the everything site ...?

[cactusjumper]

bb,

could you define your interpretation of "parts"? Is there anyone else who believes there are seven.....or eight parts?

Do I understand that you believe there is a "solution" to the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan No. 2?

During the period of 2002-2007 did you get a chance to present your interpretations to the scholars who examined the Codex at Harvard over that five year period?

Do you know who commissioned this historical record?

Thanks in advance.

Joe Ribaudo

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Cubfan64]

take a few mintues .. think about who you are and how good it is to be alive...

Shucks, and just when I thought I would never find ANYTHING to agree with BB on

 

[Oroblanco]

HOLA amigos,

Blindbowman wrote:

i was canning tomatos most of the day , i am going to bed early and watch the football game .. good night people

Coincident - Mrs O has been canning tomatoes all day here, just putting in the last batch now. I really do think we have many things in common here, despite whatever differences in beliefs we might have. Nothing like home-grown veggies!

I don't have a reference handy but am pretty sure that the Aztecs own prophesy of a return of Quetzalcoatl dates back more than 100 years, and the arrival of Cortez fit their predicted date exactly. So in some ways, the prophecy came true - (perhaps we might see a warning to those who dabble in the Dark Arts, like the witches and wizards of Montezuma?) and their horrific religious practices so despised by Quetzalcoatl came to an end. (Waxing philosophic there for a moment. )

Just as an aside, on the Aztec numerical system but I did look into this as one possible clue of cross-oceanic contact; comparing the Aztec and Mayan number systems with Phoenician and Punic, there are some similarities at a glance but we must wonder why the extremely useful concept of ZERO did not get transmitted? Casual contact such as might occur in limited trading might well not transmit such a concept, but Blindbowman has indicated that a great deal of information must have been exchanged. So I have to wonder now, if Pythagoras got his information and mathematical knowledge from this side of the Atlantic, (via Phoenicians?) then why did he not immediately grasp and adopt the ZERO? Zero is such an important number that we often ignore it, but just try doing a few basic math exercises using ONLY Roman numerals for instance...

XII x VII
CCIX / III
MDXC - CCV
MMII - MMII = ??

We won't even TOUCH the matter of FRACTIONS in Roman numerals, it is really different! Now remember that Pythagoras was using the GREEK number system which is even more difficult to work with than the Roman, since it simply substitutes Greek letters for numbers! I am having trouble accepting the idea of Pythagoras getting his information from proto-Aztec/Chichimecs in Chicomoztoc, if you haven't figured that out. *Don't you just love that we all use the ARABIC number system? I do! So much nicer to work with!*

I realize that we have virtually nothing of the works of Pythagoras, since most of his teaching was verbal, but wouldn't you suspect that such a dramatic bit of information as Blindbowman is proposing having been transmitted, ought to have left us some kind of clue in a statement from Pythagoras? There are a few of his statements preserved by his students and admirers, always couched as "in his own words" or to that effect. I know that Plato's ideas do show influence from Pythagorean ideas, BUT - again why should Plato have turned to a misleading statement when attributing his sources for the story of Atlantis? This makes no sense to me, especially when the biographer Plutarch affirms that Solon was Plato's source. Blindbowman if you can provide a good explanation for this I would appreciate it, and I ask you specifically because you have made the statement that Plato got his information from Pythagoras, rather than the sources Plato recorded for us (Dropides-Solon-priests of Sais in Egypt). Thank you in advance,

Blindbowman also wrote:

how good it is to be alive...

Ah, how sweet it is - until the pain meds start to wear off! Then "life" has quite a different 'flavor'......
Oroblanco

 

[the blindbowman]

bb,

could you define your interpretation of "parts"? Is there anyone else who believes there are seven.....or eight parts?

Do I understand that you believe there is a "solution" to the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan No. 2?

During the period of 2002-2007 did you get a chance to present your interpretations to the scholars who examined the Codex at Harvard over that five year period?

Do you know who commissioned this historical record?

Thanks in advance.

Joe Ribaudo

http://www.mc2-map.org/CHICOMOZTOC/20_8.HTM
i did a search on the Cuauhtinchan Archaeological Project....pluse you can type in just the pre heading and open this sites home page from there you can open the whole site http://www.mc2-map.org/mc2.htm

this is the page you will find interesting http://www.mc2-map.org/CHICOMOZTOC/INDEX.HTM


who would have known , more then just a hansom face ...LOL

you are correct Cj ,you are refering to David carrsco...? one of the only people to ever handle the codex dirrectly.. and yes is from harvard edu.


each part has a simbolic it can be a picture or a signal simbolic with hidden meanings ..

