JESUIT TREASURES - ARE THEY REAL?

[deducer]

I'm sorry if I didn't make myself clear. I don't question the existence of the cache, but I do question its provenance - for obvious reasons.

If I get this right. You are not only implying that Ron is a liar, you are also saying that you know better than Sonoita Bob?

As Mike said in the other thread, Bob has known Ron for many years, and again, you referred to Bob as an "an octave higher than a sharp guy," so I'm certain a sharp guy like Bob would quickly figure out if Ron was deceptive?

Yeah, but I've seen worse. When you accept that in this 'treasure hunting' field all things are possible, especially human behavior, then you tend to question why you believe the things you do. Remain flexible.

If I am not wrong, the price of gold was $414 per troy ounce in 1983. This means 83 pounds of gold was nothing to sneer at.

You are suggesting an extremely improbable scenario in which Ron finds 83 pounds of Spanish coins and greatly diminishes their value by recasting them into "Jesuit bars." So not only would he have to involve three people willing to sustain a lie to this day, but also three people who were willing to stand by and watch the resale value of these coins go up in smoke.

Sorry, but I find this quite ludicrous. It makes absolutely no sense to me.

That is absolutely the most probing question that I'm aware you've asked. Why indeed?

Are you going to answer that question or continue to be evasive?

Yeah, it's a cold trail and probably not an efficient use of our time in the bigger scheme of things. My original observation was merely that the story was controversial. And it is. Time to move on.

Again, what exactly is controversial about it? Your reasoning is unclear.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

RELAX Coffee ?? Since no one has found it, Both could be right or wrong. We are here to discuss all versions of a particular treasure. At this stage there can not be a right or wrong version, nor a person's version. So relax. instead of

Don Jose de la Mancha

 

[releventchair]

I,ll see your coffee and raise you a fresh apple fritter.

 

[Springfield]

If I get this right. You are not only implying that Ron is a liar, you are also saying that you know better than Sonoita Bob?

You have a habit of baiting people, don't you? OK - some guy says he found 82 pounds of gold. Fine - good for him. I'm saying at least two acquaintances of his offer different versions of the alleged gold's provenance. That's a red flag in my book. Draw your own conclusions. I don't personally give a $hit - to me, it's just another example of the futility of staking your beliefs to treasure magazine yarns. End of story.

As Mike said in the other thread, Bob has known Ron for many years, and again, you referred to Bob as an "an octave higher than a sharp guy," so I'm certain a sharp guy like Bob would quickly figure out if Ron was deceptive?

I wasn't there - how would I know?

If I am not wrong, the price of gold was $414 per troy ounce in 1983. This means 83 pounds of gold was nothing to sneer at.

That's right.

You are suggesting an extremely improbable scenario in which Ron finds 83 pounds of Spanish coins and greatly diminishes their value by recasting them into "Jesuit bars." So not only would he have to involve three people willing to sustain a lie to this day, but also three people who were willing to stand by and watch the resale value of these coins go up in smoke.

Sorry, but I find this quite ludicrous. It makes absolutely no sense to me.

Obviously.

Are you going to answer that question or continue to be evasive?

I'm not going to do anything.

Again, what exactly is controversial about it? Your reasoning is unclear.

Please refer to the first response above. deducer, I'm through talking about this.

 

[sailaway]

Spanish foundry and smelting

A four-pound gold bar found on a building site in downtown Mexico City last month is believed to be part of the treasure seized from the Aztec Emperor Montezuma II by the Spanish conquistador, Hernan Cortes, in 1520. The concave rectangular bar, which contains 22.5-carat gold with a market value of $25,000, was picked out of mud 15 feet below street level on March 13, 1981 at a site where a new office block was being built by the Bank of Mexico, today's guardian of the country's gold. The bar, 10.4 inches long, 2 inches wide and 0.4 inches thick, containing 93.98 percent of gold, 5.24 percent of copper and 0.78 percent iron, the bar was also the result of a rushed foundry job, consistent with the melting process described by Diaz del Castillo.
GOLD BAR FOUND IN MEXICO THOUGHT TO BE CORTES'S - NYTimes.com

 

[sailaway]

Purity of Spanish Bars

Tumbaga Silver Bars
Research places their date of manufacture to the period of 1521 - 1535, precisely the time period of the fall of the Aztec and Inca empires. The majority of the bars are stamped with the assayer monogram BV (with a wavy line over the B and small o over the V). Interestingly, the documented assayer for the Spanish conqueror of Mexico, Hernando Cortes, is Bernardino Vasques whose assayer mark would likely be the same monogrammed BV. Markings - Serial #RC, assayer BV (with a wavy line over the B & small o over the V), ley #lVe (1500 or 62.5% pure), one partial tax stamp and one bite mark.
Tumbaga Bars - plundered Aztec artifacts

All of this leads me to believe that the Spanish did not make pure gold or silver at that time in New Spain. Did the Jesuits exploit this fact to make lower quality/light currency/goods?

