tom u are correct .....but when i see a say 500 pound amount of gold in a school on tv here .......
I am willing to take a look at this. Got a link ?
Whatever it is: I gather, from the rest of your post, that this "500 pounds of gold" is indisputable in your mind's eye. The rest of your post speaks of it as fact. It's not simply "claimed". It could not have "More plausible" explanations. Right ? And if you've traced back to the source, it's a reputable news source (and not some National enquirer type magazine source). Right ? It couldn't be "staged", right ?
I have NO DOUBT that news stories (especially in tabloid rags) and campfire stories will indeed surface. And will indeed show "piles of gold bars" supposed to be from this treasure. HECK: I CAN SHOW YOU RIGHT FROM THE PAGES OF T'NET pictures that have been posted (and videos) of Rooms and stacks of gold bars. Said to be this treasure.
But when you go to try to pin down the source of the picture or video , it's elusive. It could all just be made up as a scam to attract investors (even though the person posting the links or photos ISN'T THEMSELVES in any sort of scam).
And if you point out the possibility to the current person posting this, they will never accept this. They launch out on sideways proofs like the psychology I point out in post #67. Eg.: persons with sudden wealth. Or government agents seen walking in the jungle doing something suspicious. Or how many coconut fibers does it take to float a box of gold across the Atlantic, etc...
And I can show you post after post after post , coming from well-meaning sincere Filipino members, who will tell us about a treasure that they've "found". Notice it's always in the past tense. It's never "I *think* I found.... ". It's always in
past tense "found". And their posts go on to inquire about which detector can detect gold 6 to 9 meters deep. Or ... where is the best place to smelt/sell 500 pounds of gold. Or .... is there deadly gasses and do I need a gas mask ? Etc.... If a similar story in a news link to stories like those is what you're referring to, then read on:
Other md'rs will chime in giving their advice on metal detector technology. Or ... the best smelter buyers to sell the gold to, etc.... BUT ME: I hone in on the past tense "found". Because I immediately smell a contradiction : If they're inquiring about a detector to get this, ....
why do they even need a detector? If they have already FOUND (past tense) it, then they shouldn't need a detector. Right ?? Do you see the contradiction ? AND SURE ENOUGH, with enough cross-examination, they admit that they didn't exactly *find* it yet. HOWEVER: they've honed it down to a certain meadow. Or cave. Or lake bottom, etc..... Now it's just the final details of extracting it. Or legal issues with the government, etc..... I try to point out,
in that case, that person therefore hasn't FOUND anything yet. BUT IT NEVER WORKS. They are still utterly convinced they've "found" it. Even though they've never seen a single gold coin or gold bar. See the fever at work ?
SO TOO when you read of gold in your school (or whatever source you're presently alluding to), you have to keep in mind, that the stories you read, or hear from your fellows there, COULD BE THE VERY SAME PSYCHOLOGY. They're sincere, but .... they're simply taken in by treasure fever. So they cast their story in the past tense "found". And you pick up on that. And simply take it at face value that someone "found" (past tense) something. It's not till you've done the cross-examination like I do, that you realize : NO ONE'S FOUND DIDDLY SQUAT YET.
That's why I need to see what school story you are alluding to. Because, just like I've dismantled, and/or shown more plausible explanations for, all such Yamashita stories I've ever studied, So too do I suspect this will be just like them .
Hence: Got a link ? You allude to "seeing it" (I assume you mean a photo ?) and allude to "TV" (so perhaps a video link exists?) Thus: I'm game. But you have to promise me that you'll be open to admit, if other plausible explanation could exist, to what you see. And bear in mind, that NO MATTER THE SOURCE, I have no doubt that the persons doing it and passing it along (news source, etc...) can be QUITE SINCERE. So do not construe the phrase "more plausible" with "this person is lying". Because, just like in the multiple T'net examples of past tense "found", the person is 100% sincere. Yet, as shown, nothing was "found".