The Peralta Stone Maps, Real Maps to Lost Gold Mines or Cruel Hoax?

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

=Black Beard As a matter of fact the Doctor said after looking at my MRI and I qoute:"I see nothing at all in there"
I have no Brain to be damaged!
*********

HI Black beard, sigh, it is nice to know that I am not the only one lackng a brain. Let's form a club. As a matter of fact, I suspect that most Archaeologists and the public in general, believe that most T Hunters belong to our new club.

Tropical Tramp

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Oroblanco]

Hello friends,

gollum wrote:
instead of being a smarta$$

Wasn't trying to be a smart a$$, just presenting my own conclusions about the Peralta stones. I simply don't find the stones convincing. And yes, I have stared at and studied the photos of the stones til I got a head ache, they are tantalizing yes but just don't look "right" to me.

How do you know how well they were cleaned?

Indeed, I can repeat this question to you - yet you seem perfectly happy to accept the conclusions we HEAR of but have never actually seen, and this from experts who were not experts in the field of epigraphy. Do not take my word for this, go ahead and ask any expert in epigraphy OR geology (which is not entirely the same thing) if they can tell you a good estimate on the date of inscriptions in stone, AFTER they have been cleaned.

The collection of stones (with hundreds of fakes) in NC that I examined was not at the UNC university but at Meredith college. The first forty stones that turned up had numerous mis-spellings, some of which were not that easy to dismiss (as in the name "Dare" being spelled "Dial") but according to the NC State archaeologist, (the last word I received) all have proven to be frauds including those with no spelling errors. I have at least thirty photos here in storage somewhere, if I can find them I will post a few for curiosity sake. I am not aware of an inscription on a boulder still in-situ, perhaps this was discovered after my personal research (more than ten years ago) my whole reason for even bringing them up was that it is a good sized collection of fakes, and the one I posted from the James ossuary fooled many of the experts - it is not intended to be Spanish. Did you miss that point? Surely you didn't think I was suggesting that the James ossuary is Spanish or in any way related other than that it is a good FRAUD, one that was good enough to fool some of the best experts in the world! There are not a great number of photos of fakes on the internet, but you can do your own research and if you are serious enough about the Peralta stones to pursue them, I strongly suggest that you do study several known fakes as you will look at the Peralta stones with new eyes afterwards, perhaps a bit more critical. It is not easy to discern a fake! A mis-spelled word or name usually is a strong indicator of a fraud.

I don't particularly like being Mr Skeptic, and readily accept many a tall tale as gospel - when they can be backed up with some records, like Waltz, where we can trace Wells Fargo shipping receipts, assay records, etc or even the Breyfogle ledge, where ore samples have been circulating for over a hundred years. When we delve into the Peralta legend in the Superstitions it is murky waters indeed and no records of any gold production nor any ore seen nor handled by someone who can swear that he saw and handled it, at least not that I am aware of. Of course it could all be true, but it lacks a 'ring of truth' to my ear and has many seemingly illogical points, too many for me to accept. The earliest reference to any Peralta being involved with the Superstitions that I could find is in the tale of Bicknell, which dates to after the death of Jacob Waltz; from there we have frauds and fiction to filter through, assuming there is something solid in the core of the Peralta tale the trail is so cloudy that in my opinion it is not worth pursuing - not when there are other, less cloudy lost treasures and mines out there to search for. Why spend your limited time on such a questionable 'lead'? At least that is the way it strikes me. It is a gamble of course - like all treasure hunting - so to those who are willing to follow up on them I say good hunting!

Mike your logic in accepting the whole thing does take some faith, at a minimum on some points such as that there were Peraltas working secret gold mines in the Superstitions and that the other Peraltas would not go there but would choose to go off into the Bradshaws instead years later and so on; that the Peraltas would make stone maps instead of something easier to transport like leather, paper or wood, and that the stones would end up "stashed" all in one spot and so forth. Is it possible, yes, it is logical? I say no - it is not logical. You challenge me to make up my own copies of the Peralta stones (and now that is the story, that some of the stones circulatinr are later copies of originals!) yet why would I bother, when I can't accept them as genuine? I have tried carving in stone, and the type of stone makes a huge difference (soft sandstone or limestone is easiest) in how your work comes out. The very work involved alone makes the idea that they are genuine ridiculous to me - it would take hours of work, hours that would be more productive in mining out more gold! And you insist that no one makes fakes except for the sole purpose of PROFIT? Perhaps you should examine more fakes and frauds! Who can guess the reasons WHY someone makes fakes and frauds? Profit is ONE motive, fame or infamy is another, for the sake of LAUGHS is another! Look at the goofballs making up fake Bigfoot films like a cottage industry! None of them are making a PROFIT for their efforts and expense! However you lean more to accepting the Peralta stones as genuine, point to the tests (whatever tests they used) done that the FBI is said to have accepted as "proof" they are genuine, ignore the fact that the Tumlinsons actually used the stones as maps and found zilch; I see no possible reasoning that I can present to you that might change your mind or sway your opinion, especially when you made the statement (earlier) that the only way you would dismiss the stones as frauds would be if someone could prove that Reavis had made them. There is no evidence that the stones even existed in the time of Reavis, so how in heck could he have made them? Why wouldn't he have produced them in his court case? To me, that is not logical to think that Reavis would NOT produce them in court, had he any hand in making them up.