 

[markmar]

For those who want to see how looks the region of Virgin of Guadalupe mine near Tumacacori , I post an aerial image .

 

[sailaway]

markmar stated ;
For those who want to see how looks the region of Virgin of Guadalupe mine near Tumacacori , I post an aerial image .

What facts are you basing your claim on? Belief? Simply Location? Have you been there?
Do you have Aeromagnetics Map of the area? Magnetic Anomalies map? Geological Map?
All these maps should be cross referenced first.
All the mines according to the records are marked with chiseled rocks that state the name of the mine above each and every one of the mines.
I have looked at your picture at 800% magnification and see no evidence of Chisel marks.

You are making a statement that needs some kind of proof.

 

[deducer]

I'm saying at least two acquaintances of his offer different versions of the alleged gold's provenance.

This is news to me. Would you mind sharing more details on this?

 

[deducer]

RELAX Coffee ?? Since no one has found it, Both could be right or wrong. We are here to discuss all versions of a particular treasure. At this stage there can not be a right or wrong version, nor a person's version. So relax. instead of

Don Jose de la Mancha

Dear Jose de la Henderosa Ponderosa,

Apologies if the intensity of my inquiries or debating is offputting to you or to anyone else.

It is not directed at anyone in particular. I have a particular objective that I want to achieve that is relevant to what is being discussed here.

Not really interested in relaxing when it comes to this subject- it presents an intellectual and cognitive challenge that I particularly relish and greatly enjoy, especially in that it involves a formidable opponent who has covered his footprints pretty well.

 

[gollum]

Spring,

I REALLY think you need to reread the post you quoted from regarding SonoitaBob! NOWHERE in that post does he in any way infer/state/theorize/postulate/ or guess that Ron's find was in any way hoaxed by Ron. Bob even notes the later find of almost 150 or so pounds of gold bars.

On your comments about "Ron ---". I have known "Ron" for over 15 years and partnered with him on one of the Tumacacori treasures. His 1985 find was 280 lbs of gold bar. The first 87 lb find was sold to the late Bob Pate, wealthy industrialist/treasure hunter. NO ONE dropped a dime on him to the IRS. His bars when assayed, came in almost always around 90% (.900 fine). They were NOT old NOR Spanish. Our group determined that they were probably some rich Mexican ranchers "piggy bank" buried during the time of one of the Mexican revolutions and that they were most likely coin melt bar (50 peso Mex and US $20 - both .900 fine). Why melt good coin? Why cast them with crosses and V's? I don't have an answer for that.

Bob himself says that other than the fineness of the gold, he has no explanation for why someone would melt coins and recast them with Jesuit Symboligy. A little bit of history is also in order that casts a little doubt on Bob's Theory about them being coin melt.

On 12 July 1562, Franciscan Priest Diego de Landa burned all the codices and Mayan Writing Examples that he could round up. He also tortured and murdered MANY Mayans when he found they were still making offerings to their old gods. All Mayan Scribes were forced to learn European Writing, and anyone found using the old hieroglyphics would have been tortured and killed. When the Jesuits came to the New World, they were tasked to take over from the Franciscans in converting the remaining Mayans, since the Franciscans could not gain their trust after de Landa's Auto da Fey in 1562. The Mayan system of writing was lost to most of the world. The Mayan Number system was figured out around 1812 or so, but that knowledge was not widely known outside of scholastic circles for many years. The most likely (using Occam's Razor) explanation for the origin of the bars would be a Jesuit that had worked with the Maya, and was then moved to Pimeria (hence the Cross and Heart on the rock next to the Mayan Number Rock). The Cross and "V" which is only associated with the Jesuit Order would also not be well known outside Jesuit Circles.