Is there anyone else who believes there are seven.....or eight parts? good question , if they were correct about their own translation that could matter in the future ...lol

i did run into a few people working and researching the codex and the translations ..

Do I understand that you believe there is a "solution" to the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan No. 2?
frist lets start back at the facts before we go playing in theory ,,, for one , David carrsco is the only one that related chicomoztoc to Cuauhtinchan,,.. thats because it was the only site they kew that had simalarities to the codex and the modern route between that site and Teotihuacan,, thats the wildest theory i ever herd ..lol you can not relate modern roads to these sites . i dont care how many thoeries you relate that way it dosent work like that ....

chicomoztoc should have been research with out relateing to any other site .. if the data did not suport a location then it sould have been left open for debate and not theoried to be in a location where there is no data to prove it is or not .. thats foolishness ....

just because Cuauhtinchan,,.. with chicomoztoc , that dose not mean it is chicomoztoc ..common sence can tell you that ...pluse when you see the real chicmztoc you will know right then that i am right .and Cuauhtinchan,,.. is not chicomoztoc and there is no question if i am correct or not about the real chicomoztoc ..

they asumed Cuauhtinchan,,.. was chicomoztoc .. one should not asume based on simalarities because you could be wrong and in this case they are ..

"Do you know who commissioned this historical record?"


yes i do , there is one simbolic that say they related to mayan and Aztec by their number system ...you know the Aztec often used mayan number system in counting ,in fact i had shown a sample of this . but as i see it, its the other way around , the Aztec learn this from the chicomoztoc culture because they had a dirrect link to the mayan culture ...

i can not speak for all of the codex but yes i do know who made them if they were all made by the same hand .. at frist i asume the priest of tayopa made them .. but after researching them it is clear only the shamen of chicomoztoc could have made these codex ...even thuo the priest of tayopa knew th location at one piont they did not know the histroy of this culture thus only the chicomoztoc culture could have made these ..


you take in to acount that chicomoztoc was stated to be the birth place of the tribes ..they knew where all the tribes went and yes we still have a codex that shows that ...

 

[the blindbowman]

HOLA amigos,

Blindbowman wrote:

i was canning tomatos most of the day , i am going to bed early and watch the football game .. good night people

Coincident - Mrs O has been canning tomatoes all day here, just putting in the last batch now. I really do think we have many things in common here, despite whatever differences in beliefs we might have. Nothing like home-grown veggies!

I don't have a reference handy but am pretty sure that the Aztecs own prophesy of a return of Quetzalcoatl dates back more than 100 years, and the arrival of Cortez fit their predicted date exactly. So in some ways, the prophecy came true - (perhaps we might see a warning to those who dabble in the Dark Arts, like the witches and wizards of Montezuma?) and their horrific religious practices so despised by Quetzalcoatl came to an end. (Waxing philosophic there for a moment. )

Just as an aside, on the Aztec numerical system but I did look into this as one possible clue of cross-oceanic contact; comparing the Aztec and Mayan number systems with Phoenician and Punic, there are some similarities at a glance but we must wonder why the extremely useful concept of ZERO did not get transmitted? Casual contact such as might occur in limited trading might well not transmit such a concept, but Blindbowman has indicated that a great deal of information must have been exchanged. So I have to wonder now, if Pythagoras got his information and mathematical knowledge from this side of the Atlantic, (via Phoenicians?) then why did he not immediately grasp and adopt the ZERO? Zero is such an important number that we often ignore it, but just try doing a few basic math exercises using ONLY Roman numerals for instance...

XII x VII
CCIX / III
MDXC - CCV
MMII - MMII = ??

We won't even TOUCH the matter of FRACTIONS in Roman numerals, it is really different! Now remember that Pythagoras was using the GREEK number system which is even more difficult to work with than the Roman, since it simply substitutes Greek letters for numbers! I am having trouble accepting the idea of Pythagoras getting his information from proto-Aztec/Chichimecs in Chicomoztoc, if you haven't figured that out. *Don't you just love that we all use the ARABIC number system? I do! So much nicer to work with!*

I realize that we have virtually nothing of the works of Pythagoras, since most of his teaching was verbal, but wouldn't you suspect that such a dramatic bit of information as Blindbowman is proposing having been transmitted, ought to have left us some kind of clue in a statement from Pythagoras? There are a few of his statements preserved by his students and admirers, always couched as "in his own words" or to that effect. I know that Plato's ideas do show influence from Pythagorean ideas, BUT - again why should Plato have turned to a misleading statement when attributing his sources for the story of Atlantis? This makes no sense to me, especially when the biographer Plutarch affirms that Solon was Plato's source. Blindbowman if you can provide a good explanation for this I would appreciate it, and I ask you specifically because you have made the statement that Plato got his information from Pythagoras, rather than the sources Plato recorded for us (Dropides-Solon-priests of Sais in Egypt). Thank you in advance,

Blindbowman also wrote:

how good it is to be alive...

