A GUIDE TO VAULT TREASURE HUNTING (Condensed)

[AIORIA]

Since it's all conjecture & theory, then how can anyone (who "looks into it themselves") dis-prove ?

This isn't a Tv show about bogus treasure legends. You've been given REAL information that can be verified and confirmed. So first step is to go out and apply the information. Can you do that first? Then if you didn't find anything in the hole you can take pictures of all the rest of the things you found that led you to the dig spot..... the alignments, boulders, maybe auras if you used a camera, and then post the information here with pics and let everyone know the method didn't work.

It's quite EASY to prove or dis-prove it if they so choose but the problem here seems you don't even want to take the FIRST STEP in finding out, while falling back on the excuse that you need to see proof in pictures FIRST from everyone else, before you decide to do anything.

If that's not the most bass-ackwards mentality then I don't know what is.

Therefore it's entirely logical that the "extraordinary claims" DO require "extraordinary proofs" by the persons making the claims.

In this business the burden is not on Sandy1 to prove anything, but on the REST OF US to put the information to the test if we really want to know if his method will lead us to the payday.

In other words, the faithful are not looking at it through the lenses of "most plausible". They are looking at it through the lenses of "prove to me that it ISN'T there". And to me, that seem bass-ackwards .

OR maybe Tom, they are looking at it through the lens of EXPERIENCE by having put the method to the test. Have you thought about that one yet?

I have addressed this common come back line before. But again, this is the fall-back line used for the legends, or those with un-conventional TH'ing methods, etc... Like you are doing here, they will say that .. yes it works, and/or yes we find treasures. But ... durnit ... we can't show you. Because we fear thieves, the IRS, claim jumpers, etc... But rest assured treasures are being found. And then I point out to them that the forum show & tells are FILLED with proud md'rs showing their trophies. Yes ... even caches. Yes ... even valuable ones. The fears haven't seemed to have stopped them ?

BUT NEVER a gold or silver cache of Spanish origin with marks and stamps that can identify it a such. If you do got one on t-net give me the link please...

Interesting . So you see a "rush on detectors" as one clue of the validity of a treasure story ? Or could there be other "more plausible" explanations ?

Like I said, Coincidence? I'll leave that up for you to ponder.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[Tom_in_CA]

The only people who get to see what treasure is dug up are the people who go out and find it and their buyers.
The government, if they get wind of a treasure being inside a man made vault will claim the treasure and make the area off limits as an archaeological site in a heartbeat.

Now lets look at this from an Informers Perspective :
1: We show a picture of a Gold Bar (which I have done in my avatar) The first question (is it yours?) Hypothetically lets say Yes. Obviously anybody can say it is theirs so no real proof there.
2: In order to prove its yours we need to see a picture of you holding it, and how heavy it is 4lb's and what size 6x2 inches etc.? Ok so you show a picture of you holding the bar, well that's not quite enough for the Feds, even though your holding a Archaeological artifact which is of course illegal.
3: Where did you find it at? so you say it was found in the Caballo Mountains in NM, placing you at the treasure location.
4:What was the vault like, how deep etc, can we see pictures? so you show pictures of the vault, Now the Feds have enough to at least investigate you for disturbing an Archaeological vault which you admitted to having treasure in and removing illegally, this means they are going to be keeping track of your spending which makes it very hard to fly under the radar.

By now I hope I have made my point, no matter how much evidence you show online there will always be skeptics (it was photoshopped, its not really your picture, it was a friends bar not yours etc.) But in the meantime you will be watched very closely by big brother thinking that maybe you really are telling the truth which is not at all good for you as the finder or the seller.

Sounds compelling. No one could dispute each of the reasons you give why A) treasure vault finders don't show & tell, and B) even if they did, skeptics would just 'diss the evidence. Ok.

