Possible source of stone used in Peralta tablets

alan m said:
They basically just copied Polzers report. In some cases word for word.
Click to expand...
Maybe if you read the full DAI report it would seem more authentic to you?

Questioning expert opinions is fine but alleging professional plagiarism on a public forum may be a problem if you don't have some pretty good evidence to support your belief. I, for one, would be very interested in seeing that evidence.
 

alan m said:
Hello Clay
the facts which you point out are not in dispute, as far as I am aware, only the conclusion that the stones are fake is what is being debated.
Click to expand...
I don't see anywhere in the DAI report where they say the rocks are fake? In fact there is in an in depth examination of each rock. They are all confirmed as rocks in the report - no fake rocks. I don't see any attempt at handwriting analysis in the DAI report either. Perhaps you were thinking of another source?

The age assessment is open to interpretation but the language and style assessment clearly establishes a 20th century manufacture. It was obvious to me on first viewing the rocks that the inscriptions were modern language/writing created by a non Spanish writer. I'm going to have to hear some pretty strong factual arguments before I'm willing to change my opinion of what my eyes clearly see. I don't find those factual arguments on this thread.

I'm not seeing fake here. By "fake" do you mean the scientists' opinion doesn't agree with your opinion?
 

I have a copy of that report and I have read it along with the statements made by Polzer as printed in Tom Kollenborns book.
it is the position as to 20th century which is blatantly wrong
 

Clay Diggins said:
Maybe if you read the full DAI report it would seem more authentic to you?

Questioning expert opinions is fine but alleging professional plagiarism on a public forum may be a problem if you don't have some pretty good evidence to support your belief. I, for one, would be very interested in seeing that evidence.
Click to expand...

DAI is just a small, woman-owned business that made a pro-bono, cursory examination of the Stone Maps for a tourist magazine.

The entire group spent a total of TWO HOURS examining the Stone Maps.
 

First. There existed mechanical drills in the 1800’s
second, the cross iconography is evident on 1800’s gravestones
 

This Polzar?

From Tom Kollenborn:

Dr. Charles Polzer, Jesuit historian at the University of Arizona (now deceased), believed the stone maps were a total fraud. Polzer told me personally no amount of research can convince him the stone maps were authentic.
Click to expand...
 

Yes.
to be clear, I am not interested in changing your mind about anything.
I post here for the benefit of new researchers
this has all been hashed out before, I think you are a bit late to the party.:hello:
 

alan m said:
First. There existed mechanical drills in the 1800’s
second, the cross iconography is evident on 1800’s gravestones
Click to expand...
There have been mechanical drills for thousands of years. The DAI report didn't mention mechanical drills. It did specifically mention an "electric drill" as being the tool most likely to have been used to decorate the stone. Having a lot of experience with carving stone myself I agree with the electric drill assessment.
 

Last edited:
Wouldn’t you need to personally analyze the stones yourself to make that conclusion?
 

Clay Diggins said:
This Polzar?

From Tom Kollenborn:
Click to expand...

The same Polzer (not Polzar) who loudly denied the existence of Jesuit treasure, yet in the 1980's when Tayopa was supposedly discovered (falsely), he hurriedly flew to Mexico City and tried to claim it for the order. He was so obnoxious to the authorities so they "mishandled" his luggage and ran him out of town. He wrote about it in a Christmas letter.

Also the same Polzer who was so hell-bent on canonizing Kino he disappeared a good amount of special collection materials at ASU, UA and elsewhere that had historical documents that cast Kino in a bad light.
 

alan m said:
Yes.
to be clear, I am not interested in changing your mind about anything.
I post here for the benefit of new researchers
this has all been hashed out before, I think you are a bit late to the party.:hello:
Click to expand...
So I'm unworthy of your dialogue? Your facts to support your conclusions are already published?
You don't have the temerity to support your statements?
Is it something personal relating to your health or past history?
I'm puzzled why you no longer have an interest in discovering all you can about this subject. Have you given up?
 

Polzer
also the very same who wrote an article about Jesuit mines and mining activity. Later denounced all Jesuit mining activity as being fairytales and represented the Jesuit order when an ancient silver mine was discovered in Mexico, in the vane attempt to claim it for the order.
 

An 1879 mechanical drill could have easily carved the stones
recall that some indigenous peoples of the southwest carved in sandstone only using other stones or antler
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Is it gold?

⬅️ Previous Thread

Odd things found in the Superstitions

Next Thread ➡️

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Metal Detecting Stuff

Latest Discussions

Back
Top