Do the Stone Tablets lead to somewhere OTHER than the Superstition Mtns?

[cactusjumper]

NP, when it happens we will usually ask if there are multiple people posting...

Here is something to remember, if one gets banned for breaking our rules it is banned by name and the ip, if they are using your pc then ban will cover not just their name but all who are using that ip....

If we see same ip having multiple names supporting each other in threads it is a red flag, just like if someone new signs up then goes straight to a thread and starts attacking a member it is a red flag, if that ip is attached to another member and we ban the attacker the other member gets caught in ban because we banned the ip.....

Treasure Hunter,

I would welcome your looking at my account and publically exposing any other name I have used to post on TNet. No one else has used my account, but I have posted from multiple computers. All posts were done under my login and my name is at the bottom of the post.

Any time, as you know, I have attacked another member, I have signed my name at the bottom.

You have been more than patient and fair with me.

Keep up the vigilance,

Joe Ribaudo

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Treasure of Victoria Peak - Grab it through Amazon!

[Treasure_Hunter]

Treasure Hunter,

I would welcome your looking at my account and publically exposing any other name I have used to post on TNet. No one else has used my account, but I have posted from multiple computers. All posts were done under my login and my name is at the bottom of the post.

Any time, as you know, I have attacked another member, I have signed my name at the bottom.

You have been more than patient and fair with me.

Keep up the vigilance,

Joe Ribaudo

Joe, if we had an issue with your posts or user names you would already be aware of it. You have nothing to defend.. Posting from multiple locations violates no rules and many members do so....

All we as mods do is try to enforce the rules and try to keep the forums enjoyable for all members ...

 

[Cubfan64]

cactusjumper, apparently I didn't recognize just who you were, I didn't know you are treasure hunter the moderator, but for your own information I am very happy with everything I have posted about the mission at burns ranch,' INCLUDING THE PICTURE ', to this date no one has proven that there was no mission at burns ranch,theres more proof that there was a mission ,than not. and im really glad that bothers you.if you can prove that there was no mission on burns ranch- prove it, but you will have to out way the evidence that has already shown that there was a mission on burns ranch.np

NP - You're absolutely correct that nobody has proven there was no mission at the Burns ranch site. With that said, the photo you posted with the claim that it was the mission at the Burns ranch site HAS been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to be of a building in a completely different location than the Burns ranch site or the Superstition Mountains for that matter.

If you want to continue promoting the idea of a mission once existing in the foothills of the Superstition Mountains, I for one have no issue with that in fact it's probably an interesting discussion to have. Unfortunately once your evidence for the existence included that photo, the credibility for that argument went south in a hurry.

I have no idea who took the photo or where it came from. Someone somewhere along the line hoodwinked someone into believing it came from the Burns ranch area, but it's VERY CLEAR that it's not. Continuing to use that as your evidence undermines your entire theory imho - do you honestly believe your photo and the one(s) posted by Somero and others are not the same buildings

Just to refresh everyone's memory...

http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/l...r-than-superstition-mtns-123.html#post3642993

 

[roadrunner]

@ NP. Just for the information.
Cactusjumper is in no way Treasure hunter or even related to him.
That I know of. LOL.

Originally Posted by Not Peralta
cactusjumper, apparently I didn't recognize just who you were, I didn't know you are treasure hunter the moderator

 

[Not Peralta]

roadrunner, I know that, I just couldn't help my self. np

 

[Not Peralta]

cubfan64, I heard about this picture from my relatives, it hung on their wall for about 50 or 60 years, then I ended up with it in my collection and the story that went with it. np

 

[roadrunner]

roadrunner, I know that, I just couldn't help my self. np

Ok. As has been said, text always does not show emotion.
That is why I usually use a smiley or something to let people know what I am talking about.
Or like you an emoticon.
Where cool.

 

[gollum]

Howdy Horsey,

I would say that according to Gollom, you should not listen to your wife, but rather watch how she reacts. Yeah that's it. Let me see if I have this theory together. She may ask you how you believe the treasure to be North of Del Rio, or where ever you may think it is, looking interested, and telling you how special you are. Don't fall for it if she asks for copies, she may be gathering evidence on you to send you to the cuckoo's nest. This however won't be so bad, because there may be other treasure hunters there willing to see your theory.

If your theory is right, she will see it right away, and you will be treated as a King. She will not say much, but the massages, breakfast in bed, and all the other comforts will let you know.

Homar

YES! My theory works with women as well! Take for instance, you tell your wife that you want to go out and have a few drinks with the boys. She tells you "Go ahead." Then you notice she gets a little sullen and unresponsive. You ask "What's wrong?" She replies "NOTHING", but you can tell that she is upset about SOMETHING. You finally take a guess and ask "Honey, would you rather me stay home tonight and we can have a nice quiet dinner and watch a movie alone?" Then you see her face light up and she gives you a big hug, and maybe you even get lucky.

Don't pay attention to what she said! WATCH HOW SHE ACTS!

Got anything else smarta$$ to say about my theory? HAHAHA

Mike

 

[gollum]

For Anybody That Feels the Need to Know,

Joe (Cactusjumper) has NEVER (and I know that is not a good word to use) to my knowledge EVER used any other name/login than his own on any of several forums over the many years I have known him. Actually, people posting under many aliases is one of his biggest pet peeves (mine too). I don't use aliases, and I will always provide my name for anybody that asks. The people that I don't pay much attention to are the new posters that won't give their real names, but claim to know everything (We have found that they are usually one of a few people that have done this same thing over many years). We have unmasked them many times, and will continue to do so whenever we find them.

