A GUIDE TO VAULT TREASURE HUNTING (Condensed)

[mdog]

The problem is that I havent seen any Phoenician faces carved in my area, I have seen Jesus and the Devil and Crosses all indicating Catholic, and then at the ancient sites I have seen Native American Type Indians carved.

The Phoenicians were all about trade and they were pretty good about covering their footprints when at a place where they traded and then left. If Phoenician, they could have put the chiefs head there to flatter him and cement any trade agreements. They would probably never put one of their own images there. I'd like to see somebody find some Phoenician artifacts, over a wide area.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[sandy1]

Thats a stretch there, you have to understand how many Indian heads were carved out here, even kenworthy put a huge boulder (Indian Head) one with the topknot/scalplock in one of his books which enters the superstitions, this is where Kenworthy and I part ways because he said it was made by the Spanish in order to show them they may encounter Indians along that trail while I say that the trail was made/marked by the Ancient American Indians that were there long before the Spanish.

 

[mdog]

Thats a stretch there, you have to understand how many Indian heads were carved out here, even kenworthy put a huge boulder (Indian Head) one with the topknot/scalplock in one of his books which enters the superstitions, this is where Kenworthy and I part ways because he said it was made by the Spanish in order to show them they may encounter Indians along that trail while I say that the trail was made/marked by the Ancient American Indians that were there long before the Spanish.

If you've seen a lot of these Indian heads, have you noticed anything they have in common? Are they all close to the thrones or facing the same direction. There must be something they have in common. I'd say your theory about the Indians marking the trails makes sense. Have you ever figured out what kind of tools they used to do the carving.

 

[sandy1]

The one thing I have noticed is that the carved Chief always wears the Headdress and the rest of the carved indian heads have topknot/Scalplocks

This is where me and Kenworthy part ways again, he has a beautiful full Indian head with a headdress in one of his books, he says the head is made by the Spanish and it means it is marking a sacred place like a burial ground, while again I believe it was made by the Ancient American Indians, not the Spanish (Although I do believe it is marking a sacred place in tribute to the Chief probably his Tomb)

 

[sandy1]

From my exploits I have found that Kenworthy was showing real signs however he was mixing Ancient Native American Markers with the Spanish Markers, I believe he did this because he either didn't understand the difference or because it would be too difficult to convince people about a ancient society out here carving and moving around tons of boulders.

 

[Crosse De Sign]

Hi Sandy. I asked you for information about these ancient sites, within the past couple weeks, and I was told you didn't want to get off the subject of your thread. I'd like to invite you to take part in the thread that I just started, and talk about these ancient monuments.

Yes mdog I said I didn't think he would want to discuss the ancients, because I'd never seen this detail online in forum.
As far as I've seen in forum or private with me anyway, this is the first he's discussed it in this much depth at all.
So congratulations, it seems you at least partly got your way...

 

[Crosse De Sign]

The Phoenicians were all about trade and they were pretty good about covering their footprints when at a place where they traded and then left. If Phoenician, they could have put the chiefs head there to flatter him and cement any trade agreements. They would probably never put one of their own images there. I'd like to see somebody find some Phoenician artifacts, over a wide area.

Hmm...Their footprints on the earth's surface surely faded without effort in time,
though they apparently didn't erase all of their interesting skilled rock art work...
...

 

[sdcfia]

Have you not read the journal that Pike wrote when he was taken to Santa Fe to be interrogated by the governor and his descriptions of the palace inside this is just one account of it.You make it try and seem like it was just and old run down building when actually one of the first structures to be built in the Americas or should I say New Spain.

Yeah, I've read it, and, sure, the Palace did have a couple of silver candlesticks in it - I'll give you that much. Other than those couple trinkets, all that gold and silver opulence you mention seems to be missing from real history. Maybe some of those other journals you have will describe more. Otherwise, Pike wrote: "Neither is the Governor's Palace in Santa Fe anything more than a mud building with a mud-covered portico, supported by rough pine pillars."

More from the early 1700s. Here's a report that was given to new governor Martinez before he was to occupy the Palace in 1716:

 

[sdcfia]

The Phoenicians were all about trade and they were pretty good about covering their footprints when at a place where they traded and then left. If Phoenician, they could have put the chiefs head there to flatter him and cement any trade agreements. They would probably never put one of their own images there. I'd like to see somebody find some Phoenician artifacts, over a wide area.