To my view, it seems a logical sequence of events that someone (with more time on their hands than some gold miners working under the threat of discovery by American troops or Apache warriors,) had some nice flat stones and decided to make up some interesting stone "maps" to go along with the tales of lost Peralta mines he or she had read about in Bicknell's tale or Storm's work. (It could even have been one of these exalted authors.) The faker makes up the stones, drives out along a fairly well used highway and picks a spot where there is good space to pull off the highway, perhaps a picnic spot, and then proceeds to bury them, leaving one sticking up partway so as to catch the eye of some innocent person. The lucky or unlucky finder then discovers the fakes and proceeds to search for the "treasure" they supposedly lead to, and everything takes off from there - to here. They are fun to research and ponder, but do they lead to treasure? For those using them as maps, I hope so!

Blackbeard - your conclusions and working out the codes are interesting! Ever work in cryptoanalysis/cryptography professionally? I think your abilities could prove profitable, if not wasted on what I believe are frauds (Peralta stones) - there are some codes that have never been cracked. Ever study the Bible Code?

Anyway it has been really interesting discussion, I sure wish you folks who are pursuing the Peralta stones as maps or codes etc the best of luck and hope you will let us know if you do find treasure by using them. It won't hurt my feelings to be proven wrong!

Roy ~ Oroblanco

"There comes a time in every rightly constructed boy's life when he has a raging desire to go somewhere and dig for hidden treasure." --Henry A. Kissinger

 

[gollum]

I'm in as well!

"WE'RE OFF TO SEE THE WIZARD. THE WONDERFUL WIZARD OF OZ. BECAUSE, BECAUSE, BECAUSE, BECAUSE, BECAAAAAAAAAUSE........
BECAUSE OF THE WONDERFUL THINGS HE DOES!"

Mike

 

[gollum]

Oh, and Oro,

The boulder that was still "in situ" I saw pics of (never went to the site), was in 1987 (about, I was stationed at Ft. Bragg at the time).

About the stone maps age; you must remember that the stones are made from sandstone. Not granite or marble. Plant roots could have easily worked their way into the soft rock. What might look "cleaned" to you and I might reveal organic matter under microscopic examination.

You're right. Epigraphy and Geology are very different. While an Epigrapher might loook for style, grammar, and syntax in carvings, a geologist might look for modern tool marks, type of rocks, area rocks are from, etc.

Like I said before, if the tests performed were good enough for the FBI and the SEC, I will go by that figure until proof is shown to the contrary! So far, you have not done that. Only a theory about Barry Storm, with only supposition to back it up. My side has a VERY reputable first hand witness, who got the final decision from FBI Agents directly.

Have you seen the new LDM Forum? Many of the guys from the old LDM Forum there, but they will not allow slanderous attacks. Site looks good.

http://www.lostdutchmanmines.com/index.html

Best,

Mike

 

[Oroblanco]

Hello again,
Thanks Mike for the tip, will check it out some time soon.

There is something about these Peralta stones that reminds me of the Beale codes. I don't see connections between them, just some parallels. Immense wealth, all you have to do is work out the secret...

Do you remember anything else about the NC boulder inscription? Was it modern (as in post-1492) or older than that? Was it related to the lost Roanoke colony, directly?

I repeat this, my choice of Storm as the creator is if we have to name a suspect - it is more likely this is the work of anonymous person(s) and a bit amateurish at that. A first-hand witness who saw and handled the stones? Or a first hand witness who saw/handled ore? It makes a difference.

To conclude the stones are frauds does not require any supposition - they are 'found' by Tumlinson, they are used to bilk investors, they end up in some museum - no record of them existing prior to discovery; no report of anything being found through the use of them. What do you need to assume to conclude they are bogus? A forger coming forward to claim the "honors"? Don't look for that anytime soon. Tell me one thing - if these Peralta stones are genuine, why didn't Tumlinsons find treasures/lost mines with them?

Roy ~ Oroblanco

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

=Oroblanco
I repeat this, my choice of Storm as the creator is if we have to name a suspect!
************
Nah, if it had been him he would have moved heaven and earth to be sure that they were found AND PUBLICIZED!

The only one that could have benifited under the circumstances, was Reavis and a plan gone wrong. Storm would normally just have created a series of duplicates, making sure this time that they were publicized..
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

. Tell me one thing - if these Peralta stones are genuine, why didn't Tumlinsons find treasures/lost mines with them?
************
Sheehs, it is patently obvious Roy, it is simply that Beth and I never were interested enough to help them, or anyone else...

Tropical Tramp

 

[gollum]

Hello again,
Thanks Mike for the tip, will check it out some time soon.

There is something about these Peralta stones that reminds me of the Beale codes. I don't see connections between them, just some parallels. Immense wealth, all you have to do is work out the secret...

Do you remember anything else about the NC boulder inscription? Was it modern (as in post-1492) or older than that? Was it related to the lost Roanoke colony, directly?

