Post by justasking on Apr 3, 2018 12:39:41 GMT
There may be a hint of professionalism to the map, but it still doesn't make it an obvious conclusion that he himself should have been the professional in question. Assuming he (EAR) was the one who drew the map (I tend to think so), he could have copied it from some original draft or an aerial image.
It has been noted by Paul Holes and some professionals that there seems to be some kind of an uneven dimension to the map, as the details are sharper in *this* corner but sloppy in *that* corner. This was taken to mean that maybe it was two different people who drafted it. One of them having been the experienced one, and the other some kind of a rookie apprentice. Some even think that there were two "different" handwritings on the water area of the map.
The expert with whom Paul Holes consulted with, as was depicted in the ID television episode, answered Holes's leading question about two persons drawing the map: the expert confirmed Holes's impression that it seems like the map was drawn by two different people. That's how it seemed, the expert agreed. But he added: either that, or the seemingly differing aspects of it were drawn in two completely different mental states. That's a good hint, stated by the expert himself.
Going with the theory about two different persons as opposed to varying mental states of one person, we could just as easily say that the writings on the "punshment" page were written by two persons. But no-one is suggesting that, because it seems obvious that the writings on that page have differing mental and / or emotional states behind them guiding the form.
That's most likely the case with the two "different" handwritings on the map too. If both of those words even do indeed say "lake", the first thing to be noticed would be that the first (vertically higher) one is written in lowercase, whereas the second one is uppercase. So of course they'll differ at least to that degree. And there is also an unmistakeable quality to the vertically lower upper-case "LAke", as there's that same kind of stringy, spiraling thing going on as there is to the word "punshment" on the other page. So was the more beautifully written lowercase "lake" written by the supposed "sorcerer", whereas the uppercase "lake" was written by the "apprentice"? Does the lowercase "lake" really differ that much from the other writings on the "punshment" page, or from the "homework"? Probably not. All of those writings give the same sense, even though they were seemingly different.
So, why wouldn't the simple explanation be the correct one? Just as his handwriting differed from moment to moment, so did the sharpness / sloppiness of detail in his drawing. Maybe he had limited attention span, got bored easily. Remember, he might not have liked to have his hand hurt (referring to the 6th grade rant). The part he drew more quickly and sloppy wasn't the important part of the map. Those kinds of reasons for making it "seem" like there were two people involved in drawing the map.
Like said, he could have copied it from some primary source and gotten tired, or completed the copy in a hurry. Or, again; the aspects that seem more sloppy weren't important, although he still added them to have a complete general picture of the area (or a plan) in question.
Of course, the question would still remain: what gave him access to the original image (whatever it was)? But the answer might have nothing to do with him being in construction or development business. He could have had some proximal access to it, even though he wasn't involved. Identifying the area on the map (if it exists) would be the most crucial first step.
The position of the highway in the upper left corner of the map should give some guidance, in addition to the writing on the map (if it's ever found out what it actually says).
It has been noted by Paul Holes and some professionals that there seems to be some kind of an uneven dimension to the map, as the details are sharper in *this* corner but sloppy in *that* corner. This was taken to mean that maybe it was two different people who drafted it. One of them having been the experienced one, and the other some kind of a rookie apprentice. Some even think that there were two "different" handwritings on the water area of the map.
The expert with whom Paul Holes consulted with, as was depicted in the ID television episode, answered Holes's leading question about two persons drawing the map: the expert confirmed Holes's impression that it seems like the map was drawn by two different people. That's how it seemed, the expert agreed. But he added: either that, or the seemingly differing aspects of it were drawn in two completely different mental states. That's a good hint, stated by the expert himself.
Going with the theory about two different persons as opposed to varying mental states of one person, we could just as easily say that the writings on the "punshment" page were written by two persons. But no-one is suggesting that, because it seems obvious that the writings on that page have differing mental and / or emotional states behind them guiding the form.
That's most likely the case with the two "different" handwritings on the map too. If both of those words even do indeed say "lake", the first thing to be noticed would be that the first (vertically higher) one is written in lowercase, whereas the second one is uppercase. So of course they'll differ at least to that degree. And there is also an unmistakeable quality to the vertically lower upper-case "LAke", as there's that same kind of stringy, spiraling thing going on as there is to the word "punshment" on the other page. So was the more beautifully written lowercase "lake" written by the supposed "sorcerer", whereas the uppercase "lake" was written by the "apprentice"? Does the lowercase "lake" really differ that much from the other writings on the "punshment" page, or from the "homework"? Probably not. All of those writings give the same sense, even though they were seemingly different.
So, why wouldn't the simple explanation be the correct one? Just as his handwriting differed from moment to moment, so did the sharpness / sloppiness of detail in his drawing. Maybe he had limited attention span, got bored easily. Remember, he might not have liked to have his hand hurt (referring to the 6th grade rant). The part he drew more quickly and sloppy wasn't the important part of the map. Those kinds of reasons for making it "seem" like there were two people involved in drawing the map.
Like said, he could have copied it from some primary source and gotten tired, or completed the copy in a hurry. Or, again; the aspects that seem more sloppy weren't important, although he still added them to have a complete general picture of the area (or a plan) in question.
Of course, the question would still remain: what gave him access to the original image (whatever it was)? But the answer might have nothing to do with him being in construction or development business. He could have had some proximal access to it, even though he wasn't involved. Identifying the area on the map (if it exists) would be the most crucial first step.
The position of the highway in the upper left corner of the map should give some guidance, in addition to the writing on the map (if it's ever found out what it actually says).