There are plenty of petroglyphs in NM's lower Rio Grande Valley region that depict North African symbology, but it's impossible to date them conclusively. The best evidence I've seen is Mystery Mountain west of Los Lunas NM. The Decalog Stone low on the mesa is the obvious focus for most folks and its authenticity will be forever denied by academia, as is the case with all artifacts that don't fit The Narrative. IMO, the structural ruins on top of the mesa are more compelling. The site plan of the settlement up there strongly matches similar military encampment ruins found all over the Middle East. These are clearly not Anasazi-style "Indian ruins", and are rarely if ever discussed by pointy-heads.

I have two problems with pareidolia-based "ancient carvings" - heads, faces, animals, shadow-casters, et al. First, a construction operation that reshapes a mountain, even in ancient times, will leave evidence of the work, lots of it. There will be tool marks, exposed erosion boundaries, massive detritus accumulations, etc. I've seen nobody demonstrate any of this at any of the claimed sites.

With smaller objects, like carved heads or animals, the evidence should be even easier to find as the detail required should be clearly evident on the rock surfaces. I've only seen one example of a rock that was manipulated to look more like the object it appeared to be, and I found it and verified it myself. Tool marks and fresh exposed surfaces on this dog's ear, eye and snout proved to me that somebody enhanced it.


Even though a rock may look like a familiar shape, nobody bothers to verify with even the slightest evidence that the thing isn't just another "looks like" rock, and there is certainly no shortage of those. Why not verify the claims? Because there is no evidence. When people start proving "carved rocks" or "reshaped mountains" are indeed enhanced, maybe the rest of us will begin to take them more seriously.

Second point. If these ancient carvers were so skilled, then why is the quality of their New World carvings so terribly shabby compared to the work they did back home in the Old World? The thousands-of-year-old carvings and inscriptions from ancient cultures worldwide is clearly manmade, beautifully and meticulously crafted, and obviously enduring. Yet, here in today's USA, we are shown vague rocks that sorta look like this or that, especially if you squint and use your imagination and are told that they are manmade. Why aren't they more clearly formed and detailed, and maybe even inscribed too? If beautiful carved monuments were good enough for Egypt, the Middle East and the Andes, why not the USA?

 

[sandy1]

There are plenty of petroglyphs in NM's lower Rio Grande Valley region that depict North African symbology, but it's impossible to date them conclusively. The best evidence I've seen is Mystery Mountain west of Los Lunas NM. The Decalog Stone low on the mesa is the obvious focus for most folks and its authenticity will be forever denied by academia, as is the case with all artifacts that don't fit The Narrative. IMO, the structural ruins on top of the mesa are more compelling. The site plan of the settlement up there strongly matches similar military encampment ruins found all over the Middle East. These are clearly not Anasazi-style "Indian ruins", and are rarely if ever discussed by pointy-heads.

I have two problems with pareidolia-based "ancient carvings" - heads, faces, animals, shadow-casters, et al. First, a construction operation that reshapes a mountain, even in ancient times, will leave evidence of the work, lots of it. There will be tool marks, exposed erosion boundaries, massive detritus accumulations, etc. I've seen nobody demonstrate any of this at any of the claimed sites.

With smaller objects, like carved heads or animals, the evidence should be even easier to find as the detail required should be clearly evident on the rock surfaces. I've only seen one example of a rock that was manipulated to look more like the object it appeared to be, and I found it and verified it myself. Tool marks and fresh exposed surfaces on this dog's ear, eye and snout proved to me that somebody enhanced it.
View attachment 1672015

Even though a rock may look like a familiar shape, nobody bothers to verify with even the slightest evidence that the thing isn't just another "looks like" rock, and there is certainly no shortage of those. Why not verify the claims? Because there is no evidence. When people start proving "carved rocks" or "reshaped mountains" are indeed enhanced, maybe the rest of us will begin to take them more seriously.

Second point. If these ancient carvers were so skilled, then why is the quality of their New World carvings so terribly shabby compared to the work they did back home in the Old World? The thousands-of-year-old carvings and inscriptions from ancient cultures worldwide is clearly manmade, beautifully and meticulously crafted, and obviously enduring. Yet, here in today's USA, we are shown vague rocks that sorta look like this or that, especially if you squint and use your imagination and are told that they are manmade. Why aren't they more clearly formed and detailed, and maybe even inscribed too? If beautiful carved monuments were good enough for Egypt, the Middle East and the Andes, why not the USA?

This is the only way you can make your theory work about everything being made in the 20th century by denying/ignoring all the millions of man made carved markers out there (many of them by the Spanish, which are Catholic by Design)
And also denying the saguaros that are well over 200 years old planted on alignments going to these treasure spots and also laid out in triangle patterns.
Accepting these facts destroys your theory of everything being made by a single group of rich people hiding their gold in the 20th century, because a group in the 20th century could not accomplish the amount of boulder moving and carvings that are out there or have planted saguaros over 200 years ago going to treasure vaults.