I repeat this, my choice of Storm as the creator is if we have to name a suspect - it is more likely this is the work of anonymous person(s) and a bit amateurish at that. A first-hand witness who saw and handled the stones? Or a first hand witness who saw/handled ore? It makes a difference.

To conclude the stones are frauds does not require any supposition - they are 'found' by Tumlinson, they are used to bilk investors, they end up in some museum - no record of them existing prior to discovery; no report of anything being found through the use of them. What do you need to assume to conclude they are bogus? A forger coming forward to claim the "honors"? Don't look for that anytime soon. Tell me one thing - if these Peralta stones are genuine, why didn't Tumlinsons find treasures/lost mines with them?

Roy ~ Oroblanco

Hey Oro,

I don't remember specifically what it said, except that it was the name of one of the missing colonists. There may have been a date, but I wouldn't swear to it. At the time, it was just an interesting curiosity.

Let's see.....anonymous persons, who spent countless hours manufacturing the stones, who NEVER came forward to claim them. Those anonymous pranksters, who NEVER were able to profit from them (after all that hard work). And amateurs, you say? Amateurs who know the Supers VERY well. All the mountains, valleys, rivers, passes, AND monuments correspond with places found there.

Why didn't the Tumlinsons find the treasure? Why didn't Mitchell find the treasure? Who knows? Besides the mispelled words, on the Priest Side of the stone, you see there is a mathematical equation, along with representations of two of the stones. On the lower Trail map Stone, there is another mathematical equation. If you made a set of maps to a hidden string of mines, or caches of treasure, just how easy would you make it for someone else to read? We have the trail. That part is easy. What we don't have is an exact starting point.

Since the entire trail is on the stones, there can be only two things encoded; The starting Point, and the Maps Orientation. With both of those, the rest is simple. With one of those, the rest is difficult. With neither of those (even having the trail), the rest is impossible (unless you are VERY lucky).

I will quote this part of your post:

To conclude the stones are frauds does not require any supposition - they are 'found' by Tumlinson, they are used to bilk investors, they end up in some museum - no record of them existing prior to discovery; no report of anything being found through the use of them. What do you need to assume to conclude they are bogus? A forger coming forward to claim the "honors"? Don't look for that anytime soon.

That statement is absolutely untrue! You obviously have either not read, or paid no attention to, what we know for certain about the Stone Maps History. The first three possessors kept their existence an absolute secret from 1949 until 1964. You use the term "bilk". Please show me ONE piece of evidence that ANY investor was "bilked" out of anything! That statement shows massive ignorance of the subject.

Neither one of the Tumlinsons ever "bilked" anybody out of anything. Clarence Mitchell was a longtime family friend of the Tumlinsons. Do you really think Travis' Widow would have sold fakes to a longtime family friend? The SEC charged MOEL Inc with selling unlicensed stocks. To use the term "bilk" necessitates FRAUD. No such charges were EVER filed against MOEL. That's why the SEC asked the FBI to verify the age of the stone maps. I have no doubt that if they could have proven them to be modern forgeries, they would have had a VERY good case for charging MOEL with fraud. If the investors felt they were "bilked", why is it that NONE of the investors filed claims against MOEL?

"No record of them existing prior to their discovery?" Do you realize how ridiculous that statement sounds? Was there a record of the Rosetta Stone before it's discovery? I would think most things that were originally meant to be secret, that over years, and revolutions, the secrets may have died with the maker.

Mike

 

[gollum]

Hey randy,

Yes. Bob Corbin. I would think that the word of the Attorney General of the State of Arizona, could be trusted.

Mike

 

[Oroblanco]

Greetings,

Gollum wrote
That statement shows massive ignorance of the subject.

Ooooh-kay fine, that is your conclusion so there is no point in my "contributing" anything further to the discussion, I will "bow" to your superior knowledge of the subject as you claim, and agree that you believe they are likely genuine. Others here already are convinced they are genuine. I will address some of the points you raised, not in a particular order and out of courtesy. First:

The first three possessors kept their existence an absolute secret from 1949 until 1964.

You have not proved the stones existed prior to their discovery in 1949, instead seeming to infer that I had said they didn't exist prior to their being made PUBLIC which is not the same thing.

And amateurs, you say? Amateurs who know the Supers VERY well. All the mountains, valleys, rivers, passes, AND monuments correspond with places found there.


Yes, actually any person who can copy a USGS topographic map, having never set foot in the Superstitions, can in fact draw up a map using the USGS map as a pattern and come up with very good accuracy. It does not require an expert. You disagree, I suppose.

Why didn't the Tumlinsons find the treasure? Why didn't Mitchell find the treasure? Who knows? Besides the mispelled words, on the Priest Side of the stone, you see there is a mathematical equation, along with representations of two of the stones. On the lower Trail map Stone, there is another mathematical equation. If you made a set of maps to a hidden string of mines, or caches of treasure, just how easy would you make it for someone else to read? We have the trail. That part is easy. What we don't have is an exact starting point.