Ah, how sweet it is - until the pain meds start to wear off! Then "life" has quite a different 'flavor'......
Oroblanco

"I don't have a reference handy but am pretty sure that the Aztecs own prophesy of a return of Quetzalcoatl dates back more than 100 years, and the arrival of Cortez fit their predicted date exactly."

as i under stood it ,,, Quetzalcoatl told the Aztec he would return a hunder years later, but Cortez showed up two hunderd years latter ,, and yes you are correct about the date ...

"their horrific religious practices "

now here is where we dont agree Oro . i dont see this as horrific,, diffrent then our religious practices or modern religious practices .. but never the less we can not judge them for what we dont truely under stand , modern religion sees the death and says savages ,, but did the modern chruch have its own reasons to lable these cultures as savages .. yes they got their cut from the spainish ..and look at the rule of the chruch . destroying ay records of their culture .. its nothing more then religious genocide IMHO and what really pisses me off is this not the only time they get away with this BS ...

look at all the books destroyed in the 1500's , the chruch should be held acountable for these acts of religious genocide...what could we have learn from the records they order destroyed ...maybe we would have learn they dont control us at all ..we control our selfs ..our fate is ours and ours alone . the chruch is curupted IMHO and i will have no part of a religion that answers to its needs and not the will of the people ....

our under standing of death and sacrifice comes most often from standerds set by the chruch or religions is that really any diffrent from their culture .. i think not ... did modern religions take life and condem people to death for not kissing the chruches you know what ... they sure did .. so are they any diffrent ...NO .....

power can curupt...


"then why did he not immediately grasp and adopt the ZERO? "

that in fact is one of the reason i beleive he did get the idea from them .. see ZERO is the simbolic of the moon , the chicomoztoc culture uses it for the simble of the moon or spirit world , they use it before the given messure , to defind lunar scale is related ..

how dose this look ...( 0 l l ) = lunar 10 ,,.... (0 0) = lunar 20 or it could be drawn (0 ll,0 ll) so 25 would look like this
0 l
0 ll
0 ll

now do you under stand why i say the concept of ZERO came from this culture , they in fact use it as ZERO but we never knew what it means as a simbolic . it stands for the lunar scale ...i can prove they used this dirrectly ..

see as Pythagoras saw it , he asume the (0) was the lowest posable number of the culture , that wasnt true at all . even if the (0) would still hold the same value as nothing . it did in fact hold a simbolic meaning to this culture .., IMHO the shamen controlled the trade and thus they & the kings and upper classes used the number systems ,most of their people had no reason to learn to count at all ...

but take a good look at what their systen dose it starts with (0) before each value , Pythagoras made a common misteak , he asumed ...LOL


you must also under stand that when you have nothing of value . do you have nothing .. no . nothing still has a spiritual value . this is what i beleive Pythagoras was confused by ... he saw them use this number but it had no value so he did not know the meaning of it andnamed it ZERO....

not knowing its true meaning to this culture ...the value would reflect about the same value and meaning ,,but its a matter of prospective ...

no dout what so ever this culture used ZERO frist . ,they just had used it as a simbolic and Pythagoras had no fristhand wisdom of that so he gave it a name he could relate to ...ZERO...

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

HMMMMMMMM

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[Peerless67]

Quote: "*Don't you just love that we all use the ARABIC number system? I do! So much nicer to work with!*"

sometimes, and other times


Heres a little fairy tale.


Me, CJ and BB were about to embark on a trip into the supers.

On the way we passed a store selling battery operated radios.

CJ commented on how nice it would be to have some music along to drown out BBs out landish theories.

They had a nice little radio in the store priced at $18.00. 8)

As we walked by we decided we would jointly purchase the radio.

Each of us pulled 6 $1.00 bills from our pocket, and I ran back to the shop to buy the radio.

