Rennes-le-Château

What the heck happened to Henry Lincoln? He did about 30 years of research on Rennes-le-Chateau, then just seemed to quit after Key to the Sacred Pattern in the late 90's. He did do a book about Bornholm with Erling Haagensen shortly after that, but I haven't heard anything about the guy for about the last four years. I saw a photo of him recently getting an honourary Knighthood from some Templaresque group, which was rather bizarre. I wonder if he ever looks in on this forum? Just in case, I have a message for him. Hey Hank, Poussin and Teniers were solved. Wake up call, buddy! That IS what you were looking forward to isn't it? Lost interest did you?

Pauspapier is German for 'tracing paper'...

Ah yes, Le Popol, the mentally disturbed spam factory. Take a look at the yahoogroup "Rennes-le-Chateau" to see just HOW disturbed he really is. He is currently posting under the name Gornex (or something like that). He has posted strings of posts as long as your arm about workshop tools, just to irritate people. You sure know how to pick a hero! As for Lincoln falsifying things, I don't doubt it. He is obviously not a serious researcher, so the next best thing is making stuff up. How hard could it be for him to find this forum? All he has to do is type renneslechateau.com and go to the first forum, which is actually entitled Rennes-le-Chateau. As far as can see, the guy is a total clown, just like Le Popol or whatever his name is today. I don't know of one person who I consider a respectable researcher on the subject of Rennes-le-Chateau. Nobody has ever contacted me, and I am the solver of both Sheperdess paintings and the "no temptation" painting and it is posted on every major RLC forum. Torkain himself has never contacted me, and I posted the solutions on his own forum. I don't think his webmaster even looks at the posts. Let's see just how long it takes Torkain, Lincoln and the rest to realize the mystery has been solved. I've got five bucks on 10 years! When I actually put my story into writing, it's going to be a slaughterfest.

Sorry, I thought you were a Le Popol fan. I DID publish my findings, on the worldwide web. Where else should I publish it? If anyone knows of a magizine or some kind of publication that would be interested in the solutions of Rennes-le-Chateau and Oak island then please inform me. If you mean I should write abook about it, That would be a very large undertaking and would take years to actually be printed and distributed and I would probably only get about $5000 for my trouble. I want to spread the news about locating the Grail/Ark to mankind as quickly and widely as possible. The best way I can think of is with a website and forum announcements. I am obviously wasting my time on THIS forum, but I am starting to find other forums to post on. I just posted on a couple yesterday. I will just have to get around to more forums, that's all. Eventually, the world will have to take notice of what I consider one of the biggest news stories of the century. Thanks for posting on my thread. Soory if I sounded affensive before. You seem like a good fellow.

Well, what he does is go around to all Rennes-le-Chateau forums he can find and bother anyone who won't believe his crap about Plantard and RLC being all a big hoax. He sends large numbers of spam posts to the forums to irritate people until they leave the forum. He actually sends e-mails right to some people to hound them more directly unless they agree with his insane ideas. Just take a look at his website. It goes on and on with huge amounts of stuff, most of which is of no real significance at all. The guy is clearly obsessed. He is oftern profane on forums. He uses multiple fake names to get back on forums he has been banned from, which is virtually all of them. The guy is a perfect example of an internet lunatic. He is a total nuisance and nothing more. His theories are pure garbage! Once I showed up on this forum, he promptly left because he knows I can, and already have, proven his hoax theory wrong by solving the paintings he claims have nothing concealed in them. He has never been able to show a flaw in the solutions, because there are none. Even when there really were some flaws (before I corrected them), he was too stupid to be able to find them. Now he has no chance at all of finding any, nor does anyone else on Earth!

please allow me to question your last words "nor has anyone on earth". Do you know the theory of the one hundredst ape?
There are always different people on different parts of the world developing similar ideas and even the SAME ideas. Somebody else could track you down in mind and find the same solutions. You seem not to believe that other brains can get connected to "wisdom".

No, nothing like that, I just know that I have correctly deduced the solutions to the paintings before anyone else did. I have never seen or heard of anything remotely similar.

