Yes/No-question puzzle

Muzozavr · Post by **Muzozavr** » Mon Jul 21, 2008 9:13 pm

Why the double transaction after all...

Was B needed to verify something?

Were the contents an archeological fake?

Marinus · Post by **Marinus** » Mon Jul 21, 2008 9:29 pm

Honeybee:
Funny

But this isn't one out of the world of Superman, not even out of Star Trek allthough I'm a big ST fan.

This is possible in real life.

Muzozavr: Yes. B and C needed, or actually, wanted to verify something both. And it was not a double transaction. It was just one agreement between all people who were involved. And as I said before: In this case it were 3 people but when it were 6 the story was the same.

No. The content was no fake at all. And not archeologic either

uneekrose · Post by **uneekrose** » Mon Jul 21, 2008 9:38 pm

Oh honeybee, that was so funny........

rescuefire · Post by **rescuefire** » Mon Jul 21, 2008 9:48 pm

Could it be something they all read? Like a story needing to be buried or a diary or something?

uneekrose · Post by **uneekrose** » Mon Jul 21, 2008 9:49 pm

were the three men brothers or related by blood in some way?

Marinus · Post by **Marinus** » Mon Jul 21, 2008 10:02 pm

Robyn: No. It was not something to read. It was organic and you can say that paper is organic for it's made of wood. But I also said twice before (and this is an important hint): It is not a plant. It is not even a part of a plant.

Monica: They are not related by blood or such, but they are related som other way.

Muzozavr · Post by **Muzozavr** » Mon Jul 21, 2008 10:04 pm

Did they need to hide the content, or was the burying for some other reason?

Marinus · Post by **Marinus** » Mon Jul 21, 2008 10:22 pm

Both. Allthough it was not very criminal, it wasn't really legal either (but that's not really a hint/clue, I think), so it was wise to hide it. But the real reason was that the content of the box was no longer needed/usefull after all.

jdl · Post by **jdl** » Mon Jul 21, 2008 10:23 pm

Inside the box there is a paper or something that says bury me!

Marinus · Post by **Marinus** » Mon Jul 21, 2008 10:34 pm

No. (or actually it doesn't matter) I just explained the reason why it's buried

jdl · Post by **jdl** » Mon Jul 21, 2008 10:41 pm

Whops! Didn't see your post!

mqdar · Post by **mqdar** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 12:40 am

It is a treasure chest?

Dizzy1 · Post by **Dizzy1** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 12:51 am

Here's what we have so far: (I printed a copy to study)

If I goofed anything up, please someone, let me know.

Mr. A sends a package to Mr. B.

B opens it, takes a look, nods his head satisfied, closes it and sends it to Mr. C

C opens it, takes a look, nods his head satisfied and buries it in the ground.

One man can carry it alone.

About as big as a 24 pack of beer.

Only the package and content were buried, nothing more.

None of the men put anything else in, or took anything out of it, they just watched it.

No manure
No plant
No ashes
No one died

But it was organic

Bones? you come closer in the right direction. But it was not just bones.

Not a living creature. Although it was organic, it was not living anymore, and actually I wouldn't call it a creature either.

Yes, the content was alive first

Actually B and C are equal in this situation. It was also possible that more people were involved in this story. Then A should send it to B, B to C, C to D, and the last person should bury it.

Buried somewhere on a quiet and unimportant place. And yes. It should stay there.

No other people around when it was buried.

Not a time capsule

The content has been very important before. But at that moment, not anymore.

This isn't one out of the world of Superman, not even out of Star Trek.

This is possible in real life.

Yes. B and C needed, or actually, wanted to verify something both. And it was not a double transaction. It was just one agreement between all people who were involved. And as I said before: In this case it were 3 people but when it were 6 the story was the same.

It was not something to read. It was organic and you can say that paper is organic for it's made of wood. But I also said before (and this is an important hint): It is not a plant. It is not even a part of a plant.

They are not related by blood or such, but they are related some other way

Although it was not very criminal, it wasn't really legal either (but that's not really a hint/clue, I think), so it was wise to hide it. But the real reason was that the content of the box was no longer needed/useful after all.

peegman · Post by **peegman** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 6:58 am

Was there any air inside the box with the unknown thing

Marinus · Post by **Marinus** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 7:31 am

mqdar: No treasure chest! (It was alive once before)

Thanks dear Juliet for all the work.

Peegman: Yes, there was air. The thing was not packed vacuum, if that is what you mean.

About the contents:
Bones are closest in the right direction. It was not a living creature however is was alive once before. Although bones are alive, I won't call them a living creature. I think a living creature is the same as a living being. So it is either a human being or an animal. And maybe someone call a plant a living creature as well, I'm not sure. So, with other words, I said this:

Not a human being.
Not an animal
Not a plant, and not even a part of a plant

Does anyone see something remarkable at those 3 sentences?

