" Another one bites the dust "?
Yeah it would be foolish to expect a database of old court cases in Mexico. From what I hear they don't even know about shoes or combs there - very backwards.
For those who aren't interested in Ostrich kissing there is always these records:
Ramo Civil: 1533–1857 (Civil Division: 1533–1857). 1989.
Documentos Civiles, 1626–1886 (Civil Documents, 1626–1886). 1988.
Ramo de Tierras, 1523–1822 (Land Records, 1523–1822). 1989–1992.
I find it interesting that Mexico keeps a database of all court cases nationwide since 1533 in it's Archivo General de la Nacion in Mexico City but in the U.S. you have to search out each individual court and request a copy of the record if they still have it. Different databases for different folk.
I often see on this forum the misunderstanding about Spanish colonial and Mexican record keeping. The Spanish were obsessed with record keeping and made a note of every quill, spoon and shoe purchased and used as well as personal and family records. The Spanish were record keeping nuts and the Mexicans no less so. If it happened it got written down on paper and filed. The final dates you see on the archives above are when the entire collection was fully imaged.
.
Do you know of a study of these rocks that used a better petrographic microscope than the DAI investigation? It would be nice to review the thin slices from the examination.
Thanks Alan, 'bout what I'd expect, it's all over my yard.
) and of course you don't get what you want and throw tantrums as a result. By now you should understand that nobody is going to hand feed you, and neither are they obligated to. Subjecting the methodologies of treasure-hunting to the requirements for scientific validation is the worst way to accomplish anything in either field.
Once again another member mischaracterize my writings. I have never asked much less demanded "scientific proof" of anything. I guess if all the believers make up enough stuff that I supposedly wrote but never wrote you can assassinate the character of another expert that might disagree with your conclusions. You picked the wrong guy to be playing those sort of high school games with.Here's the thing, Clay, this is a treasure-hunting forum.
There is no scientific burden of proof to be met here. No requirement to do so. You either find treasure or you don't. No amount of science is going to help. If you want science, go to a science forum.
You barge in here demanding to be hand-fed "scientific proof," (as if that would help you locate any treasure
Mel Fisher didn't find the mother lode using scientific protocol or analysis. He acted on a simple tip from the Archive of the Indies in Seville, Spain that 18th Century attempts to salvage the Atocha had centered not on the Metecumbe Keys, as was previously thought, but on the Marquesas Keys 32 miles west of Florida`s southern tip.
Treasure hunters and archaeologists have always had such contempt and disdain for one another because they are after different things and their methodologies differ greatly.
