Original Cone-head (Spanish)

[Ol' Kentuck]

View attachment 1947935


OK-ok, just cool off. You may rupture something.

C'mon, give us a smile


View attachment 1947936


Sure you can do whatever you want, but my advice is to get another Botanical moment as before.

I have been smiling...... You just don't *See it.


Have a Good'un.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[listopiedras]

I have been smiling...... You just don't *See it.


Have a Good'un.

Thank you


This IS, after all a treasure hunting site and not an archaeological site that requires documented proof.

A lot of these endeavors are driven by inspiration, gut feeling and nonconformity to the ‘accepted rule of Information’ by others.

Should you not subscribe or understand the process, it would be your own choice to stay uninvolved or participate.

But when ‘someone’ tries to shift that process to his/her understanding by becoming a naysayer, it will only be a disservice to those who do see and do understand it in the first place.

It is selfish, ego driven and not fair to others to get involved but only to deny.
Be decent and find a new hobby or another subject to approach which is more in line with your aptitudes.

 

[Ol' Kentuck]

Thank you


This IS, after all a treasure hunting site and not an archaeological site that requires documented proof.

A lot of these endeavors are driven by inspiration, gut feeling and nonconformity to the ‘accepted rule of Information’ by others.

Should you not subscribe or understand the process, it would be your own choice to stay uninvolved or participate.

But when ‘someone’ tries to shift that process to his/her understanding by becoming a naysayer, it will only be a disservice to those who do see and do understand it in the first place.

It is selfish, ego driven and not fair to others to get involved but only to deny.
Be decent and find a new hobby or another subject to approach which is more in line with your aptitudes.

Truth is only a disservice to those who push Inaccurate Information.

Just being a decent Human works for me.


Have a Good'un

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Natural rocks with man made lines drawn, imaginary images are caused by Pareidolia.

..........and you're free to NOT look at it.

some see it ....some don't. Your choice is to call it out.......AS you DON'T see it?

Let everyone make his own choice to look or ignore

Thank you


This IS, after all a treasure hunting site and not an archaeological site that requires documented proof.

A lot of these endeavors are driven by inspiration, gut feeling and nonconformity to the ‘accepted rule of Information’ by others.

Should you not subscribe or understand the process, it would be your own choice to stay uninvolved or participate.

But when ‘someone’ tries to shift that process to his/her understanding by becoming a naysayer, it will only be a disservice to those who do see and do understand it in the first place.

It is selfish, ego driven and not fair to others to get involved but only to deny.
Be decent and find a new hobby or another subject to approach which is more in line with your aptitudes.

Listopiedras, this is not your thread, you do not get to tell members what to look at and not look at.

 

[Gulf Coast Pirate]

I see Dan Ackroyd...

 

[Ol' Kentuck]

....and Bill Murray with a groundhog.


Have a Good'un

 

[GoDeep]

Yes indeed it remains hidden to all naysayers. Some see it...some don't

No sir. It is not a subjective choice of the viewer, it is an objective fact that either the rocks have been altered by man or they have not.

The evidence we have been provided so far by the OP, reveals no evidence of the rocks being altered by man. If you have other clear and convincing evidence you can provide, i'd be open to viewing it and changing my statement.

But that’s about all the untrained eye will see as familiar, which is very common. Mileage helps.

Insightful and well stated. With time you will learn to recognize the signs that a stone has been worked by man vs natural states that create Pareidolia.

But when ‘someone’ tries to shift that process to his/her understanding... it will only be a disservice to those who do see and do understand it in the first place.

Again, very insightful. You have switched the "process" to your understanding when, rather then look at the stones first for evidence of actual human alteration, you jumped ahead to focusing on what you imagine you see in the rocks . What you imagine you see in the rocks (owls, hearts, arrows or even cute puppies) is irrelevant to whether they were actually worked by man.

1st determine if they are man altered, if (Yes), then proceed to deciphering what they carved, if (No), cool looking rocks bro, i think i see Elvis!