 

[cyzak]

Yeah, I've read it, and, sure, the Palace did have a couple of silver candlesticks in it - I'll give you that much. Other than those couple trinkets, all that gold and silver opulence you mention seems to be missing from real history. Maybe some of those other journals you have will describe more. Otherwise, Pike wrote: "Neither is the Governor's Palace in Santa Fe anything more than a mud building with a mud-covered portico, supported by rough pine pillars."

More from the early 1700s. Here's a report that was given to new governor Martinez before he was to occupy the Palace in 1716:
View attachment 1671996
View attachment 1671997

Oh yes that is what history would make us believe just and old falling down mud hut that was the palace, your game is weak and it is starting to show..

 

[sdcfia]

Oh yes that is what history would make us believe just and old falling down mud hut that was the palace, your game is weak and it is starting to show..

Facts that conflict with our hopes and dreams really suck, don't they cyzak?

 

[In Deep]

I could fill this forum with head pictures there is just to many to not be man made

 

[sandy1]

Facts that conflict with our hopes and dreams really suck, don't they cyzak?

I could definitely say the same about you, Ignoring all the facts don't make them wrong it just makes you wrong.

 

[In Deep]

And this is proof they are ancient how else would they know what a dinosaur looks like

 

[Crosse De Sign]

Facts that conflict with our hopes and dreams really suck, don't they cyzak?

Mostly your know it all right all the time no one else can be right aptitude is what's so lacking...

 

[Crosse De Sign]

View attachment 1672097
I could fill this forum with head pictures there is just to many to not be man made

That's a big 10-4!

 

[Crosse De Sign]

I could definitely same the same about you, Ignoring all the facts don't make them wrong it just makes you wrong.

Exactly! You don't have to know rocket science, be an achaeologist
or hold a PHD to see who's on top (Truth) of their game with NO BS...

 

[Carl-NC]

View attachment 1672097
I could fill this forum with head pictures there is just to many to not be man made

Perhaps there are just too many to have been man made.

 

[In Deep]

There are plenty of petroglyphs in NM's lower Rio Grande Valley region that depict North African symbology, but it's impossible to date them conclusively. The best evidence I've seen is Mystery Mountain west of Los Lunas NM. The Decalog Stone low on the mesa is the obvious focus for most folks and its authenticity will be forever denied by academia, as is the case with all artifacts that don't fit The Narrative. IMO, the structural ruins on top of the mesa are more compelling. The site plan of the settlement up there strongly matches similar military encampment ruins found all over the Middle East. These are clearly not Anasazi-style "Indian ruins", and are rarely if ever discussed by pointy-heads.

I have two problems with pareidolia-based "ancient carvings" - heads, faces, animals, shadow-casters, et al. First, a construction operation that reshapes a mountain, even in ancient times, will leave evidence of the work, lots of it. There will be tool marks, exposed erosion boundaries, massive detritus accumulations, etc. I've seen nobody demonstrate any of this at any of the claimed sites.

With smaller objects, like carved heads or animals, the evidence should be even easier to find as the detail required should be clearly evident on the rock surfaces. I've only seen one example of a rock that was manipulated to look more like the object it appeared to be, and I found it and verified it myself. Tool marks and fresh exposed surfaces on this dog's ear, eye and snout proved to me that somebody enhanced it.
View attachment 1672015

Even though a rock may look like a familiar shape, nobody bothers to verify with even the slightest evidence that the thing isn't just another "looks like" rock, and there is certainly no shortage of those. Why not verify the claims? Because there is no evidence. When people start proving "carved rocks" or "reshaped mountains" are indeed enhanced, maybe the rest of us will begin to take them more seriously.

Second point. If these ancient carvers were so skilled, then why is the quality of their New World carvings so terribly shabby compared to the work they did back home in the Old World? The thousands-of-year-old carvings and inscriptions from ancient cultures worldwide is clearly manmade, beautifully and meticulously crafted, and obviously enduring. Yet, here in today's USA, we are shown vague rocks that sorta look like this or that, especially if you squint and use your imagination and are told that they are manmade. Why aren't they more clearly formed and detailed, and maybe even inscribed too? If beautiful carved monuments were good enough for Egypt, the Middle East and the Andes, why not the USA?

Good Grieve Because you've been to that rock and looked at it in person it's real and all ours are not because you have not been there little conceited aint you