So, we have this anonymous Mexican. He is versed in the numbering system of a culture that was mostly lost for two hundred years (by 1900). He also knew about symbols that were related to the Jesuit Order. Instead of just bringing his coins North and burying them, he goes to all the trouble of melting them, and recasting them into bars with little known Jesuit Symbols, and hiding them with a combination of Mayan Numbers and a Jesuit Cross and heart.

or

A Jesuit that had worked with pacifying the remaining Mayas (known for an historical fact), and was later moved North to Pimeria, hiding gold and possibly silver (Kenworthy's 1028 silver bars just a few miles from this gold), with Mayan Numbers (that he would have learned) and Jesuit Symbols (which he would have known).

Which seems more likely to the average individual?

Mike

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Or neither, a third or more. Gollum !!!!!

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[Springfield]

Mike,
Thank you for clarifying the point that I raised - the 82 pound story is not a slam dunk 'Jesuit cache'. Why? For no other reason that two respected researchers (you and SB) have offered differing opinions of the bars' origins:

You: **NEW** 82 Pound Cache of Gold Bars FOUND! **NEW**
I include this story here because the cache was Jesuit in origin based on the markings cast into the bars.
[From your website - link available as your signature]

SB: They were NOT old NOR Spanish. Our group determined that they were probably some rich Mexican ranchers "piggy bank" buried during the time of one of the Mexican revolutions and that they were most likely coin melt bar (50 peso Mex and US $20 - both .900 fine). Why melt good coin? Why cast them with crosses and V's? I don't have an answer for that.
[From your preceding post, referred to frequently]

Me: Concerning the details of the ultimate provenance of the loot: since we don't know, all possibilities remain. Am I accusing 'Ron' of 'hoaxing the find'? No. Was the find 'hoaxed' prior to its discovery? Possibly. Like it or not, that 'possibly' is a red flag folks.

Summary: A bunch of gold was found by some guy in Arizona. Mike says it's an old Jesuit cache. SB says it isn't. Since both opinions are respected, IMO the matter isn't settled. I lean toward SB's offering. For everyone else - your results may vary. Everybody get it now? Everybody happy? Not so nice and tidy, huh?

 

[deducer]

Mike,
Thank you for clarifying the point that I raised - the 82 pound story is not a slam dunk 'Jesuit cache'. Why? For no other reason that two respected researchers (you and SB) have offered differing opinions of the bars' origins:

You: **NEW** 82 Pound Cache of Gold Bars FOUND! **NEW**
I include this story here because the cache was Jesuit in origin based on the markings cast into the bars.
[From your website - link available as your signature]

SB: They were NOT old NOR Spanish. Our group determined that they were probably some rich Mexican ranchers "piggy bank" buried during the time of one of the Mexican revolutions and that they were most likely coin melt bar (50 peso Mex and US $20 - both .900 fine). Why melt good coin? Why cast them with crosses and V's? I don't have an answer for that.
[From your preceding post, referred to frequently]

Me: Concerning the details of the ultimate provenance of the loot: since we don't know, all possibilities remain. Am I accusing 'Ron' of 'hoaxing the find'? No. Was the find 'hoaxed' prior to its discovery? Possibly. Like it or not, that 'possibly' is a red flag folks.

Summary: A bunch of gold was found by some guy in Arizona. Mike says it's an old Jesuit cache. SB says it isn't. Since both opinions are respected, IMO the matter isn't settled. I lean toward SB's offering. For everyone else - your results may vary. Everybody get it now? Everybody happy? Not so nice and tidy, huh?

Sonoita Bob never said it "wasn't" a Jesuit cache. He made it clear that he had no explanation for it.

I think Mike makes a very good point with the timeline of how the Mayan code was cracked, which was something I never thought about. Due to the widespread destruction of Mayan glyphs with the onset of the Spanish conquest, decoding was not possible for many, many years. One of the earliest person to decode the Mayan language was Constantine Rafinesque in 1832 and even then he didn't get beyond simple numbers. The biggest breakthrough came in the 1930's with British researcher, Eric Thompson who developed a numerical cataloging technique, the "T" numbering system, and even then he had committed major blunders such as believing that individual glyphs stood for entire words or concepts. It wasn't until 1952 with Yuri Knorosov's big breakthrough when the Mayan language was finally decoded and truly understood, and thus, the ability of Ron's team to accurately decode the stone, made possible.

So the myth of the Mexican Rancher is well and truly dead. Not only because he would have no idea what these symbols meant, but would have never heard or learned of them due to their near non-existence at the time of the Mexican revolution.

On the other hand, it was part of the Jesuit mandate to study and familiarize themselves with indigenous language and customs, and they were certainly there early enough.