 

[dog the treasure hunter]

All the clues are on this head. It's limestone, white streaks are 2'' wide quartz. Tell me what you see. I'll let you know later.
This head is 10' tall

I see what i call a helmeted head. A very nice desert hat style from the middle east .You will find that shape,done by man, and legit to me. There's a whole lot going on there,for private eyes only.
Any updates? Thanks for posting the photo.

 

[dog the treasure hunter]

Kinda like this headwear .The shape is also close to the homeland.

 

[dog the treasure hunter]

I also see The Aztec/Mayan type chief with headress and with a X eye?. Its legit.

 

[listopiedras]

No sir. It is not a subjective choice of the viewer, it is an objective fact that either the rocks have been altered by man or they have not.

The evidence we have been provided so far by the OP, reveals no evidence of the rocks being altered by man. If you have other clear and convincing evidence you can provide, i'd be open to viewing it and changing my statement.



Insightful and well stated. With time you will learn to recognize the signs that a stone has been worked by man vs natural states that create Pareidolia.



Again, very insightful. You have switched the "process" to your understanding when, rather then look at the stones first for evidence of actual human alteration, you jumped ahead to focusing on what you imagine you see in the rocks . What you imagine you see in the rocks (owls, hearts, arrows or even cute puppies) is irrelevant to whether they were actually worked by man.

1st determine if they are man altered, if (Yes), then proceed to deciphering what they carved, if (No), cool looking rocks bro, i think i see Elvis!

Well done boys and girls, outstanding. As long as y’all see Elvis, Bill Murray, Dan Ackroyd or even Dan Aykroyd…and others… the treasures will stay safely as they are.
There’s no point in debating who’s who and what’s what. You win the right to innocence and your rightful place at home safely in front of the computer. Let others do the dirty work in the field, quietly. You have the right to keep on dreaming while surfing treasure sites. Great job y’all.
Oh, …and don’t forget to “Like” each other plenty. Someday, maybe you’ll be able to exchange them for some digital currency or some such. No chance for metals.

 

[listopiedras]

Dog, I've been wasting my time here with this bunch. Chances are you will too. Just like taking a horse to water if he ain't thirsty.They seem to like the couch more.

 

[dog the treasure hunter]

Dog, I've been wasting my time here with this bunch. Chances are you will too. Just like taking a horse to water if he ain't thirsty.They seem to like the couch more.

I bet the person that originally posted this thread will find value in some of the postings. Hopefully he will give a update.

 

[GoDeep]

Well done boys and girls, outstanding. As long as y?all see Elvis, Bill Murray, Dan Ackroyd or even Dan Aykroyd?and others? the treasures will stay safely as they are. .

Again, it doesn't matter what you or I imagine we see, it has to do with whether they have been purposely altered by man. Where we stand now with the current pictures, we can see no evidence that they are. Do you have further evidence you can share supporting they've been carved by man?

There?s no point in debating who?s who and what?s what.

Good thing no one here was debating who's who. We were debating evidence, try to keep up.

You win the right to innocence and your rightful place at home safely in front of the computer. Let others do the dirty work in the field, quietly. You have the right to keep on dreaming while surfing treasure sites. Great job y?all.

Your accusations are demonstrably false. If you look at the post histories of those posting in this thread, you'll see we have a long, documented history of sharing our explorations and recoveries in the field, you know, "getting our hands dirty". You aren't special.

 

[Ol' Kentuck]

Your accusations are demonstrably false. If you look at the post histories of those posting in this thread, you'll see we all have a long, documented history of sharing our explorations and recoveries in the field, getting our hands dirty. You aren't special.

Just more ad hominem and a quick exit instead of evidence, my friend. Disappointing, but if you look at post history - entirely predictable.

 

[Tpmetal]

Well done boys and girls, outstanding. As long as y’all see Elvis, Bill Murray, Dan Ackroyd or even Dan Aykroyd…and others… the treasures will stay safely as they are.
There’s no point in debating who’s who and what’s what. You win the right to innocence and your rightful place at home safely in front of the computer. Let others do the dirty work in the field, quietly. You have the right to keep on dreaming while surfing treasure sites. Great job y’all.
Oh, …and don’t forget to “Like” each other plenty. Someday, maybe you’ll be able to exchange them for some digital currency or some such. No chance for metals.

