Maps

[sgtfda]

I met Craig at the Rendevious. He was sitting in front of Joes trailer with some others. As with any group there are those who are in and those trying to look in. Those that are in know and those trying to look in will only hear whispers. If your new to dutchunting listen close and you may hear some whispers if your lucky. In this case I was told outright by several involved in this mess to stay away from Craig and why. When my mentors talk I listen.
Hal I may be wrong but I suspect you have been in contact with Craig

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Hal Croves]

Quoted text: "Can you see the difference? A forged document is not the same thing as an incorrect, even fraudulent list" end quoted text

I think this is the critical difference in how you and I approach this.

In my opinion; forgery, in this case, includes the lesser crimes (substitute sins if that term better suits) of uttering and false attribution.

Forgery includes the manufacture of a false document for the purpose of deception. Uttering is the passing of it as authentic and false attribution is to add borrowed credibility to the document in the eye of the beholder. All of these happened with this record. Sufficient discovery unearthed the deception. No credible alternative other than the "Corbin source" has surfaced. The document and the underlying sins, crimes, failure of moral dealing, (chose your favorite) are inseparable.

I think we need to just agree to disagree on this. Its gone far afield from the topic at hand.

I am late to the show and sticking my nose into obviously sensitive memories. Unfortunaly, that's the nature of historical research. It's painful. Sometimes personal. I have even research my own families history and it is full of pain, embarrassment, and dark moments. The things people don't share publicly.

It is your right to express anger over Mrs. Corbin's book, and the information provided by the source. But from an outsider, looking back, trying to understand exactly what a liar is, all I see is a shift of blame from several, to one.

The curious part of my nature wants, insists, on understanding how that occurred. If that means opening a few wounds, I ask for forgiveness in advance.

The publisher is 100% responsible for that book going to press and it's contents. Both LEGALY & morally.

Validation of Corbin's sourced information is absolutely related to this thread.

I will leave it here, where you suggested.

 

[Hal Croves]

I met Craig at the Rendevious. He was sitting in front of Joes trailer with some others. As with any group there are those who are in and those trying to look in. Those that are in know and those trying to look in will only hear whispers. If your new to dutchunting listen close and you may hear some whispers if your lucky. In this case I was told outright by several involved in this mess to stay away from Craig and why. When my mentors talk I listen.
Hal I may be wrong but I suspect you have been in contact with Craig

Wow, Frank. You broke the first rule of "dutchhunting".
NEVER take anyone's word for fact.

I thought about not responding to your post, simple because you seldom extend the same courtesy to, I guess, "non-friends", as you describe it. But for old time sake, I am going to indulge you here. Hopefully you are not too set in your ways to appreciate the effort.

Sent today at 12:01PM to Corbin's Source.

"The list in Helens book is still very interesting and I am looking at the names now. Some seem to make sense for the year 1839. I guess I want to ask you man to man, how it came to you? I am a stranger and you have no reason to trust me with the truth. I get that. But...."

Your instincts are correct but a little ahead of my effort.
The first thing you should have done that night, was to pull him aside and asked for his side of the story.

Man to man.
Because, that's what men do.

 

[sgtfda]

I only met him that one time. I was informed later. The thing that upset me was a false Vietnam service claim. My sources are above reproach. Those who's info is 100% I don't need his info and have no dog in this fight. If your using his info good luck.

 

[Hal Croves]

I only met him that one time. I was informed later. The thing that upset me was a false Vietnam service claim. My sources are above reproach. Those who's info is 100% I don't need his info and have no dog in this fight. If your using his info good luck.

It's never a good thing when truth is misrepresented.

 

[sgtfda]

I spent my time in Cong hell. Anyone who makes a false claim they did also is **** in my book and a insult to those who did serve there. Enough said on that subject. You want dutchman info from someone like that?

 

[Old]

Hal,

I'm not angry. Confused as to logic perhaps, but not angry.

I hope you get a plausible answer to your inquiry. Its long over due. If there is one it would have saved a ton of heartache for those affected, all of them, a long time ago.

What I do find interesting is the duplicity and duality that runs throughout all things LDM. For every story and clue, and just about every player, there is a counter story with just the opposite twist. There's Jake the kind old gentleman true to this friends countered against Jake the serial killer. There is Julia the kind soul who took in a sick neighbor and cared for him through his last days countered with Julia the money grubbing map maker. Holmes the hero vs. Holmes the thief. Just about every character up to current has dual competing story lines. Is that unique to the LDM or is that part and parcel with such legends?