Then if the Tumlinsons failed to find any treasure or lost mine, you obviously don't see that as a negative point to consider as to the maps - and you shouldn't need the exact starting point, since the maps are so accurate it should be an easy step to triangulate off of any of several of the known landmarks and work from there. You have had training in map use and land navigation, are you going to tell me that if you had a topo map that showed a trail and numerous landmarks but had lost a starting point, that you could not follow what remained of the map without needing the starting point? Of course my diminuitive knowledge of the subject prevents my understanding just why the Tumlinsons or any of the others who used them from finding the treasure or lost mines, all it requires is knowledge of the secret.

Please show me ONE piece of evidence that ANY investor was "bilked" out of anything!

Uh, you are aware that the SEC got involved because of investors complaints, right? You have already amassed tremendous knowledge of the subject, far beyond my total lack of knowledge as to these stones, so must know the reasons why the FBI got involved far better than I do. It wasn't because they were selling tickets to the FBI ball. Are you now stating that MOEL was not investigated by the SEC or FBI for fraud, and that all of the investors have received every dime they invested?

Neither one of the Tumlinsons ever "bilked" anybody out of anything.

Where did I say that the Tumlinsons or Mitchell "bilked"? You are not reading my post too carefully and have made a leap where there was none - I did not mention MOEL as I was trying to be brief in summing up the story, as my extra-long winded posts can be boring for the reader. Before you make such leaps, please re-read the post?

"No record of them existing prior to their discovery?" Do you realize how ridiculous that statement sounds? Was there a record of the Rosetta Stone before it's discovery?

You are aware that the Rosetta stone was not in any way a "map" or a "secret" - the only secret involved was in the ability to read Egyptian hieroglyphs. No one was able to read any of the Egyptian hieroglyphs prior to the discovery, however after it was deciphered, they did find that other such legal notices did exist but only in Egyptian. How ridiculous it sounds to say that no record of the stones exists? Why, because that statement is true and does not sit well with you when you have pretty much accepted them as genuine? The whole idea of stone maps, all found together, with an engraving style unlike that of other known Spanish and Mexican inscriptions, dated to the middle of the Mexican war, attributed to Peraltas when we have no record of any Peraltas in the Superstitions, yet I am sounding ridiculous. Must be my tremendous lack of knowledge that makes me sound so ridiculous to you.

Good luck and good hunting to you all.
Oroblanco

 

[rochha]

Billy,

Let me clear something up for you, I said there were several possible locations, the old Indian village to tumacacori being one of them. Which is located off hwy 19 near noglales. The San Cayatano High schools sits on most of that site. I am not convinced that inside camp loco is the old mission of tumacacori or the original site of one. I am convinced however that there is something in several locations hidden in that canyon. None of which I feel have anything to do with that particular story ( virgen of guadalupe mine ).

You seem to think that everyone is after your worthless idea's. Randy has not divulged anything to me nor will he ever nor will I ask. I am not interested in any your wild claims. I am not acting like I don't know anything about that canyon, don't know where that is coming from. But that is about par for the course with you. Coming up with $hit that makes absolutely no sense at all.

I see your posting your photo of the horse, why not tell everyone here what you have claimed about it like you did in other forum? Or are you waiting to see what everyones response will be? Which there hasn't been yet.

The only thing to laugh about here is you!

Rochha

 

[gollum]

Hey Oro,

About the "bilked" term. I read your post very well. You just don't seem to understand, that MOEL Inc, WAS Clarence O. Mitchell (along with a few others), so MOEL Inc and Clarence Mitchell can be used interchangably. So, when you state that MOEL "bilked" investors, you are also stating that Mitchell "bilked" investors.

You are mistaken about why the SEC investigation started. It had nothing to do with investor complaints (there were none). When the Life Magazine article about the Stone Maps came out in June 1964, THAT brought MOEL and Mitchell to the attention of the SEC. They checked and found that the shares MOEL was selling in itself were not licensed (registered) stocks.

I will quote from the actual SEC Litigation Release of 28 Sep 1964 (I promised not to publish the entire form yet):


"the defendants made use of the mails and facilities of interstate commerce in the offer and sale of securities, namely, capital stock of MOEL, Inc., and that no registration statement as to the securities was in effect or had been filed with the Commission as required by the Secutities Act of 1933"

About the Stone Maps themselves; I was mistaken (or I used the wrong phrase), about one thing I said. There are MUCH more than two things that could be encoded on the stones. What I should have said was, there are only two things that could be encoded about the TRAIL on the Stone Maps. They could have encoded amounts, types of treasure, to whom it belonged, etc.

See, you keep hanging on to that crutch about them being modern fakes. I can't understand why tests performed by an accredited University of California Geology Dept. Head (Professor Dana), that were accepted by both the FBI and the SEC (two Federal Agencies), aren't acceptable to you? If there would have been any doubt as to veracity of the tests, or the testing facility, the SEC would have had the testing done elsewhere! Didn't happen!

Following old hand drawn maps is not that easy. I stated this on another forum, that the starting point couls be anywhere from Peralta Canyon down to Whitlow Canyon (based on the starting point being where the Cross Stone was found pictured on the lower trail stone).

Best,

Mike

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

TIME OUT GENTLEMEN, GO TO THE SHOWERS AND COOL OFF, THEN RETURN. WE HAVE LOTS TO DISCUSS STILL, BUT COURTEOUSLY.