I took the radio to the assistant and handed over the $18.00

As I left, the manager who had been on a tea break came back to the store, and the assistant told him about the sale.

The manager told the assistant that the radio should have been on special offer.

He gave the assistant $5.00 and told him to catch up with me down the street and return the diffrence.

The assistant was not an honest man and pocketed $2.00 before he got to me.

when he caught up to me he gave me the $3 and told me that the radio had been on special offer and here was 3 bucks back.

When I caught back up with CJ and BB, I returned them 1 of the $1 each.

So we had each paid $6 each

We each got back a dollar which means we paid $15

The assistant had pocketed $2

But 15 + 2 is 17 wheres the other dollar?

 

[Infosponge]

Howdy Peerless67,

You have confused the math with the wording of your story. The original price was $18.00, minus the $5.00 brings the actual price to $13.00, add the $3.00 that was given back to you brings the total to $16.00, and with the $2.00 the assistant pocketed you have the original total of $18.00.

Infosponge

 

[cactusjumper]

bb,

Thanks for your reply.

Since you know who made the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan No. 2, can you tell us in what time period it was created?

I should tell you up front, that I don't agree with what you have said......so far. What is your source? A disagreement does not mean that either of us are wrong, as we may just have different sources. If you can explain yours, we may both end up learning something new. I assume that is your reason for posting on this Forum.

Take care,

Joe Ribaudo

 

[Peerless67]

Howdy Peerless67,

You have confussed the math with the wording of your story. The original price was $18.00, minus the $5.00 brings the actual price to $13.00, add the $3.00 that was given back to you brings the total to $16.00, and with the $2.00 the assistant pocketed you have the original total of $18.00.

Infosponge

Not bad for 19 minutes

 

[the blindbowman]

bb,

Thanks for your reply.

Since you know who made the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan No. 2, can you tell us in what time period it was created?

I should tell you up front, that I don't agree with what you have said......so far. What is your source? A disagreement does not mean that either of us are wrong, as we may just have different sources. If you can explain yours, we may both end up learning something new. I assume that is your reason for posting on this Forum.

Take care,

Joe Ribaudo

thats one of the easy question ,,, for one the tayopa mine was active at the time the priest made the bells and the bells show up in the codex .. end of stroy ... IMHO the bells could have been made as early as 1535 .. but i feel the mine was never work for very long and the data i collected shows that the priest only had control of chicomoztoc for a few years at most this would place the events between 1595-1609 noteing this would let some 45 years pase before the tayopa treasure trove list was signed and sealed .. that would sound about right to me ...even if there were spainish there in 1535 it dosent make good logic to place the event that far back ...

i would have to beleive the 1595-1609. we know that the preson that drew the codexs copyed or had fristhand wisdom of the tribes past and the whole culture even parts far away from chicomoztoc ...

so IMHO the codex were made between the years of 1595-1609 with the under standing that much of the codex was copied from a much old sorce ...

this also may tell us when the stones were made ...IMHO the prealta stone may have been made around the same time to misleed people ..as .a decoy

 

[the blindbowman]

i will piont out one other fact that came into the light why ihave been studing these codex .. one is notethe MC2 codex is all about chicomoztoc why some of the others are dirrected to given events.. the artest that made the MC2 had to have been from chicomoztoc it self . of the most likely would not know the inner workings of this tribe or the other related tribes ,, that tells me a shaman from cicomoztoc made these codex from a sorce . most likely the sorce was at chicomoztoc and could still be there ...

i have to beleive within a reasonable logic that the stones and the codex were at one time at the same location ...i should not say this , but i know for a fact they were...

lets look at the logic out line ..

the list was dated 1647 and seal , that means if i was right this could have all taken place within on priest life time .. if the priest was in his 30's around the time of the event he would been in his 60's 0r 70's when he returned to the Santa Ana chruch where one of the copies of the list where found , if thats the case it would make good logic that the priest at one time had been to santa ana chruch in the past ,and knew its location , if he was the sorce of the list . he could have very well been the sorce of the stones that i logically showed could have very well came from santa ana chruch as well .

billy crystal took the stones from santa ana , if he had not the list and the stone could have been found at the same location ...dateing with in a few years of each other ..from a signal sorce ...both showing one given location ....makes good logics or theory ..

logic tells me we are looking at both sides of the same event .. the codex is chicomoztoc's acount and the list & stones are the priest acount

 

[cactusjumper]

bb,

"I will piont out one other fact that came into the light why ihave been studing these codex .. One is notethe MC2 codex is all about chicomoztoc why some of the others are dirrected to given events.. the artest that made the MC2 had to have been from chicomoztoc it self . Of the most likely would not know the inner workings of this tribe or the other related tribes ,, that tells me a shaman from cicomoztoc made these codex from a sorce . Most likely the sorce was at chicomoztoc and could still be there ...

