took the example of lines on the map which draw the shape of something, it was mentioned in the madits, it was reused in a later hunt by Max Valentin like most of the owls' finds.
So when you say that there would be something... it's like the question that was asked to me earlier by saying earlier when we decipher do we have a Well done, something is coming out, we understand, there is confirmation...it's really bad! There's nothing wrong, nowhere, no confirmation at any time.
(Q – minicos: is there a word that would allow you to decode an enigma and that would be inside, there, a mechanism that allows you to decode the rest…)
MB : no, no, no, there is none of that, that's why I thought it was very useful to draw your attention to this notion of changing gear, because nothing does not allow you to anticipate or guess it.
You can't tell that there is a gear change. Especially since you were subjected throughout the first part of the puzzles to a relatively constant functioning, in terms of complexity, of processes, relatively varied but at the same time quite homogeneous, so we are always in the same way... there is always a notion of decryption and when we arrive at the end there is a notion of trick which becomes predominant. And no one was prepared for that, that’s why I talked about changing gear.
MB : underlying, what do you mean by underlying the puzzles?
(Q - minicos: I think who could... let's admit that you are in Roncesvaux, and that you arrive in Carignan, in an axis, there you go, isn't there something behind Who can justify this and who would be outside the solution but who could contribute to the reasoning of the Super Solution? That, we long-time researchers, we have plenty of reasoning like that and we find it hard to let go of the fact that all of this could be false? that we move on to a completely brutal gear change that happened in 650, and not the result of a reasoning that we could have already perceived in the enigmas before, you know what I mean?)< /u>
MB : I see very well, but you are in denial of what I have been trying to do for months. Max was a completely ordinary guy, he was not at all the genius we imagine, he had never done that in his life, and when he did it later, he used other people's ideas, it It's proven, demonstrated, well I mean, you look, you take the madits again, you have in the madits all the findings, the suppositions, which were reused in all the hunts of Max Valentin behind to perfect the enigmas.
I took the example of lines on the map which draw the shape of something, it was mentioned in the madits, it was reused in a later hunt by Max Valentin like most of the owls' finds.
So when you say that there would be something... it's like the question that was asked to me earlier by saying earlier when we decipher do we have a Well done, something is coming out, we understand, there is confirmation...it's really bad! There's nothing wrong, nowhere, no confirmation at any time.
(Q – minicos: is there a word that would allow you to decode an enigma and that would be inside, there, a mechanism that allows you to decode the rest…)
MB : no, no, no, there is none of that, that's why I thought it was very useful to draw your attention to this notion of changing gear, because nothing does not allow you to anticipate or guess it.
You can't tell that there is a gear change. Especially since you were subjected throughout the first part of the puzzles to a relatively constant functioning, in terms of complexity, of processes, relatively varied but at the same time quite homogeneous, so we are always in the same way... there is always a notion of decryption and when we arrive at the end there is a notion of trick which becomes predominant. And no one was prepared for that, that’s why I talked about changing gear.