LDM why you cant get it !

[Javaone]

Re: LDM why you can't get it !

Well then I had the opposite opposite.

But the peaks are situated generally north to south, so the needle he spoke of there must be southerly from the four peaks. And his mine must be generally on that line, if he actually said that, and if he was telling the truth.

Four Peaks - Photo taken south of and a tad east of...

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[Javaone]

Re: LDM why you can't get it !

The peaks of Four Peaks do form a straight line to Weavers Needle...
(for those following this)

 

[Javaone]

Re: LDM why you can't get it !

One clue that always interested me was - Waltz sitting on a rock in Tortilla Creak when he confronted the dude trying to follow him...

 

[JackH]

Re: LDM why you can't get it !

Gentlemen,

My photo reference of the "4 Peaks" is Totally OFF, as far as the Official 4 Peaks. But in the general direction.

In my search for answers, I used at my disposal several types of geographical references. Some from the State of Arizona.

As this series of pin placements are a few years old, I believe I had placed them there in reference to (4 smaller Peaks)......J

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: LDM why you can't get it !

Hello

Beth,

Although i have been accused of not getting off of my horse, i actually have read on the subject quite a bit. I am familiar with the stories you are talking about.

Java,

The "Four Peaks" clue is one that i believe people are misinterpreting. In my opinion, the Holmes manuscript "directions" dont ever say that the Four Peaks AND the High Needle (pointed rock) have to line up, only the Four Peaks are supposed to "line up". "In the other direction" is open to interpretations, of course, but i dont believe it HAS to be on that line you drew, it just needs to be in the other direction. (The "Needle" is obviously open to interpretation as well) (Again, just my opinion)

Although according to the Manuscript, Brownie himself thought the same thing. Either his own directions confused even him, or he didnt write it afterall. (Or i myself am wrong. Something i refuse to believe..... ....kidding....kidding..)


EE,

All of the stories about it being a cache or some kind of treasure could very well be true. My personal thought is that it is a goldmine, not just a cache. Albeit a "special" mine, but still just a mine. I do believe its up very high. Not so high that it is too difficult to get there, but still high.

I have gone back to the "basics" myself. Meaning i am only studying the directions and clues left behind. The reasons for this are discrepancies i have found in things like the Bark notes and others.

First, based on my own research, i am a firm believer in the Walker/Weiser story. Not nessicarily the Sims version, but the letters and other stuff. I believe that to be a real account of something that did happen and that "short" story really doesnt sound like too much "garbage" was added to it.

I believe the Bark notes flat out lie in many places. I know some people are probably going to get upset but, hear me out first. Bark is describing Waltz returning to camp and finding Weiser stripped naked and dead. He buries him and leaves the FRYING PAN with BULLET HOLES above the mine on a peak somewhere. The problem......the Walker story says Weiser was shot.....by ARROWS. So, who's lying? I believe Bark was. I believe he was trying to make himself look like a "detective". Like he had some "points" he could make about "discrepancies" in the story. The problem is, they were HIS stories. (In my opinion) All just to make it sound more interesting i think.

I only put stock in the directions first. That is not to say i dont have all of the "clues" written down and take them with me when i go to the mountains. I do. I'm just asking, who should we believe? To each his own but, i will take my chances following the directions, then see what else will "match up".

Thanks,
Travis

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: LDM why you can't get it !

Travis,

I don't believe the story was Bark's, although it's possible. Many times during the telling, he states he has doubts about the truthfulness of it. Why would he make up a story, and then say he has doubts that it's true?

Joe

 

[JackH]

Re: LDM why you can't get it !

Gentlemen, Ladies,

A more accurate view of the "4 Peaks" taken from behind the top of Red Mountain looking straight on to the "4 Peaks".

Virtually the same conclusion, side by side in line.......J

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: LDM why you can't get it !

Travis,

I don't believe the story was Bark's, although it's possible. Many times during the telling, he states he has doubts about the truthfulness of it. Why would he make up a story, and then say he has doubts that it's true?

Joe

I dont know what you mean by the story not being Barks but, if you mean that he heard it from someone else and just wrote it down, could be.

I dont like the name "Bark Notes". Notes to me would have been the "40 questions" list, if it is fact real. I believe he did have the "notes" he collected from questioning the parties but, 40 questions probably doesnt make for much of a book. (I for one wish he would have just stayed with the "notes". I know i would rather see those than this other "stuff") This is the reason i believe it took him so long to "publish" the notes. He was writing around the "real" information with his own "stuff". But, this is just MY opinion and not to be taken as anything more than that. I just dont buy it which is why i havent been reading it anymore. I took the descriptions and clues out of it, and let the rest "go".