I have to believe within a reasonable logic that the stones and the codex were at one time at the same location ...I should not say this , but I know for a fact they were..."

I believe the parts in bold are untrue, but it's interesting to see your conclusions on these matters. The sites you provided are also interesting, but hardly anything to base an educated opinion on. Internet sites seldom give you the detailed facts needed to speak with anything approaching authority.

You might want to spend a little time with some more detailed sources. It may be that you have, but those are the sources you provided. Is there something else you have used to base your conclusions on?

Thanks,

Joe

 

[the blindbowman]

would it real matter ... you had a chance to get to know me , you never even tryed ....your actions made me stand off from knowing who you are and even stoped me from opening up to others at this site ,,,would it matter if i can prove site 4 is chicomoztoc ... if it is will it make me fit in any more then i do now .. will it change who i am or how i think or react to the world and nature around me . will it stop me from steping in and out of time any chance i get .. most like not .. so why ask .. you never cared before ..why would you if i answerd you ..?


i am not from your reality ,,, i never will be ..

.stay safe stay free

 

[the blindbowman]

throw the maps away , and just hike out there and look forget the legends and everything you think you know ,, taste your sense ,look and dream of how it was long ago ...remember beyond your self .let your sense guide your spirit ... it is truely a secerd place ...

 

[cactusjumper]

bb,

Thanks for your reply.

"will it stop me from steping in and out of time any chance i get"

Is that your other source? If so, that makes many of your posts easier to understand.

You are correct, in that I don't really care if you answer me. But you are wrong as to my meaning. Your answers seldom have much to do with the questions, so I an naturally curious as to how you come up with them.

Do you know why, IMHO, "Cave, City, and Eagle's Nest" is the single best source for information on "Mapa de Cuauhtinchan No. 2"? Just curious.....

Thanks again,

Joe

 

[the blindbowman]

bb,

Thanks for your reply.

"will it stop me from steping in and out of time any chance i get"

Is that your other source? If so, that makes many of your posts easier to understand.

You are correct, in that I don't really care if you answer me. But you are wrong as to my meaning. Your answers seldom have much to do with the questions, so I an naturally curious as to how you come up with them.

Do you know why, IMHO, "Cave, City, and Eagle's Nest" is the single best source for information on "Mapa de Cuauhtinchan No. 2"? Just curious.....

Thanks again,

Joe

no i dont under stand why you would want to research a site not related to chicomoztoc in any way other then being small vallage near others .. the simalarities are confuseing till you know where chicomoztoc really is then that all ends dirrectly .. there is no question that Cuauhtinchan is not related to the codex above it maybe related to other codex that have been destroyed ...poor translation ,a shame but true ....


this is in no way degradeing Cuauhtinchan but it is not the secerd site of chicomoztoc ...

I have ask scott wood for a heiring to present my research and findings , hopefully at the gethering on the frist day ,sometime in the early morning around 9:00 or so .then a sign in book and over sight of the event ,,, so as to get some of us togather to go to site 4 and see what we can find as a group .. anyone want to go on a treasure hunt ....? the discovery has been made , and it will stand as my discovery but i am not so big of an ego to under stand this site could use some ft on the ground to search it and see what we can discover at the site ...

i would hope Oro and CJ and Cub and many more could help . i can lay my cards on the table knowing once you see me present the reseach you would want to go to the site and take part in this histroical event ..we all dream and that is cool but being at a site where evidence is being found that supports this is the secerd site of chicomoztoc .. is a once in a life time event and i would like to share that with other treasure hunters and people interested in this type of event...

would any of you be willing to help another treasure hunter in need and have one of the best days in your life at the same time ...?

i have talked this out with my brother and we are in agreement ...with this type of event ..

 

[cactusjumper]

bb,

no i dont under stand why you would want to research a site not related to chicomoztoc in any way other then being small vallage near others .. the simalarities are confuseing till you know where chicomoztoc really is then that all ends dirrectly .. there is no question that Cuauhtinchan is not related to the codex above it maybe related to other codex that have been destroyed ...poor translation ,a shame but true ....


this is in no way degradeing Cuauhtinchan but it is not the secerd site of chicomoztoc ...