I also said:
It is organic.
Once before / in the past, it was alive, but not anymore.
Once before / in the past, it was important, but not anymore. It was useless / worthless after all, so he buried it.

About the people involved:
The story is told me with 3 people, so I tell it with 3 people too, but it is also possible to make the same story with, by example, 5 people. That makes no difference.

The person who sends the package first is in a different situation then the others. The others are in the same situation, except for the fact that the last person buries the package.

They are not related by blood/family but some other way. Let me say: They have something in common.

About the agreement:
Or, as Muzozavr said, transaction. But I think a transaction is about money and valuable things, and this isn't, so I won't call it a transaction.

It just that one person sends something to the others. The others only wanted to see it. When they knew what it was, they were satisfied and then it was done. But, of course, there is a history involved.

BTW, If there is any misunderstanding because English is not my primary language, (or for some other reason) I would really appreciate when someone tells me.

mqdar · Post by **mqdar** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 8:15 am

mqdar wrote:It is a treasure chest?

Oops, looks like I wasn't thinking then.

1. Does the content inculde anything related to dinosaurs?
2. Was it a mummy?
3. Is it something that would be put in a museum? Would that be appropriate?
4. Was question 2 above valid? Did it go against, "...not a living creature?"

Marinus · Post by **Marinus** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 8:40 am

Mqdar, I'm sorry but it's 4 times no.

It was alive before, but not long ago, maybe a day. And indeed, I think a mummy was once a living creature.

Someone asked if was a dead body or if it was a living creature. It was not, but even if it was one of those, it should have been not just bones, although these things mostly have bones in it.

Maybe you should look again if you find something remarkable at those 3 lines with bold text.

mqdar · Post by **mqdar** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 8:56 am

Oh no.

Um...

Not a human being.
Not an animal
Not a plant, and not even a part of a plant

...

But that covers all aspects of life! Bones...

No, it can't be a treasure map. You say this 'whatever-it-was' was alive for about a day, so it wasn't historic or anything. No, it can't be a battery. That's not organic.

Not a human being.
Not an animal
Not a plant, and not even a part of a plant

How's that remarkable? Gimme a glue.

Marinus · Post by **Marinus** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 9:06 am

There are 3 sentences: Not a .......
But with one of these 3, there is something more: Not even a part of a ....
With the other 2, I didn't say that.

mqdar · Post by **mqdar** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 9:07 am

Sooo, how does this help?

Marinus · Post by **Marinus** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 9:14 am

I said several times: It is not a part of a plant, but I never said: It is not a part of a human body or a part of an animal body! So your next question will be now: Is it either a part of a human body or a part of an animal body. And then my answer will be: Yes, it is.

maxnick · Post by **maxnick** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 12:37 pm

Sedimentary rock?

Marinus · Post by **Marinus** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 12:45 pm

Well I didn't know that sedimentary rock could have been alive one day earlier, but the answer is no.

uneekrose · Post by **uneekrose** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 12:46 pm

Is it a finger?

Marinus · Post by **Marinus** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 12:53 pm

The same situation as with the bones Monica. Actually there are bones in that box, and there is also a finger in. But it's more then that.

I think after 1 or 2 questions you should know what it is exactly so I think can rather tell. It is an arm, with hand, with fingers.

uneekrose · Post by **uneekrose** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 1:01 pm

Yup that was my next question. I thought about the arm or a hand yesterday. They were all mob brothers and were confirming a hit, the arm had a tattoo on it as verification to the identity of the target.

lol that was a good one Marinus.

Marinus · Post by **Marinus** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 1:14 pm

Monica, actually the story is a little bit different. This was only the first part. There is quite a story about what happened in the past, and why these people send that arm, looked at it and then buried it.

I don't understand all words what you are saying, "mob brothers" and "confirming a hit", but I think it was not quite that.

To give you one more hint: You got the idea, there was a tattoo on it, but it wasn't. They were thinking that they knew who's arm it was, but they couldn,t know for sure.

uneekrose · Post by **uneekrose** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 1:31 pm

mob brothers--very bad men, the mafia
confirmed hit is a killing

So it was an arm with a tatto that wasn't really a tattoo, so there had to be a really bad scar or birthmark on the arm that identified it to the men. Right?

Marinus · Post by **Marinus** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 2:12 pm

They were not mafia men. As I said, it was not really criminal, but of course it's not really legal either to send a package with a human arm to someone and to bury it somewhere. But they didn't kill anyone.

As I remember from long ago when they told me this riddle, they didn't talk about a tattoo or such. I think it's your idea. And I have to say: It's a very good idea. So let's say that there was a fake tattoo on the arm. So they thought they could identify it, but in fact they could't.

rescuefire · Post by **rescuefire** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 2:28 pm

I'm still confused (what a surprise huh)

Does this arm have some type of birth mark on it?