Your argument that the find could have been 'hoaxed' prior to Ron finding them makes no sense. Who buries 83 pounds of gold as a hoax only to leave cryptic directions?

You are obviously dead-set against considering the Jesuits as the most likely culprits.

Why?

 

[gollum]

See Spring,

Remember, unlike the Franciscans, EVERY Jesuit Missionary was required to be fluent in the language of the natives of the area where they were to be stationed. After de Landa tortured and killed many Maya, they never liked nor trusted the Franciscans. The Jesuits showed up after a hundred years of Franciscan Suppression. They knew the Maya Language and customs before they even got to the Yucatan. They quickly earned the trust of the remaining Maya. The Jesuits being the scholars that they were/are, probably wanted to learn everything they could about the Maya. It is very likely they learned a rudimentary (historical knowledge the Maya were afraid to show in front of the Franciscans) version of the old Mayan Glyphs (including the number system). Put yourselves in the shoes of the Jesuits. You arrive someplace like Chichen Itza, Copan, Palenque, etc. You see all the beautiful glyphs in all the walls and stelae. Wouldn't you want to know what they said?

Also, Bobs theory that the bars were coin melt is also cast into doubt by the finding of known Spanish Treasure Bars from the Atocha (1622 shipwreck). They all assay out at 20-22 karat gold (which is right about .900 fine). Bob might not have known about that.

So again Spring:

1. An anonymous Mexican with a piggy bank. It has ALWAYS been illegal to take gold out of Mexico (in any form). So, it didn't matter if it were in coin form or bar form. This anonymous Mexican must have been closely associated with the Jesuit Order and also very scholarly, because he knew the not widely known (in the late nineteenth century) Mayan Number System, as well as symbols that were not widely known (even today) to be associated with the Jesuit Order. Then, for some reason unknown to us, decided to melt his coins and recast them into these bars. He then hides the bars using both Maya and Jesuit Symbolism. Does that REALLY make sense to anybody?

or

A Jesuit that had been stationed with the Maya (an historical fact), for some reason, had cause to hide a bunch of gold (and possibly silver). He used a Jesuit Symbol (Cross and Heart) for future Jesuits to understand, as well as Mayan Numbers to encrypt the location.

Which one seems more plausible?

Mike

 

[sailaway]

Maya codices are folding books stemming from the pre-Columbian Maya civilization, written in Maya hieroglyphic script on Mesoamerican bark cloth, made from the inner bark of certain trees, the main being the wild fig tree or amate (Ficus glabrata). 'Paper' of this sort, generally known by the Nahuatl word āmatl [ˈaːmat͡ɬ], was named by the Mayas huun. The folding books are the products of professional scribes working under the patronage of deities such as the Tonsured Maize God and the Howler Monkey Gods.
Maya codices - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Grammaire de la langue nahuatl ou mexicaine by André de Olmos (1547) Franciscan priest and extraordinary grammarian and ethno-historian of Mexico's Indians. In 1528 he was the first bishop of New Spain. As early as 1533 Olmos was recognized as unusually adept in the Nahuatl language. Olmos also published a Nahuatl Vocabulary. Much of his work on the Arte and the Vocabulary was done in Hueytlalpan, in Totonac country, where he settled ca. 1539. presented by Rémi Siméon (1875)
Confessionario breve, en lengua mexicana y castellana by Alonso de Molina (1565) was the first book published for the Spanish and was based on the written version 20 years prior by André de Olmos.

first page from Olmos
Aquí comienca [sic] un vocabulario en la lengua castellana y mexicana - Biblioteca Virtual Miguel de Cervantes
it was republished in 1599:
Confessionario en lengua mexicana y castellana, con muchas aduertencias muy necessarias para los confessores by Juan Bautista [(1599)
then in 1890
Rig Veda Americanus: sacred songs of the Ancient Mexicans collected by Daniel Brinton (1890) with vocabulary & translation in English

english translation here: Nahuatl Dictionary Online Translation LEXILOGOS >>


With one of these books a person would be able to use the code, along with some basic knowledge of the Jesuit order it is plausible but not likely that a mexican could have hid the gold as the information is available. These were the same books that the Jesuits had. Notice who the Author of the first book is? Molina!