Yet let's try it out for size: Go to the banner of Treasurenet. There is a rolling banner, as you know, of md'rs and th'rs who are proudly showing off their hole-in-one trophies. Right ? For well-deserved atteboys from fellow hobbyists, right ? And some of them are even quite valuable, right ? Even some caches from time to time make banner, right ? Then how it is that your (A) and (B) reasons aren't applying to them ? They don't seem to fear the IRS or Thieves or cultural heritage.

I think I can see the answer coming: "Because those are all child's play". The the "treasure vault" people are getting the BIG ticket treasures. Not the wimpy lesser value "fumble fingers" losses. Or the "bread and butter" caches shown there. Right ?

 

[sandy1]

To all the People who have followed and supported what I have said and shown, I have no doubt that you Guys and Gals, would not have listened to me for a second if it weren't for the fact that you all have witnessed for yourselves the same types of markers I have shown but in your very own parts of the country.

So, I wanted to thank you all for your support.

 

[Barton]

( corrected this three times--90% disappeared so I will stop now. )

 

[Tom_in_CA]

...You've been given REAL information that can be verified and confirmed. So first step is to go out and apply the information. Can you do that first?...., and then post the information here with pics and let everyone know the method didn't work......

Aahh, but I can already beat you to the punch-line, if I did all that and objected that "it doesn't work", the replies would be: a) you didn't practice long enough, b) you weren't operating the equipment correctly. c) well shucks, not EVERY single hole will have a goodie. Sometimes it takes years afterall of boot-leather d) durned those sun-spots anyhow. e) maybe it's deeper. If I went 5 ft. deep, well then it must be 10 ft. If went 10 ft. deep, then it must be 15 ft. f) The laborers I hired to dig must be un-faithful and maybe stole it while I turned my back, etc....

.... . the burden is not on Sandy1 to prove anything, but on the REST OF US to put the information to the test if we really want to know if his method will lead us to the payday....

So let's turn the tables and test this: If I propose to you an unconventional method of TH'ing that involves smearing peanut butter on a tennis shoe, and tossing it in the air. Is this TH'ing method therefore beyond question ? If you tried to say: "that's silly", I merely reply that you have to test the method. Otherwise you can't say "it doesn't work" ?

And mind you EVEN IF YOU DID "try it", the tennis shoe advocates would merely say you need more practice, wasn't doing it right, doesn't have the gift, sun-spots, etc.... So it seems to me that the burden of proof is on the claimant, when it comes to extraordinary claims.

.... .BUT NEVER a gold or silver cache of Spanish origin with marks and stamps that can identify it a such. If you do got one on t-net give me the link please.....

Yes, as you can see, I correctly anticipated this answer. Somehow, someway, the caliber of the type treasures found in treasure-vaults, puts it in a different class than normal cache stories . Those that do-indeed make the news and T'net banner, etc.... In other words: Yours are much more valuable than those that have indeed hit the news . So ... therefore, you have legitimate reason to fear the IRS, thieves, claim jumpers, cultural heritage, etc... As opposed to the wimpy caches like Mel Fisher's, and so forth that do indeed get shown. Eh ?

 

[Ditlihi]

Aahh, but I can already beat you to the punch-line, if I did all that and objected that "it doesn't work", the replies would be: a) you didn't practice long enough, b) you weren't operating the equipment correctly. c) well shucks, not EVERY single hole will have a goodie. Sometimes it takes years afterall of boot-leather d) durned those sun-spots anyhow. e) maybe it's deeper. If I went 5 ft. deep, well then it must be 10 ft. If went 10 ft. deep, then it must be 15 ft. f) The laborers I hired to dig must be un-faithful and maybe stole it while I turned my back, etc....



So let's turn the tables and test this: If I propose to you an unconventional method of TH'ing that involves smearing peanut butter on a tennis shoe, and tossing it in the air. Is this TH'ing method therefore beyond question ? If you tried to say: "that's silly", I merely reply that you have to test the method. Otherwise you can't say "it doesn't work" ?

And mind you EVEN IF YOU DID "try it", the tennis shoe advocates would merely say you need more practice, wasn't doing it right, doesn't have the gift, sun-spots, etc.... So it seems to me that the burden of proof is on the claimant, when it comes to extraordinary claims.