 

[Hal Croves]

I spent my time in Cong hell. Anyone who makes a false claim they did also is **** in my book and a insult to those who did serve there. Enough said on that subject. You want dutchman info from someone like that?

You are a good man Frank Augustine. I make it a point not to talk about what others have done in service of their country. You do it and live with it. You don't parade it about, wear it on your sleeve, and you don't measure other men by your effort. Learned that first hand from one of the last Chosin few.

Back to the topic. Yes, I want any and all information. No matter how credible the source.
Because I honestly believe that clues overlap. Things that seem iffy, sometimes make sense when looked at from a new perspective. I have my money on the Haywood story. Things are starting to become focused for me there.

Frank. In all seriousness. Look at Tom K's map. Find where the mapmaker stood. Look out in the direction of Kenworthys digs. It's a heart on Tom's map. If you ever plan to visit that area, let me know before you go.

 

[Hal Croves]

Hal,

I'm not angry. Confused as to logic perhaps, but not angry.

I hope you get a plausible answer to your inquiry. Its long over due. If there is one it would have saved a ton of heartache for those affected, all of them, a long time ago.

What I do find interesting is the duplicity and duality that runs throughout all things LDM. For every story and clue, and just about every player, there is a counter story with just the opposite twist. There's Jake the kind old gentleman true to this friends countered against Jake the serial killer. There is Julia the kind soul who took in a sick neighbor and cared for him through his last days countered with Julia the money grubbing map maker. Holmes the hero vs. Holmes the thief. Just about every character up to current has dual competing story lines. Is that unique to the LDM or is that part and parcel with such legends?

I guess we all have two sides. Dexters "dark passenger" is a great example. Duality of spirit I think they call it.
I enjoy the history side, but dealing with living history is sometimes way to difficult.

Your are not alone in your confusion.

 

[sgtfda]

I've address that issue and told you what that represents. It's been beat to death over the years.

 

[gollum]

Hal,


I am at work right now, and will post the page I sent to ISTG. But for right now, you REALLY need to follow this link:


OLBERS MANIFEST


Read everything. It was all very well hashed out there. In the meantime, I will give you two little pieces of Kibble to chew on:


1. From the ISTG Website, this is a list of the available records of the Ship Olbers:



If you look carefully, you will see on your posted copy of the Olbers Manifest, that it is from 1839. The ISTG does not have any records of the OLbers making port in New Orleans in 1839.


2. Is a list from the ISTG Website showing the voyages by year and Ship Name:



I grabbed 1837 through most of 1840. Do you see an Olbers?

I will say again that the Olbers Manifest that was provided to Helen Corbin for her book "The Bible on the Lost Dutchman Gold Mine and Jacob Waltz" was a forgery meant to deceive! There is not a chance of misinformation or accidental inclusion. The list was parsed from several other lists. A couple of those lists were in blocks of multiple names. The manifest was invented. There is not one shred of doubt.

That being said, I have known MKR for quite a while, and I have found him to be extremely knowledgeable and very generous in sharing some of his information. Knowing that he was the source for this document was very disturbing to me. I am not one to jump on a bandwagon. I don't put it past the realm of possibility that someone hoaxed the document and gave it to him, but being one of the most knowledgeable people around on a subject is a TWO EDGED SWORD! If you are THAT knowledgeable, then how could someone put that kind of thing over on you? It just took us a couple of days to see that something smelled fishy about the manifest as presented, then a little sleuth work showed it as such.

Mike

 

[Hal Croves]

Hal,


I am at work right now, and will post the page I sent to ISTG. But for right now, you REALLY need to follow this link:


OLBERS MANIFEST


Read everything. It was all very well hashed out there. In the meantime, I will give you two little pieces of Kibble to chew on:


1. From the ISTG Website, this is a list of the available records of the Ship Olbers:

View attachment 1133205

If you look carefully, you will see on your posted copy of the Olbers Manifest, that it is from 1839. The ISTG does not have any records of the OLbers making port in New Orleans in 1839.


2. Is a list from the ISTG Website showing the voyages by year and Ship Name:

View attachment 1133206

I grabbed 1837 through most of 1840. Do you see an Olbers?

I will say again that the Olbers Manifest that was provided to Helen Corbin for her book "The Bible on the Lost Dutchman Gold Mine and Jacob Waltz" was a forgery meant to deceive! There is not a chance of misinformation or accidental inclusion. The list was parsed from several other lists. A couple of those lists were in blocks of multiple names. The manifest was invented. There is not one shred of doubt.