Alonso de Molina was a Franciscan priest and grammarian, who wrote a well-known dictionary of the Nahuatl language published in 1571. He was born in Extremadura, Spain in the Province of Cáceres, and arrived in Mexico, still a child, in 1522, during the Spanish conquest of Mexico. He grew up playing with monolingual Nahuatl speaking children in the streets as the Aztec capital Tenochtitlan was being refashioned into Mexico City, and so he became a fluent speaker of Nahuatl. In 1528, as a young man, he entered the Franciscan convent of Mexico city becoming a friar. He taught at the Colegio de Santa Cruz in Tlatelolco along with Bernardino de Sahagún, Andrés de Olmos and Juan Badiano.
http://oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Alonso_de_Molina

 

[markmar]

sailaway

You looked for chiseled rocks and didn't saw the carved cross beside the mine .
I am not magician , just I have read the map ( Tumacacori - Molina ) . Now , if I was there or not , make your conclusions .
To find the Virgin de Guadalupe , have to find the San ramon water and the rock with the spiral mark . A line from the San Ramon water via rock mark , go straight to the mine .

The San Ramon water



The rock mark



The Virgin monument near the cross mark



Have a nice day

 

[Springfield]

Thoughts.

1) Knowledge of Mayan number glyphs was unavailable until ca 1832, when Rafinesque first interpreted the bar/dot Mayan system.
2) Jesuits were removed from the New World in 1767.
3) Most likely conclusion: the 82 bar cache was hidden no sooner than 1832.

4) Atocha's 22 carat gold bars were taken on board after being refined in Cartegena, Columbia.
5) No data is available for alleged Jesuit smelted gold purity in Arizona. (Typical frontier results 14/16 carat, depending on ore.)
6) Most likely conclusion: there is no firm basis for assuming the 82 bar gold (90%/coin grade) was mined/smelted in Arizona.

7) Is it possible the 82 bars were cast from gold coins with Jesuit symbols, and then hidden using symbology available to non-Jesuits anytime after 1832? Yes, it's possible - maybe even probable.
8) Is the identity of those who cached the 82 bars known for certain? No.

Sorry, Mike. The more a guy thinks about it, the more he doubts that the 82 bar stash was buried by Jesuits. If you can identify the mystery Arizona Jesuit who studied with the Maya, show that he had figured out the dot/bar numbering scheme, and provide proof the Arizona Jesuits cast 22 carat gold - then your argument strengthens.

 

[deducer]

1) Knowledge of Mayan number glyphs was unavailable until ca 1832, when Rafinesque first interpreted the bar/dot Mayan system.
2) Jesuits were removed from the New World in 1767.
3) Most likely conclusion: the 82 bar cache was hidden no sooner than 1832.

Rafinesque was very eccentric polymath and a genius that was way ahead of his time, but he died in obscurity. His work was not known in his lifetime and he received no honors. To consider 1832 as a date relevant to what we are discussing, is not plausible.

Just because the Mayan dialect was being worked on, doesn't mean it was known outside of anthropological/linguistic circles. Even Yuri Knorozov's work was not well known until the Iron Curtain came crashing down.

The Mayans didn't enter into popular culture until the 1970's with the emergence of "Mayanism" as part of the new age/alter religion movement in that "Mayanism" was falsely thought to be an endorsement of alter-reality inducing drugs such as LSD.

Sorry, Mike. The more a guy thinks about it, the more he doubts that the 82 bar stash was buried by Jesuits. If you can identify the mystery Arizona Jesuit who studied with the Maya, show that he had figured out the dot/bar numbering scheme, and provide proof the Arizona Jesuits cast 22 carat gold - then your argument strengthens.

From the "The Mission That Wasn't: Yucatan's Jesuits, the Mayas, and El Petén, 1703–1767" by Mark Lentz:

By 1700, many Jesuits, especially creoles (of European descent but born in the Americas), had managed to learn Yucatec Maya, a proficiency necessary to convert a monolingual indigenous population.

Mark Lentz quotes as his source for making this statement: Archivo General de la Nación (México), (AGN), Fondo Colonial, Grupo Documental 64 Jesuitas, Vol. I–11, Exp. 133, Folios 409–410, 8 Marzo 1705.

"We Will Dance Our Truth: Yaqui History in Yoeme Performances" by David Shorter:



"Conflict in the Early Americas: An Encylopedia of the Spanish Empire's Aztec, Incan, and Mayan Conquests" edited by Rebecca Seaman:



I could just go on and on, but you get the idea. There is a very strong connection between Criollo Jesuits and the Mayans.

I will leave the question of the assay of the gold found to Mike or anyone else who may have the means to answer, as I don't consider myself an expert in that area by any means.

You still have not answered my question of why you refuse to consider the Jesuits as the likely culprits.