Yes, as you can see, I correctly anticipated this answer. Somehow, someway, the caliber of the type treasures found in treasure-vaults, puts it in a different class than normal cache stories . Those that do-indeed make the news and T'net banner, etc.... In other words: Yours are much more valuable than those that have indeed hit the news . So ... therefore, you have legitimate reason to fear the IRS, thieves, claim jumpers, cultural heritage, etc... As opposed to the wimpy caches like Mel Fisher's, and so forth that do indeed get shown. Eh ?

Yes! I knew it was a tennis shoe, not a penny loafer!
What was I thinking, the penny loafer was obviously the baited version.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Yes! I knew it was a tennis shoe, not a penny loafer!
What was I thinking, the penny loafer was obviously the baited version.

Exactly. And if you try it (in an effort to prove to me it doesn't work), I just need to alert you that you must've been using the wrong size penny-loafer. Should be using a size 10, not a size 9. Tsk tsk.

At no point is it ever questionable. It's up to the skeptic to prove it doesn't work (which, as we've seen , is impossible). At no point is proof ever needed from the claimant. Besides, I can't show the proof anyhow, because of the IRS, thieves, cultural heritage, etc... But rest assured: The peanut butter covered shoe method works.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

There was an interesting fellow on Findmall a year or two ago, who was way into this treasure vault stuff. He claimed that the city of phoenix was built on top of a giant treasure vault. Hmmmm. And that there were treasure vaults in the Aleutian islands, @ sea lion sanctuary places. And that the government had set up cameras on the island, cleverly disguised as nature cams. The nature cams are there under the guise of wildlife cams (sea lions, etc... that scientists use to observe and study nature). That but that was all merely a guise. The real purpose of the cameras was the island was loaded with treasure vault treasure.

I kid you not ! Now how does a guy dis-prove that ? YOU CAN'T . A few of us took turns trying to "talk this guy back to earth", but it just got more and more bizarre as time went on. True story !

 

[Barton]

Post # 1071

You can put Sandy1 GUIDE TO VAULT TREASURE HUNTING --to the test out in the field--it either holds up to a real test or it doesn't.

To those who have applied what he has freely taught / shown us---we have already seen the proof out in the field.
I live in a totally different state--yet I can say--the basic principals he has graciously shown us work here too.

 

[AIORIA]

Yes, as you can see, I correctly anticipated this answer. Somehow, someway, the caliber of the type treasures found in treasure-vaults, puts it in a different class than normal cache stories . Those that do-indeed make the news and T'net banner, etc.... In other words: Yours are much more valuable than those that have indeed hit the news . So ... therefore, you have legitimate reason to fear the IRS, thieves, claim jumpers, cultural heritage, etc... As opposed to the wimpy caches like Mel Fisher's, and so forth that do indeed get shown. Eh ?

Just as we predicted this type of an answer from you to our posts. None if this is new. When we cut the BS, ALL that's left for people to do if they want to find out the truth is to go out and put the information to practice.

Also, since you're another skeptic hellbent on trying to discredit this information then I'll ask you this..... Have you personally put Sandy1's method to the test?

 

[mdog]

Just as we predicted this type of an answer from you to our posts. None if this is new. When we cut the BS, ALL that's left for people to do if they want to find out the truth is to go out and put the information to practice.

Also, since you're another skeptic hellbent on trying to discredit this information then I'll ask you this..... Have you personally put Sandy1's method to the test?

Hey Tom. If I can show you a criminal investigation from the 19th century, that speaks of stolen money and signs being used to lead the way to the cache site, will that satisfy your curiosity?

 

[Chadeaux]

Post # 1071

You can put Sandy1 GUIDE TO VAULT TREASURE HUNTING --to the test out in the field--it either holds up to a real test or it doesn't.

To those who have applied what he has freely taught / shown us---we have already seen the proof out in the field.
I live in a totally different state--yet I can say--the basic principals he has graciously shown us work here too.