BE, with all due respect your work will never be recognised as the sollution to the paintings. There are several reasons for this and these are as follows. 1. Your work is not original, there are others who discovered what you have many years ago including myself. 2. Your work is wrong not just in the content and aspect of it but because of the laws of probability involved in complex geometrical and mathematical systems. The geometrical coincidences you are talking about can be found both on the Moon and Mars. The trouble is Poussin didn't paint the Moon did he, so one can draw conclusions from that! There are certain aspects of the paintings that are within the boudaries of your theory but you have taken them out of context and in some of your work out of the paintings. The painter would never have gone out of the boundaries of the canvas and that is a major flaw in your work. 3 In the process of your work you failed to take into account certain obvious facts that are of utmost importance to this mystery and you have as a result become single minded in both your thinking and your conclusions. The result of this single mindedness is a theory that is bent and twisted to fit what you have in your mind and not what is actually fact. Not only is your theory correct in your mind, everyone else's is wrong because they don't fit into your's. Take a look at what you have done Brian, remember the times when you bent the rules a little for this thing to work and ask yourself, could I be wrong here?

As for one point you made, that the artist would never have gone outside the edges of the canvas, how the hell do you know that? You are simply speculating based on nothing. I say he would have gone outside the edges, just like Vermeer went outside the edges. I say that going outside the edges is common practise with painting geometry and also helps to make solution that much trickier. It doesn't matter what you say, Maffaman, because I am the solver of the Poussin and Teniers paintings and that is a matter of historical fact, regardless of whether you personally believe it. I don't expect you, or 99 % of the population, to recognize that fact. Only a super-genius can understand something as complex as the Poussin/Teniers/Oak Island Cross solution. If your IQ is under 150, you don't qualify to comprehend the solution and your opinion is of absolutely no significance to me.

BE, if your theory is correct how come no one is giving you any acclaim for it? Your reply is typicle of someone who is a legend in his own mind. Why would a painter create an entity that only super human intelligent people could work out? When he was painting such a entity I take it we are to believe that he was thinking that people with an IQ of less that 150 would be struggling to cope with such a mind boggling puzzle. Why would he bother at all painting such a thing? To tease those who are not quite intelligent enough to work it out? The paintings cannot be worked out with geometrical sollutions, they are I must admit a tease but only to people the likes of you and I who are not initiated into their real meaning. I can find your grail star on the moon by the way!

BE, my IQ exceeds 150, and to be honest I don't see anything in your solution that requires such an IQ to understand. High school level geometry and a knowledge of how to use AutoCAD is all that is required.

If in fact the paintings do hide a key to a treasure map, then the solution would be trigonometric, rather than geometric - and there is a difference.

Whether your solution is correct or not, you have a tendency to dismiss as irrelevant any clues or information (whether accurate or not) pertaining to the RLC mystery which do not immediately fit with your solution. That is why you are not being taken seriously. It has nothing to do with the intelligence of the readers - it is simply due to the fact that you have not adequately explained the other 95% of the information relating to this mystery, even if all you do is reasonably disprove the data - simply dismissing it is not enough.

Mark H, you and I have the same perceptions about BE's attitude. I am sure that he is a reasonably intelligent guy but he has a lack of understanding about the facts of this mystery just as you pointed out. He can be very dismissive at times and if his theory is to blossem then he needs to lighten up a little. Lincoln and DiCurcio have been there and bought the t-shirt when it comes to geometry and that is partly the reason no one is interested in yet another theory along those lines. Many years ago I was in touch with Cliff Stoll the guy who wrote ' The cockoo's egg' and caught the russian star wars hacker. I asked him to put these geoligical models through those enormous number crunching computers they have down at Berkeley university. He told me they had already done it before (I suspected Lincoln had already been there) with some strange results. The computers came up with millions of models and star shapes within the paintings. So to pick just one star within that painting would have to be bias. this is why I dismissed my own findings which were not the same as Brian's but very, very similar. This mystery has more to offer than Grail stars and such but whether we will find that out remains to be seen. When I post my stuff on this forum I do it for a reason and that is to stretch people's imagination to the utmost limit with original material. Right or wrong this material certainly gets the mind ticking and sometimes stimulates other theories. By the way BE my IQ is up there.