That being said, I have known MKR for quite a while, and I have found him to be extremely knowledgeable and very generous in sharing some of his information. Knowing that he was the source for this document was very disturbing to me. I am not one to jump on a bandwagon. I don't put it past the realm of possibility that someone hoaxed the document and gave it to him, but being one of the most knowledgeable people around on a subject is a TWO EDGED SWORD! If you are THAT knowledgeable, then how could someone put that kind of thing over on you? It just took us a couple of days to see that something smelled fishy about the manifest as presented, then a little sleuth work showed it as such.

Mike

I want to give this post the attention it deserves. Let me take your advice and read that link a few times. In the mean time, it's not the correct transcription date but, it appears that the Olbers did make New Orleans in 1839. Not saying it happened again, at a later month but, there was more than enough time between dates.

The first family on the faulty list is something worth researching. It's just a place to start and no smoking gun but worth following. It may be coincidence. The dates are close.

 

[cactusjumper]

Mike,

Two things.........Happy Birthday and Thank you for your service to our country.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Cactus, Mike is 39 already ?

 

[Hal Croves]

Hal,


I am at work right now, and will post the page I sent to ISTG. But for right now, you REALLY need to follow this link:


OLBERS MANIFEST


Read everything. It was all very well hashed out there. In the meantime, I will give you two little pieces of Kibble to chew on:


1. From the ISTG Website, this is a list of the available records of the Ship Olbers:

View attachment 1133205

If you look carefully, you will see on your posted copy of the Olbers Manifest, that it is from 1839. The ISTG does not have any records of the OLbers making port in New Orleans in 1839.


2. Is a list from the ISTG Website showing the voyages by year and Ship Name:

View attachment 1133206

I grabbed 1837 through most of 1840. Do you see an Olbers?

I will say again that the Olbers Manifest that was provided to Helen Corbin for her book "The Bible on the Lost Dutchman Gold Mine and Jacob Waltz" was a forgery meant to deceive! There is not a chance of misinformation or accidental inclusion. The list was parsed from several other lists. A couple of those lists were in blocks of multiple names. The manifest was invented. There is not one shred of doubt.

That being said, I have known MKR for quite a while, and I have found him to be extremely knowledgeable and very generous in sharing some of his information. Knowing that he was the source for this document was very disturbing to me. I am not one to jump on a bandwagon. I don't put it past the realm of possibility that someone hoaxed the document and gave it to him, but being one of the most knowledgeable people around on a subject is a TWO EDGED SWORD! If you are THAT knowledgeable, then how could someone put that kind of thing over on you? It just took us a couple of days to see that something smelled fishy about the manifest as presented, then a little sleuth work showed it as such.

Mike

Mike, I read the 42 pages. I am going to read it again on the train but my first response is... That was a mean trick, making me revisit page after page of OZ! What, you couldn't just send me directly to Paul's post?


Thats a joke.


Seems that Paul did some great work.
Why isn't that surprising.


But... I would still need more convincing before I closed the door on that list. There are a few things that need to be checked.


Olbers arrival date for 1839 is incorrect. Not a big deal but an example of explainable errors inherent at the time.


Olbers returned to Germany, and it's crew made and effort to find her missing sister ship. A return departure date, cleared port, would be interesting. From this we know she return home. But if you do the math, she had more than enough time to make a second voyage that year.


And she did.
The question is, where did she go? From 38' to 48' she "visits American ports of call" Her captain remained constant until her grounding in 48'. BTW, says on some of these sites that a second journey was not uncommon. Olbers made 2 voyages to New Orleans in 48'.


According to the list in Mrs. Corbin's book, the Olbers captain was correctly named.


It seems to me that the Olbers log book is what everyone is after. Or, even the captains journal if he kept one. If that is available, and it probably is since she was only grounded and not lost, it needs to be checked.


When I see that log book, that's when I will make my final call on that list.
In all honesty, outside of Paul's research, it still seems like you guys were quick to cast judgement on the source. The list may be a composite. It may have been made to deceive and to support a deception. But it in no way resembles and official ISTG document. I read the link and see where that suggestion came from.


But let's say it is a bogus composite list, made to deceive. You have absolutely zero proof that Mr. Roberts created it. The man admits to being the source, admits that it was an unreliable document, says he made his concerns known, and still, because it was in his possession, he is labeled a liar?