True, but they can't. Why? They are not capable of accepting failure. You can't fail if you never get off your bum to see if it is true.

Much more fun to create chaos and discourage others.

Oh well,

 

[AIORIA]

Aahh, but I can already beat you to the punch-line, if I did all that and objected that "it doesn't work", the replies would be: a) you didn't practice long enough, b) you weren't operating the equipment correctly. c) well shucks, not EVERY single hole will have a goodie. Sometimes it takes years afterall of boot-leather d) durned those sun-spots anyhow. e) maybe it's deeper. If I went 5 ft. deep, well then it must be 10 ft. If went 10 ft. deep, then it must be 15 ft. f) The laborers I hired to dig must be un-faithful and maybe stole it while I turned my back, etc....

Sandy1 posted his information almost a year ago... and since that time there hasn't been one, NOT ONE, person to come on here and say that the information cannot be verified or that the method doesn't work. (to the contrary, there are many people that have confirmed it to be true from around the world)

The only ones that seem to be CERTAIN that the method is false are the ones that HAVEN'T EVEN PUT THE METHOD TO THE TEST.

Let that SINK IN for a minute people. You will CLEARLY see what's happening here.

Those that put it to the test, confirm the information is trustworthy. Those that HAVEN'T PUT IT TO THE TEST claim it's not true and not only that, they DISSUADE you from EVER GOING TO FIND OUT FOR YOURSELF.

You can clearly see their true motives....

"Be as wise as serpents, and as harmless as doves"

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... You can put Sandy1 GUIDE TO VAULT TREASURE HUNTING --to the test out in the field--it either holds up to a real test or it doesn't......

Sure, anyone can test the system. So too can my tennis shoe method have required testing before someone claims "that's silly". But the problem is, when/if someone concludes "It doesn't work", then their conclusions will be promptly dismissed. By the variety of fall-back reasons I've already stated.

...---we have already seen the proof out in the field.....the basic principals he has graciously shown us work here too.

Yes. However, they can not be shown to general public to back up the claims. For the list of reasons discussed above also.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

........ Have you personally put Sandy1's method to the test?

I have already answered this: It won't matter if someone puts the methods to the test. If they concluded "it doesn't work", that would not settle the issue. The believer's would merely roll out the fall-back lines I listed above. Eg.: You didn't practice enough, you need to put in more years, you have to dig deeper, you didn't do it right, etc...

Sort of like Oak Island: Notice that it's NEVER a case of simply "not being there". It's always "a little deeper". Or "a little more to the left" , or .. "a little more to the right" etc....

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Hey Tom. If I can show you a criminal investigation from the 19th century, that speaks of stolen money and signs being used to lead the way to the cache site, will that satisfy your curiosity?

EXCELLENT QUESTION ! And the answer is "no" in one sense, and "yes" in another. Here's what I mean: SIMPLY because someone can find a newspaper story from the 1800's that details a robbery. And cites "the criminals were seen going thataway". And that the posse caught up with them, the bandits didn't have the loot on them. The bandits were locked up in jail, and .... further newspaper clippings show them died in prison, ALL without EVER revealing, to their dying day, the location of the treasure.

Now, on the surface, the above series of facts lead the indisputable conclusion that : "Therefore, the treasure still must be out there" . Right ? After all, how does anyone argue with this clear series of logical building blocks. Right ?

Not so fast. What this fails to take into account is other plausible explanations. For example:

1) perhaps the shop owner, who had the safe (where he stored patrons valuables for them) simply spent all the patrons money. And then concocted the robbery story to cover his theft ?

2) perhaps the posse who finally caught up with them miles later simply kept the loot for themselves. But simply told the sheriff: "The loot wasn't on their person when we caught them".

3) The entire thing was an insurance farce, and there was no $$ in the first place.

4) The treasure was long-since recovered by persons back in the day who went looking. But, of course, they "didn't make waves" about it. Ie.: that didn't "make the newspaper". Hence it's no longer there today for the TH'r, NO MATTER how good the story sounds.