I PERSONALLY WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE TO HEAR ALL SIDES, EVEN IF YER ALL WRONG.

Furthermore, probably none of us will phyically go into the field, to follow up the data for the mines. HEHEHEHEH.

RIGHT BETH?

TROPICAL TRAMP

 

[gollum]

Now BlackBeard, Billy, Heidi, Ronnie (or whatever alias you happen to be using today),

I had tried to be nice about this, but since you seem to have a hard on for me, I'll not be so polite. I can understand why you must really dislike me, since I proved you to be nothing more than a lying a$$ on another forum, where you slandered somebody using a story that was about 100% LIE! You didn't figure on anybody knowing the person (Gary Oliver), whose name you used. When I emailed him, and asked about what you said he stated that everything you said was BS!

Even though you erased your slanderous statements from the other forum (out of sheer embarrassment of being found to be a liar), since I quoted you, I still have what you said:

according to my source, there was another party involved that told this Charlie person where to dig from the Cross at the Church of the Old Vista of Tumacacori right in front of the landfill at Calabasas you go 82 varas northeast 45 degree's and dig. It's about thirty feet from the freeway at I-19. The old Vista of Tumacacori's location is recorded in the Arizona State Museum. They apparently did an Archaeological dig there and you can still see the old trenches and make out where the Vista Church was at.

Anybody who knows anything about the Tumacacori Treasure knows that it has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the church cross! It is the natural cross in the cliff face at Camp Loco (three miles West of highway 19):

You want to try and argue that crap with me again? I hammered you about it before, and I'll do it again here (and embarrass you once again)!

Don't believe that the ORIGINAL mission sites are somewhere West of where they currently are? I believe it was Buddy who found the original San Xavier del Bac Mission site (was it that or Guevavi, I don't remember). I'll say it here as well, the ESTANCIAS (asistencias) for the missions were right there on the Santa Cruz River. That's where they raised the crops and cattle to sell to the Spanish. The original mission site was right by the mines.

Concerning me telling Rochha about how Camp Loco got it's name. There are tons of people who don't know the real story (you included, hell, you don't even know the real treasure story). Rochha thought that Mrs Shipley went crazy there, and that was how it got the name.

You say you are going to do something for us, why don't you ask one of the Park Rangers about the Tumacacori Treasure? They'll tell you that Tumacacori Mission had no mines, and there never was any treasure. They'll tell you that it is an interesting story, but not based in fact. Would you take anything they tell you as gospel? I wouldn't, and neither would anyone else who knows the history of the area! If you really want to do something for us, why don't you wait until the first part of next month, and go down there to Camp Loco when Gary Oliver is there. Talk to him. He has given the last twenty-five years of his life (since about 1979) to researching, hiking, and digging out that spot. I doubt anybody knows more about it than he does. But, I guess you won't do that because you are just happy to spew your BS, without having any facts to back up your lies.

A LAUGH? Do you really want a laugh? You should reread your post about the "Golden Bowl of the Silver Backbone!" That's hilarious!

You seem to make a big deal about Randy (djui5) joining the wrong side! Let's see, whose side would I take:

A. A person who won't give his real name, who uses a ton of aliases, who uses stories that are complete lies to try and slander somebody, who doesn't know dick about stories he professes to be knowledgeable about.

or

B. People who give their names (My name and address is free to anyone who asks for it), people who have proven their integrity (I have never lied or ENHANCED a story to fit my wants), someone not given to flights of fancy (Golden Bowl of the Silver Backbone).

The decision would be pretty easy for me.

Best,

Mike

 

[rochha]

Billy,

Dont know what your point here is, why dont you just provide the link so everyone can see for themselves.

http://www.lostdutchmanmines.com/forum/showthread.php?t=9

Rochha

 

[gollum]

Hey,

Who are you calling Brian? Me or Rochha? You tried that looney crap on the other forum as well. I only use two names anywhere, Gollum (preferred), and Mike McChesney my real name (where Gollum is not available).

Is what Rochha did as much of a felony as Pretending to be a Federal Marshall? I saved your post where you were claiming that! Sound familiar, "I'll be the one wearing the Federal Marshall's Badge!" I think that was EXACTLY what you stated.

Let's look at some other lies stated by you:

Is that Better? I know Gray Oliver But it isn't him I learned to Treasure Hunt from. I will show you whom.
BB

That quote can be found at:
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,41291.msg295187.html#msg295187

You might know who he is, but you definitely don't know him! That's evidenced by your lies about his statements on the other LDM Forum

The area's I haven't opened up yet are the Antique Library and the Virgin of Guadalupe's main Vault. I think the library contains the location of the Vaults. I've found most of the other areas and locators on the map. The district is large and covers a vast land tract of old played out Spanish and Aztec Mines. Yes it is near Tumacacori but most have looked in that immediate area with no results. I was able to locate the master Map far from that area carved in rock and spent nine months reversing all the rock maps from that new location. The end result. A Gold Mining Claim.

That quote can be found at:
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,41291.msg294484.html#msg294484

Based on that statement, you have been digging at the site. Gary Oliver has had claim there since 1986. Are you saying that you have been digging on someone else's claim? Where is your gold mine claim? From the sound of the post, it would have to be around Camp Loco. That's just not possible!