I tried to explain earlier the "why" Bark would do that. He would "make up" some stories (surrounding his real notes) then he either realized he had discrepancies in his own writings, or, he was trying to make himself "look good" (like me) and saying that HE'S the one who "figured it out".

There are many more just like the example i posted but, i will leave you guys to interpret them how you wish, this is just how i see it.

Travis

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: LDM why you can't get it !

JackH,

One problem for me is youre using a "clue" about the Four Peaks lining up but, youre leaving out the "rest" of the description. "Line up to look like one peak".

I believe, if your going to use the "Holmes" clue, you need to try to use it all. I havent ever read anywhere that the Peaks even have anything to do with the legend except for in the Holmes manuscript. Now, i agree there can be misinterpretations of clues but, to me this one is clear that they should be lined up to "hide" each other.

Again, just my opinion. If you believe it, thats what counts.

Thanks again,
Travis

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: LDM why you can't get it !

Travis,

Actually, Bark never did publish his notes/manuscript. Over the years, those "notes" have been massaged and cleaned up a number of times by various Dutch Hunters.

Brownie Holmes was writing his manuscript in the fifties, according to his family. That was forty years before they were found and brought before the public. In the time that Brownie was said to be writing the manuscript, according to his family, he was constantly changing the contents.

I assume that's the same thing that was taking place with Bark's Manuscript. Since he never published it, it seems likely that more changes were yet to be made.

In both cases, who knows what changes were made by the family and editors.
At least with the Bark Notes, we have the stolen version that purports to be a fairly accurate copy of the original.

There has been a pretty good sized cottage industry set up around adding clues, landmarks and stories to the LDM legend. It has been in business since Waltz died.

How do you weed out the truth from the fiction? In SAR, we always go back to the "point last seen" to find someone who is lost. This story is lost and to find the truth, I believe you have to go back to the evidence that was brought forward from the people and time closest to the events.

If you are going to throw out the Bark Notes, who do you turn to that was closer to the events and the major players in the story? Truth is, we don't know who's story to believe. Many of them are believeable, but which one it the real deal?

If the Bark notes, or parts of it are believed to be a "flat out lie", what can be gleaned from them that are a positive? Because of the hundreds of false clues and stories that are out there, many Dutch Hunters have spent years following those stories through the range, finding out where the LDM isn't.

There are way, way more folks who have taken the shortcut of figuring out where it is, and going into that area first. Usually, in those mountains, many places will fit the clues they use to determine the location of the LDM. That is reflected in the many books that are written by folks who just know they are right.

Joe

 

[Blindbowman]

Re: LDM why you can't get it !

LOL

 

[JackH]

Re: LDM why you can't get it !

Gentlemen, Ladies,

"4 Peaks in Line" based on this imagery, could it be, that means, All the Same Height ?

This shot is taken from the perspective of Red Mountain looking towards the 4 Peaks.......J

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: LDM why you can't get it !

Travis,

Actually, Bark never did publish his notes/manuscript. Over the years, those "notes" have been massaged and cleaned up a number of times by various Dutch Hunters.

Brownie Holmes was writing his manuscript in the fifties, according to his family. That was forty years before they were found and brought before the public. In the time that Brownie was said to be writing the manuscript, according to his family, he was constantly changing the contents.

I assume that's the same thing that was taking place with Bark's Manuscript. Since he never published it, it seems likely that more changes were yet to be made.

In both cases, who knows what changes were made by the family and editors.
At least with the Bark Notes, we have the stolen version that purports to be a fairly accurate copy of the original.

There has been a pretty good sized cottage industry set up around adding clues, landmarks and stories to the LDM legend. It has been in business since Waltz died.

How do you weed out the truth from the fiction? In SAR, we always go back to the "point last seen" to find someone who is lost. This story is lost and to find the truth, I believe you have to go back to the evidence that was brought forward from the people and time closest to the events.

If you are going to throw out the Bark Notes, who do you turn to that was closer to the events and the major players in the story? Truth is, we don't know who's story to believe. Many of them are believeable, but which one it the real deal?

If the Bark notes, or parts of it are believed to be a "flat out lie", what can be gleaned from them that are a positive? Because of the hundreds of false clues and stories that are out there, many Dutch Hunters have spent years following those stories through the range, finding out where the LDM isn't.