Interesting.....so what exactly have you explored then and what exactly have you found? You have some sort of nasty demeanor to you is all I know at the moment, no started threads on the site that I can see? So put your money where your mouth is and start a thread of your own going over your research, discoveries, and what treasure or artifacts you have uncovered. Detailed photos and evidence please.

 

[sdcfia]

Again, it doesn't matter what you or I imagine we see, it has to do with whether they have been purposely altered by man. Where we stand now with the current pictures, we can see no evidence that they are. Do you have further evidence you can share supporting they've been carved by man?
...
Good thing no one here was debating who's who. We were debating evidence, try to keep up.
...
Your accusations are demonstrably false. If you look at the post histories of those posting in this thread, you'll see we have a long, documented history of sharing our explorations and recoveries in the field, you know, "getting our hands dirty". You aren't special.

It's not worth getting too excited about GD - some folks simply seek out the role of being provocateurs. We're all allowed our opinions, but personal attacks in lieu of rational debate is very telling when it comes to any topic at hand. Your responses on this thread have been clearly on target, IMO.

RE the OP's post #3, I repeat - what mine?

 

[Ol' Kentuck]

It's not worth getting too excited about GD - some folks simply seek out the role of being provocateurs. We're all allowed our opinions, but personal attacks in lieu of rational debate is very telling when it comes to any topic at hand. Your responses on this thread have been clearly on target, IMO.

RE the OP's post #3, I repeat - what mine?

Yep, there's a lot to be said for rational debate. In my experience most (but not all) visitors who post in this section tend to be Bias Hunters rather than treasure hunters. They come seeking validation of their own biased conclusions, methods, or preconceived notions, and seem to dislike - even discount - any debate on the actual merit of any evidence (or lack thereof) they may or may not present.

Rational debate is healthy. It's how we suss out facts. If you're not willing to submit an idea or claim to healthy debate, then basically you're just throwing it out there hoping it will stick somewhere so you can arbitrarily declare the spaghetti on the wall as validation, when all you have actually proven is you can throw a wet noodle. It takes more than a wet noodle to make spaghetti.

I see a lot of wet noodles on this section of the forum, but very little spaghetti. An occasional word salad like we've recently been served is also quite common. It goes along with the rabbit holes, I reckon. Never been much for rabbit food, personally, I like a thick juicy steak. Reckon I'll leave the salad bar and go hunt one up.


Y'all Have a Good'un

 

[sdcfia]

Yep, there's a lot to be said for rational debate. In my experience most (but not all) visitors who post in this section tend to be Bias Hunters rather than treasure hunters. They come seeking validation of their own biased conclusions, methods, or preconceived notions, and seem to dislike - even discount - any debate on the actual merit of any evidence (or lack thereof) they may or may not present.

Rational debate is healthy. It's how we suss out facts. If you're not willing to submit an idea or claim to healthy debate, then basically you're just throwing it out there hoping it will stick somewhere so you can arbitrarily declare the spaghetti on the wall as validation, when all you have actually proven is you can throw a wet noodle. It takes more than a wet noodle to make spaghetti.

I see a lot of wet noodles on this section of the forum, but very little spaghetti. An occasional word salad like we've recently been served is also quite common. It goes along with the rabbit holes, I reckon. Never been much for rabbit food, personally, I like a thick juicy steak. Reckon I'll leave the salad bar and go hunt one up.


Y'all Have a Good'un

Remember Ol' K, confirmation bias can also be a positive thing if you're searching for support for a valid argument.

 

[Ol' Kentuck]

Remember Ol' K, confirmation bias can also be a positive thing if you're searching for support for a valid argument.

Excellent point. But the key in that instance would be Evidence. All Valid arguments are based on evidence. Without it it becomes only your 'belief'.

As you and I both know from experience, 'Beliefs' are purely subjective, and subjective claims cannot be proven true or false by any generally accepted criteria. Subjective claims often express opinions, preferences, values, feelings, and judgments. Without evidence they fall outside the realm of what is verifiable. They could be true or false. But when faced with no evidence there can be no valid argument for Beliefs. In effect, without evidence the individual promoting the belief has hamstrung the very support/validation they desire.