Look at BlackBeard's first ten posts:

He signs them (and I quote):
1. Legend Hunter
2. Blackbeard
3. WW (is that Wyatt Westwood)
4. Bill
5. Wyatt
6. Blackbeard
7. Blackbeard
8. Billy Blackbeard

Just who are you? You should just sign off OWM (obsessed with Masons).

Best,

Mike

 

[gollum]

ORO, REALD, all,

I'm sorry for this mess and I'll stop posting the poo for now so you guys can go on talking about the important things on here. I have some research and reporting to do so I'll be tied up for a wee little bit. Have to make a trip with an official to show the site to. They told me this. For evidence.

Anyway, go on talking and we can discuss things like normal since it's suddenly quiet on here.

I apologize for the harsh language and dirty banter.

BB​

I'm quoting this, so you can't delete it after you are proven to be lying again, like you tried on the other LDM Forum!

Mike

 

[Oroblanco]

Hello friends,
I apologize for having stirred this mess up. We all have common interests, just different ideas about some lost treasures and artifacts. I posted that I would not discuss the matter any further with my total lack of knowledge of the subject but just can't let it go.

Those Peralta stones seem to be a good source of friction, perhaps that was part of the idea when they were made. If we ignore all the information about them (for and against) and just look at them, each person can decide for him/herself whether they are genuine or not. It says a lot (to me) that so many people who profess so much interest in them and faith in their validity are not willing to try using them as maps, a basis for a boots-on-the-ground search. I have problems with them, however they have quite a 'draw' or 'tug' on people like us, treasure hunters all seem to have a commonality in that we are automatically attracted to unsolved mysteries especially when connected to treasures or legends of treasures.

I have personally gone hunting for the lost Dutchman mine in the Superstitions and became convinced there were not more than two mines in that whole area, that is mines that existed 1890 or before, there are literally dozens and dozens of old prospects, short tunnels, short shafts etc that the later Dutch-hunters dug, sunk and blasted in the years AFTER 1891, these are often "found" today which can be exciting for the finder until they discover that what they found has not enough gold to make it worth bothering with. My conclusion that there cannot be more than two lost mines in the Superstitions almost certainly causes a bias in every other report I hear of, such as the Peralta legends (which at one time I believed as true) or these Peralta stones. So speaking personally, it does not matter to me if the stones are genuine or not, I do not have enough faith in them to make a field trip using them as a basis for a search. Some of the supporters of the Peralta stones seem pretty hesitant to try using them as maps too, which says volumes to me. Just looking at the style of writing, it is notice-ably different from other Spanish and Mexican inscriptions; that does not automatically make them frauds, to me it raises some red flags though. Gollum and others accept the examination by Prof Dana as solid proof the stones are genuine, despite the fact that the very best experts in the world have been fooled by stone inscriptions (and recently too) and the fact that the stones were cleaned before they were examined; the statement of (admittedly Jesuit, as if that means his opinion is worthless when there is nothing Jesuit involved here with the Peralta stones) Father Polzer that he could readily see modern tool marks on the stones you dismiss and ignore. Bob Corbin supports the stones as genuine so that is readily accepted and brought up repeatedly, as if Corbin is 'the' authority on all things related to Treasure hunting (not to cast aspersions on Corbin, he seems like a pretty nice fellow and does have expertise) yet when I mentioned the fact that Tom Kollenborn holds the opposite opinion (publicly, as he has on his web site) Mike does not believe me, writes to Tom privately as if I am making it up etc. No, sorry but not everyone believes the Peralta stones are anything but frauds, and the fact that many of the 'believers' won't go into the field using the stones as maps says they don't believe in them enough to use them, to me.

As to MOEL, please provide some accounting of exactly how much of the investors money was eventually returned to them? I read it a couple of weeks ago and can't recall the exact figure, but the investors did not get their money back, at least not ALL of it, which by at least one definition would allow a person to say they were "bilked" of their investment money without fear of a slander lawsuit. Of course all investments have some risk, so it can be said that their investment simply didn't pay off - I have lost money in currency exchange futures, and would say that I was "bilked" of my investment, though I did end up getting some return - exactly twenty five cents per thousand dollars invested. So I stand by my statement that MOEL (and Mitchell, which is not precisely saying the same thing, unless Mitchell's home, car, personal bank accounts etc were all seized and liquidated to refund some of the investors money) had "bilked" the investors of their money.

Based only on the numerous posts here and elsewhere, it is readily apparent that the Peralta stones are (in a way) like an article of faith; once a person has been swayed to the view that they are real, that pro-belief view colors everything about the stones - anything negative is dismissed and attacked, anything positive is absolute proof and need not be questioned further. The reverse is also true, once a person has become convinced they are frauds, all argument gets that bias. We have covered this before, but no matter how much we discuss or argue about the Peralta stones, the believers are going to continue to believe, the non-believers are going to continue to dis-believe. Speaking only for myself, unless someone can use those maps and actually FIND a lost treasure or lost mine thereby, I stand by the conclusion they are frauds.