You've also got to stop and think of how newspapers GET their information IN THE FIRST PLACE : They simply interview folks and relay what they were told. And .... heaven forbid that was ever subject to telephone game, opinion, biases, etc... Right ?

That's not to say that a treasure story CAN NEVER be true. But it's just showing that there can be other explanations. In the next post, I will give you a true life example of what I mean.

 

[AIORIA]

I have already answered this: It won't matter if someone puts the methods to the test. If they concluded "it doesn't work", that would not settle the issue. The believer's would merely roll out the fall-back lines I listed above. Eg.: You didn't practice enough, you need to put in more years, you have to dig deeper, you didn't do it right, etc...

Sort of like Oak Island: Notice that it's NEVER a case of simply "not being there". It's always "a little deeper". Or "a little more to the left" , or .. "a little more to the right" etc....

So you evade the direct question and give us nothing but babble. You're starting to sound A LOT like sdcfia and ditlihi..... NEWSFLASH, you'll NEVER get people to post pictures of Spanish Treasure they may have found no matter how hard you try.

 

[mdog]

EXCELLENT QUESTION ! And the answer is "no" in one sense, and "yes" in another. Here's what I mean: SIMPLY because someone can find a newspaper story from the 1800's that details a robbery. And cites "the criminals were seen going thataway". And that the posse caught up with them, the bandits didn't have the loot on them. The bandits were locked up in jail, and .... further newspaper clippings show them died in prison, ALL without EVER revealing, to their dying day, the location of the treasure.

Now, on the surface, the above series of facts lead the indisputable conclusion that : "Therefore, the treasure still must be out there" . Right ? After all, how does anyone argue with this clear series of logical building blocks. Right ?

Not so fast. What this fails to take into account is other plausible explanations. For example:

1) perhaps the shop owner, who had the safe (where he stored patrons valuables for them) simply spent all the patrons money. And then concocted the robbery story to cover his theft ?

2) perhaps the posse who finally caught up with them miles later simply kept the loot for themselves. But simply told the sheriff: "The loot wasn't on their person when we caught them".

3) The entire thing was an insurance farce, and there was no $$ in the first place.

You've also got to stop and think of how newspapers GET their information IN THE FIRST PLACE : They simply interview folks and relay what they were told. And .... heaven forbid that was ever subject to telephone game, opinion, biases, etc... Right ?

That's not to say that a treasure story CAN NEVER be true. But it's just showing that there can be other explanations. In the next post, I will give you a true life example of what I mean.

Hi Tom. Here's a link to a book titled Banditti of the Prairies.

https://archive.org/stream/bandittiofprairi00bonn/bandittiofprairi00bonn_djvu.txt

The book is real interesting and has a lot of treasure leads, but on page 177 the author describes the cache site.

A few hours before the execution of the Longs and Young, John
Long informed a friend of Baxter, that when Fox buried the mo
ney in the bluff on the Des Moines river, he made certain land
marks by which he, or his friends could find the money, as fol
lows :

''At the point where Fox left Birch, to go and bury the money,
he made the figures 72 on a large black walnut tree. Soventy-twr
yards from this tree in a Northeast direction is a small black wal
nut tree with a cross cut in the bark with a bowie knife; fourteen
yards from this small tree, due North, is a large stone; midway
between the tree and stone is the spot where tte money was burictd.

Soon after I returned from Fort Madison, I received this infor-
mation, and immediately started in search of the money. I found
the marks corresponding with Long's description, the fallen leaves
from the forest trees had covered the ground obliterating every
mark where the earth had been removed, but after a close search
1 found where the robbers had deposited their treasure, and found
three American half dollars, and two Spanish quarters, with other
marks which proved that the money had been dug up and removed
in the night, doubtless under the direction of Fox, after his escape
from Johnson, at Indianapolis.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

For M-dog and gang: A true life story of how a newspaper article "could have more than meets the eye" : (ie. other explanations) :

A buddy of mine was working an old town sidewalk demo. tearout. But since the tearout and new cement all happened in single day shifts, he was forced to come furiously work on their lunch hours each day (while the dirt sat naked). The contractor would progress block by block through the old-town district, doing a 1/2 block every other day or so. For 8 blocks up and back each side, such that the project went on for a month or more.