I have ask scott wood for a heiring to present my research and findings , hopefully at the gethering on the frist day ,sometime in the early morning around 9:00 or so .then a sign in book and over sight of the event ,,, so as to get some of us togather to go to site 4 and see what we can find as a group .. anyone want to go on a treasure hunt ....? the discovery has been made , and it will stand as my discovery but i am not so big of an ego to under stand this site could use some ft on the ground to search it and see what we can discover at the site ...

[i would hope Oro and CJ and Cub and many more could help . i can lay my cards on the table knowing once you see me present the reseach you would want to go to the site and take part in this histroical event ..we all dream and that is cool but being at a site where evidence is being found that supports this is the secerd site of chicomoztoc .. is a once in a life time event and i would like to share that with other treasure hunters and people interested in this type of event...

would any of you be willing to help another treasure hunter in need and have one of the best days in your life at the same time ...?

i have talked this out with my brother and we are in agreement ...with this type of event ..]
________________________________________________________

Your comment I highlighted in bold is demonstrably mistaken. I would suggest you do a little more research into the MC2.

Other than that, should you bring your suggestion of a hike into your site to the Rendezvous, I would imagine you will find some people willing to check it out. After all, it's not all that far from the Don's Camp.

Anyone is welcome to present their ideas and theories in camp. You should expect some hard questions, but I believe you will be able to say your piece. Hope you make it out in Oct.

Take care,

Joe Ribaudo

 

[the blindbowman]

"there is no question that Cuauhtinchan is not related to the codex above "


i was not guessing when i said that ....i have evidence that proves this is a true statement ...


you can not just say a site is chicomoztoc because it shares some simalarities

you have to have prove ,,, i Do !


i hope i can get back to the gathering ...


you have been out there 48 years did you see any UFO or little green men ,, me nether ...lol

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: the everything site ...?

Reply To This Topic #730 Posted Today at 03:45:13 PM Quote

"there is no question that Cuauhtinchan is not related to the codex above "

i was not guessing when i said that ....i have evidence that proves this is a true statement ...

you can not just say a site is chicomoztoc because it shares some simalarities

you have to have prove ,,, i Do !

i hope i can get back to the gathering ...

you have been out there 48 years did you see any UFO or little green men ,, me nether ...lol
_______________________________________________________________________

bb,

It's very hard to discuss this subject with you, because your understanding of the relationship between Cuauhtinchan, Chicomoztoc and the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan No. 2 is severely limited by the paucity and lack of depth, of the Internet sites where you have gleaned your knowledge of the topic.

There is a reason it was not called Mapa de Chicomoztoc. It is, in fact, all about Cuauhtinchan. There are many creation myths, including numerous places of emergence of the Chichimec, but there is only one (1) Cuauhtinchan.

The Chichimec ancestors emerged from the "Place of Seven Caves" (Chicomoztoc) in order to find a new homeland. That place they were seeking and eventually found, was Cuauhtinchan. The Mapa de Chicomoztoc tells the detailed story of their journey to that new homeland.

Because you are spiritually connected to MC2, you should be able to tell me what kind of ceremony is being shown in the upper left hand corner of the historical document.

Angeles Espinosa Yglesias provided the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan to David Carrasco and William Fash for an unprecedented, interdisciplinary study of the artifacts. The related fields of expertise included: History, art history, archaeoastronomy, ethnobotany, social anthropology, archaeology, and history of religions. The scholars, who were experts in these fields, were gathered from around the world.

These people were no lightweights, and had collectively studied the groundbreaking work on MC2 by people such as, Bente Simons, Luis Garcia, and Keiko Yoneda. There were very few previous scholarly studies that had been done on the documents.

The Native tlacuiloque who created this map, did so around two decades after the conquest. There were a number of reasons for creating it, but none of them seem to bear any resemblance to your thinking. The series of essays that can help you understand the Mapa de Chicomoztoc are not hidden from public view. Those who truly want to know the meaning of MC2, will seek them out.

You claim to have much "evidence" to prove your conclusions, but have never shown us anything approaching the threshold of proof. As soon as your permit is approved, or even considered, you may very well have the last laugh on everyone. I will be the first one to applaud that success. Right now, the only sound you will hear is that which is made by one hand clapping.

If you have anything approaching a rational argument on this subject, I would be happy to hear it.

Take care,

Joe Ribaudo