 

[Springfield]

deducer: You still have not answered my question of why you refuse to consider the Jesuits as the likely culprits.

Post #2405: (Springfield) "Sounds like we're not that far apart - it's merely a matter of degree. Your choice of the 82 pounds and the 1028 bars may be dogmatic 'common knowledge' to many, but I haven't 'been shown' anything about either of them, other than blatant hearsay."

Post #2418: (Springfield) "Are you saying that a Mexican in the early 20th century could not have entered Arizona and buried coin melt? I don't follow your Gadsden Purchase idea."

Post #2425: (Springfield) "I completely fail to understand your 'demonstration' that it couldn't have occurred - looks pretty straightforward to me."

Post #2428 (Springfield) "You and I may differ in our opinions, yes, but neither of us were there, so we neither know what, if anything, happened, nor do we know exactly when it did."

Post #2428 (Springfield) "Please show me some verified treasure cache layouts the Jesuits created. Remember, I don't accept tales that originate in treasure magazines."

Post #2430: (Springfield) "Well, you're the one who mentioned the Jesuits' history of elaborate concealment schemes. I wasn't aware of those schemes and was asking for details, such as: what was concealed, where it was hidden, what clues were created, how the schemes were consistent with the 82 bar layout, who discovered the concealments, and how they were identified as Jesuit. That kind of verification."

Post #2436: (Springfield) "Same as your line of reasoning - it's a possibility."

Post #2439: (Springfield) "The point is that you sometimes rely on reasonable possibilities to explore a topic, and so do I when there are no facts to settle the question - which is all perfectly acceptable. The results aren't solutions, they're possibilities.

Re the 82 bar guy, let's just say I'm observant of discrepancies and have wondered how they might have occurred. I look at the thing not as a question of integrity, but as choices made for necessary expediency of the moment. I've done similar things myself, so I don't have a problem with what he told people. Sometimes you just need to be less than forthcoming - it's part of the game. For me, the bottom line is a warning to be careful what you decide to accept as fact."

Post #2442: (Springfield) "I'm sorry if I didn't make myself clear. I don't question the existence of the cache, but I do question its provenance - for obvious reasons.

...When you accept that in this 'treasure hunting' field all things are possible, especially human behavior, then you tend to question why you believe the things you do. Remain flexible.

Yeah, it's a cold trail and probably not an efficient use of our time in the bigger scheme of things. My original observation was merely that the story was controversial. And it is. Time to move on."

Post #2447 (Springfield) "You have a habit of baiting people, don't you? OK - some guy says he found 82 pounds of gold. Fine - good for him. I'm saying at least two acquaintances of his offer different versions of the alleged gold's provenance. That's a red flag in my book. Draw your own conclusions. I don't personally give a $hit - to me, it's just another example of the futility of staking your beliefs to treasure magazine yarns. End of story."

Post #2456: (Springfield) "Concerning the details of the ultimate provenance of the loot: since we don't know,all possibilities remain. Am I accusing 'Ron' of 'hoaxing the find'? No. Was thefind 'hoaxed' priorto its discovery? Possibly. Like it or not, that 'possibility' is a red flag folks.

A bunch of gold was found by some guy in Arizona. Mike says it's an old Jesuit cache. SB says it isn't. Since both opinions are respected, IMO the matter isn't settled. I lean toward SB's offering. For everyone else - your results may vary."

Post #2461: (Springfield) "Sorry, Mike. The more a guy thinks about it, the more he doubts that the 82 bar stash was buried by Jesuits. If you can identify the mystery Arizona Jesuit who studied with the Maya, show that he had figured out the dot/bar numbering scheme, and provide proof the Arizona Jesuits cast 22 carat gold - then your argument strengthens."

Comment: I don't refuse, deducer, but you will simply have to produce more than 'what if' logic to support your arguments. That's the problem with the Arizona Jesuit argument in general. Predisposition, similar activities elsewhere, etc - establishing the habits of dogs - doesn't prove that this dog bit. Show us some proof - a dog bite - and we'll be more willing to jump in the boat. If I cared enough to spend the time, I'd dig out my old logic book and list the fallacious arguments used in this thread to 'prove' these Jesuit rumors. I was trained as an engineer - thank god our bridges weren't designed with this approach. Well, maybe some that fell down were.

You keep asking me why I'm not joining the club. I might ask you, Mike and Roy - why are you so frenetic to prove this Jesuit thing? What's the benefit?