You, of your own volition, publicly posted that the closest number was off by 24,674. I took this possibly erroneous bit of information and applied it to the data set and made a plus/minus chart of all the entries, which effectively doubled the number of choices. Because of the way some of the numbers overlapped relative to the 24,674 number, I was able to eliminate them and got the list of viable possibles down to 60 or so.
I then had a jumbled mess of possibles to be sorted and so I operated under the assumption that your choice of numbers wouldn't actually be random. I scoured the list looking for anything that may be of historical significance or otherwise meaningful in some way. Of all the possibilities, two stood out with plausible date formats in the 1900's.
From here I looked at your forum name "Sharpie Sniffer" hoping to glean some insight, and assumed it was likely someone in their mid-to-late teens. Any earlier and you would not be into sniffing markers, any later and you would have moved on to proper narcotics to get your fix. This assumption happened to line up nicely with one of the two plausible date formats, the one ending in 1995. The 4 and 6 were of no interest to me but I later assumed them to be birth month and day.
It was a guess, based on a guess, based on a set of assumptions. Nothing in the rule set banned the analysis of this publicly available data or operating on assumptions. As the rules are written, the only possible way to cheat in this contest would be to change your answer after the fact, and that is something I did not do. It was a guess, a scientific wild *** guess maybe, but a guess all the same.
Hopefully this clears up the mystery. I'm totally blown away that it all came together.
As to why my first post was short, I didn't want to spend an hour-plus putting my thoughts together in a coherent way... I do not like to write if I am not going to write right.