Mike

 

[Springfield]

For Anybody That Feels the Need to Know,

Joe (Cactusjumper) has NEVER (and I know that is not a good word to use) to my knowledge EVER used any other name/login than his own on any of several forums over the many years I have known him. Actually, people posting under many aliases is one of his biggest pet peeves (mine too). I don't use aliases, and I will always provide my name for anybody that asks. The people that I don't pay much attention to are the new posters that won't give their real names, but claim to know everything (We have found that they are usually one of a few people that have done this same thing over many years). We have unmasked them many times, and will continue to do so whenever we find them.

Mike

IMO, anyone who uses multiple identities or frequently changes his user name does so for only one reason: deception.

 

[gollum]

IMO, anyone who uses multiple identities or frequently changes his user name does so for only one reason: deception.

AND BINGO WAS HIS NAME-O!

 

[wrmickel1]

AND BINGO WAS HIS NAME-O!

OR HE GOT BANNED FOR A LONG TIME

Wrmickel1

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

We didn't delete bluedeer posts only the name. If you don't want to waste any time here it is really simple, just don't log in...

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Ed T stop the insulting of members in general... You were using 2 names at same time, giving thumbs up to your posts under each name. Admins advised it was against rules, we ask you to pick a name the other would be deleted. There is no call for the drama or to attack this forum because we ask you to use only one name..

 

[cactusjumper]

For Anybody That Feels the Need to Know,

Joe (Cactusjumper) has NEVER (and I know that is not a good word to use) to my knowledge EVER used any other name/login than his own on any of several forums over the many years I have known him. Actually, people posting under many aliases is one of his biggest pet peeves (mine too). I don't use aliases, and I will always provide my name for anybody that asks. The people that I don't pay much attention to are the new posters that won't give their real names, but claim to know everything (We have found that they are usually one of a few people that have done this same thing over many years). We have unmasked them many times, and will continue to do so whenever we find them.

Mike

Mike,

I appreciate the kind words, but I have used other names. For awhile I used my dogs name.....Heidi. I have mentioned why, and it seemed like a good idea at the time. Like my pup, I never attacked anyone under her name. It did not last very long and was a poor idea.

I signed up on DUSA using an Apache name. I signed my name at the bottom of my posts.

cactusjumper is the only ID I have ever used here.

I don't really mind folks using more than one ID. It's how they use the others that rile me. Pretty much how TH explained it.

Thanks again,

Joe

 

[Tnmountains]

roadrunner, I know that, I just couldn't help my self. np

When we look at the page we see all the information associated with every post… Deception is not tolerated. I think that Treasure Hunter is very patient person….

 

[Cubfan64]

cubfan64, I heard about this picture from my relatives, it hung on their wall for about 50 or 60 years, then I ended up with it in my collection and the story that went with it. np

That makes complete sense and I would understand if that happened to me within my family as well. You didn't answer the question I asked however, when you compare your photo with that of the building and surrounding mountainscape posted by Somero and others, do you still believe the two are different?

 

[cactusjumper]

Paul,

I am amazed that anyone is still discussing the "mission" considering how thoroughly it has been debunked/exposed.

Really sorry to hear of your health troubles. We will miss you at the Rendezvous. Right now, I have serious doubts that I will be able to be there.

We are sorry to hear of your health problems. Hope you are better soon.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Cubfan64]

Paul,

I am amazed that anyone is still discussing the "mission" considering how thoroughly it has been debunked/exposed.

Really sorry to hear of your health troubles. We will miss you at the Rendezvous. Right now, I have serious doubts that I will be able to be there.

We are sorry to hear of your health problems. Hope you are better soon.

Take care,

Joe

Thanks Joe - I'm disappointed to not be there as well. Hard to believe it's been about 7-8 years since I first got involved in all this stuff - I know it's cliche', but man time really does fly. I should have gotten involved in the Superstitions 25 years ago when I could move around like a teenager, the heat and the knees didn't bother me and I could go for days on just a couple granola bars.

We'll see though - maybe things will turn around in the next 6 months and I'll be able to get back out there again next year.

 

[Not Peralta]

cubfan64, yes,they are different , you be the judge, the photo that was posted by someone else is recent , the photo I have was given to me in 1974, before that the photo hung in a frame on a wall for
40 to 50 years in a residence, which was viewed by many people over the years,and yes I have the negatives, the negatives also show other shots before and after all on burns ranch, so if you look at the
photo I have ,it was given to me in 1974 , so that time period to now is 40 years plus the 40 or 50 years before ,that makes the photo I have at least 80 to 90 years old. what do you think,,so yes I will stick with
my photo,and really don't care what any one thinks.they can be the judge, and like I said before, which you agreed with, theres more proof the mission existed than not. the proof of the mission does not
need the photo at this point to prove that there was a mission on burns ranch, there is also a lot more evidence in the burns ranch area to show there was a mission there. this is the last time im going to discuss the mission, form your own opinion that's why you have one. np ps. there are other markings and petroglyphs indicating the mission in the burns ranch area,all you have to do is spend a little time hiking and looking.np