Blackbeard, by any chance have you ever had opportunity to fly over the Tumacacori area in one of the ultra-light aircraft or one of those 'powered' parachutes? If I could afford it, I would do that myself. I found PARTS of an old carreta track, that led 'toward' the mission, but standing on the ground the old ox cart track just disappears into the soil, and worse, once you try to follow it WEST, you get part way up the first hill W of the interstate, and it is totally washed away. I found two more sections of the track west of there, and tried studying the area by satellite photos, but that was no help. My thinking is that if a person could fly LOW there, say less than 500 feet or so above the ground, it might be possible to find enough of the old wheel ruts to try to follow them to the mines and mining camps. I won't say what info I do have (most anyone could find it with a little research) but two key landmark points I have found tell me that it IS possible to locate several of those 'famous' lost mines. You fellows are quite correct that some of the missions WERE re-located for various reasons (as were some of the presidios, like the Terranate presidio I am fighting with BLM about right now) and original locations are not always known.

Funny that Guevavi was mentioned, been there too and it is a good place for a treasure hunter to get arrested. I don't know why everything has to be made into some kind of national park or national monument anymore. Especially concerning these old missions and Spanish forts, yes some are historically significant, but NOT ALL of them! It has become a bit of a race for us treasure hunters to find any Spanish colonial or Mexican remains that we might be able to pursue our interest (detecting etc) before the eco-Nazis find out about it and get it declared some kind of "national monument" and lock us out forever. It behooves us NOT to post publicly any information about the correct locations of old missions, forts etc and I know it is already too late but please my friends don't post any more information about the locations publicly where some protectionist jerks might find it (and yes there are some that read our posts here!) and then lobby for the Feds or state to get it locked up. Let us share the info alright but keep it in private messages where the jerks can't read it? At least not without some involved snooping on their part.

I got to go out and do some prospecting yesterday, it is good for the soul of a prospector to do some digging. No spectacular finds to report, but did find some interesting ground that looks promising. Have some concentrates to pan out tomorrow too, which will tell me if I should go back to that spot. I think a body ought to use all the clues, maps etc they can to hunt down these lost mines, but not to neglect good old prospecting work as well - after all remember that is how those old mines were found in the first place, in almost every case.

Oroblanco

“For nothing hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain without being uncovered.” Gospel of Thomas, 11

 

[gollum]

Hey Roy,

You didn't stir this mess up. It was stirred up a looooooooooooooong time ago. If you mean this stuff with Blackbeard, it started on the other LDM Forum. He seemed to have a problem with Rochha, that went back a ways. I tend to stay out of those personal squabbles, but he (blackbeard) made some statements regarding Gary Oliver and the Tumacacori area that slandered Roccha, that I knew were not true. I don't know Rochha from a hole in the ground, but won't abide a liar. When I called him on it, he tried to change the subject, and altered his story somewhat. I contacted Gary, and asked him about what BB had stated. He said it wasn't true. BB came back with another altered statement. I emailed Gary again, and this time he said the guy's (BB's) story is total BS.

I would offer you the opportunity to go there and see the posts for yourself, but BlackBeard/Ronnie Kelso/Billy/Wyatt/WyattWestwood/Jan/Heidi/whatever deleted all his posts. You can still see my posts (with pictures), and some of the main lies he posted (because I quoted him).

He claimed to know the story of the treasure (not true), and on this forum, he also claimed to know Gary Oliver (also untrue). I just hate liars!

Now, back to the stone maps. As far as Father Polzer is concerned, I know that he was an eminent historian. He was very knowledgeable. He also firmly stated that the Jesuits NEVER mined anything. I think Tayopa can attest to that. He knew him personally. I believe that any statements made by Father Polzer regarding anything that might have to do with Jesuit Mining interests in Primeria Alta is suspect. I defer to Tayopa on that belief.

Professor Dana had no agenda in the matter. He was not a treasure hunter. He had no interest in the Stone Maps, other than the tests he ran on them.

You are absolutely wrong about people who believe in them don't ever go out and try using them as maps. People do it all the time. Travis Tumlinson did it. His brother and Gene Davis did it. Mitchell did it. Several people on the other LDM forum have done it. It's not a question as to if you can use them for a map of the area. It's all about the starting point. There is a several mile stretch that could be used. As they are basically hand drawn maps, they are not TOPO accurate, the wrong starting point can put you (still following the trail), on the wrong course. That's where I believe the mathematical equations come in. If you had the key to the equations, I think it would give you the starting point. From there, the trail map could be easily followed.

The phrase you should have used was "and became convinced there were not more than two mines (still hidden) in that whole area, that is mines that existed 1890 or before." The reason I say this is that many of the miners in the late 1800s and early 1900s found and reopened older Mexican and Spanish Mines out there, and worked them until they played out. That has always been a good sign for prospectors. Find an old sealed mineshaft. They were only sealed if there was something left inside.

Yes, some of the best experts in the world have been fooled recently by old stone carvings (you used the James Ossuary as an example). Most of the time they were fooled by a dead language. When a language hasn't been spoken in two thousand years, it's kind of hard to know many of the details about it.