Naturally, since he was forced to do it in broad daylight, he had to fly below the radar, keep in good graces (so as not to get a "scram", etc...). And each day, as the workers returned to work, they would stop and ask him what he's finding. And so he would pass out common barber dimes, V-nickels, IH's, etc... to "grease the wheels" of his liberty to be inside their zone. The workers became fascinated with each day's tallies.

One day, he found the usual assortment of IH's, V's, etc... And he also found some sort of owl-shaped amulet, that was about the size of a chess piece. It was gold colored, and has some sort of little red jewels for the eyes. As the workers returned for lunch, they gathered around him seeing what his latest finds were. As he showed them, he also pulled out the owl thing to show them. He mused "might be gold" (on account of the gold color). And then pointing to the red jewels mused "might be rubies". And then mused "probably dates to the late 1800s (since that was the predominant dates of the coins in the area). The workers were quite impressed.

That night he got home to sort and clean his finds. When he got the owl charm thing under magnification, he could see it was only gold plated. Not gold. And the red jewels in the eyes ? Just glass chips. He realized he just has 1920s costume jewelry junk, so he promptly threw it in the trash.

The next day, my friend returned for the normal lunch hour routine. And out of the corner of his eye, he could see a tractor driver in the distance who was eyeing him intently . The worker got off the tractor and got closer, just watching my friend. My friend could see that this was a new worker, whom he'd never seen on the job site before. Eventually, the worker got up the nerve to ask "what have you found?". As it turns out , my friend hadn't found anything good that day. So he told the guy "just some junk".

At which point the worker launched into a story about how, the day before, a guy had found "gold coins from the 1800s" ! My friend was floored ! He immediately figured "oh no, some other md'r must've come by, after I left, and must found a gold coin !". So he pressed the worker for details. Ie.: what did the guy look like. Did you see the coin, etc... The worker explained that he had this on good authority, because he'd heard it from the eye-witness fellow workers, who had seen it with their own eyes. He was relaying water-cooler talk he'd been a part of that morning. My friend's heart sank as he was figuring he'd missed a gold coin, that some other md'r must've snagged after he'd left.

As he spoke further with the worker, a curious word slipped out of the worker's mouth: "owl". My friend busted up laughing as he realized the worker was talking about HIM So he corrected the worker and said "No, no gold coins have been found. Just some silver and copper ones." And "no, it wasn't "fistfuls", it was just a few random coins per effort. " And no, the owl charm was just junk.

But the worker WOULD NOT BE DISSUADED. He was certain that a gold coin(s) was found. He had it on good authority from the eye-witnesses. So he just assumed that someone must've come along after my friend.

Do you see ? And this was happening over a single night's time-frame ! Guess what happens when you add days or weeks or years to the formula ? And then a newspaper reporter comes to interview one of the people in the daisy chain. Before you know it, a full blown cache is at stake. And then the worker is interviewed and recorded as giving this iron-clad proof of "gold coins under the street". 100 yrs. later, someone sees his text recordings (newspaper quotes or whatever) and .... they rightly figure "there's gold coins under the street!".

And then add to that, the modern TH'r goes to city hall to seek permission to "tear the streets up to get the rest of the gold coins". The city says "no". And then THIS TOO becomes ALL THE MORE PROOF of a cover-up hush job. Right ?

So as you can see, even yester-year newspaper stories *could* have alternate explanations.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

... discourage others.....

For potential md'ing sites: If someone comes along and gives me reasons to "be discouraged" about hunting a certain site I have in mind (by telling me various reasons why the site is bound to be lame), then that type "discouragement" is WISE discouragement. Because it allows the md'r to focus on sites with better potential.