There are way, way more folks who have taken the shortcut of figuring out where it is, and going into that area first. Usually, in those mountains, many places will fit the clues they use to determine the location of the LDM. That is reflected in the many books that are written by folks who just know they are right.

Joe

Im sorry if i wasnt clear before. I took what "I" needed from them (clues/descriptions) and threw the REST out. I'm not saying all of those clues/descriptions are correct or true but, i dont believe i need the "fluff" to find the mine. Thats all i was trying to get at. I took out the "how to find the mine" stuff and left the "bloody shirt" and all of that out of my own notes. I am NOT asking anyone to agree with me, just sharing what i have done and why.

While i understand there are plenty of "i found its" on the net yelling their claims, i can tell you im not one of them. What i have found is an area that, so far, matches ALL of the clues that i have. Not some, all.

I will even part with a "little something" you can ad to your "Travis is a dummy file". I believe i have seen the "shelving cave" hidden by the trees and brush.....and didnt know what it was at the time. I hadnt done enough research at that point on the CLUES. At that time, i had been consumed by the directions. I was about 10 feet from it too.... I hope the part is true about "left some of my belongings in the camp" because how cool would it be to find something that might have belonged to Waltz? Some tools, letters, whatever. That is the FIRST place i am going when i make my next HIKE in the mountains. (My last 3 trips have been on foot and yeah, i got "cut up" a bit in my area ears, eyelids, etc...)

My point is that "I" dont put much stock in the "stories" around the clues or directions. I am taking the "basic" approach of following the directions, looking at the "clues" and seeing what i come up with. Thats all. I am not expecting to convince anyone that they should do the same. This is just MY approach and it is working out so far.

Heck, i could go in the shelving cave and there could be an old note that says...."Ha Ha dummy, made ya look"! Who knows?

Travis

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: LDM why you can't get it !

JackH,

You've got a good thought on the "height" thing.

But,

"to look like ONE peak" They still look like four from that view. (to me anyway)
Thanks,
Travis

 

[EE THr]

Re: LDM why you can't get it !

BB---

GBYS.

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: LDM why you can't get it !

Travis,

One of the major problems with some of the most respected books on the LDM, has to do with a primary source for them all. That source's "evidence/facts" can't be true, because the history of how the information was acquired is complete fiction.

That being said, it has little to no bearing on the existence of the LDM. The most believeable evidence for its authenticity comes from the early accounts.
Much of what you read today has no more truth than the accounts of Robert Joseph Allen, and in truth some of the tales being told today can be attributed directly to his, mostly, fictional book with some manufactured evidence/corroboration.

Good luck,

Joe Ribaudo

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: LDM why you can't get it !

A number of years ago I put together a topogralphic map showing the line that the Four Peaks would make if extended into the Superstitions. That was brought about by a conversation I was having with Kraig Roberts.

Not sure if I still have that map, but I will look for it.

Joe Ribaudo

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: LDM why you can't get it !

Joe,

Which is why i try to say, "your theory is as good as anyones". Until someone finds it, and can prove/disprove the stories, you are as correct as anyone else.

Your theory or spot is "right/correct" until someone proves it wrong, and so is mine. (Another way of saying what i'm getting at)

The books i have may be complete fabrications but, its all i have at this point so, i HAVE to stick to them and make the best i can out of them. It is my opinion though, that whoever fabricated them, had spent some serious time in the Mountains, and they are leading me to SOMETHING. Like i said before, it would very well be a note that says...."SUCKER".... (But even THAT would be funny/cool to find and i will post it if thats what i find)

Take care,
Travis


Looking forward to seeing the "Peaks lined up map".

 

[JackH]

Re: LDM why you can't get it !

"Line up to look like one peak".

Travis,

Who wrote that down ? and from whom ? Waltz to his caretaker ? Doesn't matter to me. With that info after all these years, you would think someone would have found it, if it was Locked On.

Jacob Waltz was a German immigrant if I remember, as was his friend/cousin Jacob. When languages are translated from one another small differences can make Huge changes.

I spent 20+ years communicating with people and trying to make a living at it. Eager people only want to hear what they associate with, and sometimes leave out the Clues, and we were all talking English and not multi lingual.......J

 

[EE THr]

Re: LDM why you can't get it !

CJ---

I'd like to see that one, too.

I hope you find it without too much trouble.