In court, even Paul's ingenious work wold not be enough to convict the source of intentional fraud. And, from where I sit, as an outsider trying to remain neutral, if I were that source, and I had been treated publicly this way, I would be on the phone with an attorney, talking about a slander case against ANYONE who publicly denounced me as a liar.


All he would have to do is prove that the statements were made. That those statement damaged his reputation is obvious. The fact that he never filed against his one time friends speaks volumes to me about his character.


So, where am I on this? The Olbers argument is a false one.
I don't know anything about Franks complaint about misrepresented service to the country except that it has nothing to do with this conversation. A mans personal problems are his alone and it has no place here.


I will do a little look'en around and let you know.

 

[cactusjumper]

Hal,

False claims of military service are taken very seriously by many Americans:

[Adm. Jeremy M. Boorda was the chief of naval operations when he killed himself in 1996 amid controversy over whether he had earned the right to wear two “V” pins signifying valor for combat for his service aboard two warships in Vietnam. Two years after his death, a letter was written by the secretary of the Navy declaring Boorda was eligible to wear the decorations; however, officially his case would have to be appealed to the Board of Correction of Naval Records.]

Hard for a Veteran to lightly toss off false claims of combat service.

In this case, it's not just one or two deceptions, it's years of face to face untruths. I have great respect for the men who did the research. They were thorough and accurate in that work. You are coming to some huge conclusions without having those years of personal experience.

Greg Davis has most, if not all of that research. I would like to see one (1) falsehood out of the research that he was sent.

I, as well as others, spent a great deal of time trying to prove any of the facts to be in error. Each and every time we were left with nothing but the facts. I counted Matthew as a friend who had just gotten lost, and trapped in his made-up persona.

If it's untrue, he has only to call me and explain the whole thing. I have made that offer many times.

Good luck,

Joe

 

[Hal Croves]

Hal,

False claims of military service are taken very seriously by many Americans:

[Adm. Jeremy M. Boorda was the chief of naval operations when he killed himself in 1996 amid controversy over whether he had earned the right to wear two “V” pins signifying valor for combat for his service aboard two warships in Vietnam. Two years after his death, a letter was written by the secretary of the Navy declaring Boorda was eligible to wear the decorations; however, officially his case would have to be appealed to the Board of Correction of Naval Records.]

Hard for a Veteran to lightly toss off false claims of combat service.

In this case, it's not just one or two deceptions, it's years of face to face untruths. I have great respect for the men who did the research. They were thorough and accurate in that work. You are coming to some huge conclusions without having those years of personal experience.

Greg Davis has most, if not all of that research. I would like to see one (1) falsehood out of the research that he was sent.

I, as well as others, spent a great deal of time trying to prove any of the facts to be in error. Each and every time we were left with nothing but the facts. I counted Matthew as a friend who had just gotten lost, and trapped in his made-up persona.

If it's untrue, he has only to call me and explain the whole thing. I have made that offer many times.

Good luck,

Joe

cactusjumper,
I don't talk about peoples personal shortcomings in an open forum. It is not relevant to the conversation. It is sniping. It also reflects poorly on the person repeating these things because it tells us that they are either too fIng lazy to construct an intelligent argument or, that they have an agenda. Character assassination.

For heaven sakes, this argument about the Olbers voyage of 1839 is simply irresponsible. It should have been put to bed the first day it was brought to light. The only person that I give any credit to in this is Paul, and that's for taking the time to look.

I never graduated from high school and at 50ish, my math skills are embarrassing.
But a ship sailing from Baltimore on October 6th, 1839 for Germany would not have been able to reach New Orleans by November 17 of that same year.

Olbers cleared New Orleans for Havana on April 11, 1839.
She eventually left Breman and 50 days later made Baltimore on September 18th, 1839.
She cleared Baltimore on October 5/6, destination Breman.

And that, is that.

 

[pkdmslf]

I started this thread to be about maps. How did it get hijacked?

I guess it might be time to just sit back and just check this site once in awhile. It has taken another tangent.

 

[Hal Croves]

I started this thread to be about maps. How did it get hijacked?

I guess it might be time to just sit back and just check this site once in awhile. It has taken another tangent.

I am at least partially to blame.
It's done now.

But if you hang in there, it will all eventually make sense. Mr. Roberts has something to contribute and you, me, and even the naysayers should pay attention.

 

[cactusjumper]

I am at least partially to blame.
It's done now.

But if you hang in there, it will all eventually make sense. Mr. Roberts has something to contribute and you, me, and even the naysayers should pay attention.

Hal,

I always pay attention when Matthew speaks.

Good luck,

Joe