As to MOEL, please provide some accounting of exactly how much of the investors money was eventually returned to them? I read it a couple of weeks ago and can't recall the exact figure, but the investors did not get their money back, at least not ALL of it, which by at least one definition would allow a person to say they were "bilked" of their investment money without fear of a slander lawsuit. Of course all investments have some risk, so it can be said that their investment simply didn't pay off - I have lost money in currency exchange futures, and would say that I was "bilked" of my investment, though I did end up getting some return - exactly twenty five cents per thousand dollars invested. So I stand by my statement that MOEL (and Mitchell, which is not precisely saying the same thing, unless Mitchell's home, car, personal bank accounts etc were all seized and liquidated to refund some of the investors money) had "bilked" the investors of their money.

If you recall, I told you how much it was. Either $60K or $80K. It had nothing to do with being bilked. They sold unregistered stock in MOEL. They had to return the stock they sold. Not one investor ever registered a complaint about them. MOEL was actually incorporated on 12 December 1960 (I have a copy of the letter of incorporation in front of me). A year before buying the stone maps from Alleen Tumlinson. Mitchell did buy the stones for the company, but the company was selling stock before they had the stones. MOEL stood for Mining, Oil, Exploration, and Leasing. Their purpose was to buy land, and lease it to oil and mining companies. They sold stock to raise money to buy land in oil and mineral rich parts of the country. The stones just came in as an aside in 1961, after Travis Tumlinson's death.

I didn't email Tom Kollenborn because I thought you were lying. I went to the website and saw that what you said was true. In a PM, I was told that what some people say in public, is MUCH different than what they believe in private (for their own personal reasons). I was told this by someone who knows Tom Kollenborn personally. I just wanted to know what he would say to me.

Bob Corbin is not an expert on the stones (at least not any more of an expert as some of the people I have talked to and corresponded with since this started. I never claimed that he was. What I said is that if he said that he saw the Stone Maps in the possession of the FBI at the US Attorney's Office in Phoenix, Az, and they told him that it was their belief that the stones were at least 100 years old (in 1964), that I believe that part of the story. And if the FBI believed it, and the SEC believed it, that it was good enough to use in a court of law, that it was good enough for me.

What you said about believers and disbelievers is not true (at least in my case). If you read the first page of posts, I was on the fence about them being authentic. My thoughts were that (based on the facts of the known history of the stones), I believed them to be either authentic, or part of the Peralta-Reavis Land Grant Fraud. A preponderance of the evidence shows that they were at least 100 years old in 1964.

One thing I have to apologize for. Since I started in on this obsession, I have gotten a lot of private information, pictures, copies of documents. The greatest majority of them were given in confidence, and I will honor that promise. I have also scoured other Forums. Spoken to people who live in that area. Corrersponded with representatives of various Government and Private Institutions. Many things that I know to be true for various reasons, I assume that everybody knows. That is not true. When I sit back, and think what I thought was true two months ago, compared to what I know to be true now, I have to keep in mind that you haven't been the recipient of much of this stuff I have been. So, when I read what you consider evidence of fakery, that I know not to be true, I tend to get frustrated. So, sorry if I come off sounding angry at times.

I know this is no way for an argument to go, but about some things (that I know for certain, but can't say publicly), you'll just have to take my word. If I don't know, or if trhe evidence is shaky, I'll say so, but there are many things that I have written evidence of, that I can't post.

One thing I will mention (that I just saw while typing this), are the release dates of the SEC Litigation Releases against MOEL Inc. The initial release is September 28th, 1964. It states that: "Judge Craig set the hearing on the Commission's motion for preliminary injunction for September 30th, 1964."

The release regarding the judgement is dated October 1st, 1964. That tells you that the entire matter was settled inj one day of court, and the whole mess was over. Anything serious would have been litigated for quite a while. I even have a VERY good source that told me NO money was returned to any investors. Nobody asked for it back, and nobody complained. About that, I don't know for certain. What I have seen in print is wrong about many things. The statement about MOEL returning money may not be true either.

Best,

Mike

 

[Seventytwo]

Has anyone ever looked at the Don stone like this before?
Use the word Don as a title and not a name. After all a Don is a title that is used by a man of power.
Don is also the name of a club that formed in the 1930's that promots the Superstition mountains.
Yet the name is engraved on a stone that was found in the 1950's by a man on vacation.
Go Fish!

 

[Oroblanco]

Hello again,
Mike, you seem to have again mis-read my post, I guess I should expect this. Lets look at your statement:

You are absolutely wrong about people who believe in them don't ever go out and try using them as maps.

Now here is what I posted:
Some of the supporters of the Peralta stones seem pretty hesitant to try using them as maps too, which says volumes to me.

And:

...the fact that many of the 'believers' won't go into the field using the stones as maps says they don't believe in them enough to use them, to me.

If you noticed (apparently not) - nowhere did I make a statement that NONE of those who believe in the stones ever go out and use them to make searches. “Absolutely wrong”? Sweeping statement and incorrect. The fact that Tumlinsons and all those who have also tried and failed to find any kind of treasure or lost mines apparently doesn't matter to those who believe in the stones. If any of them ever did have any success, it is a well-kept secret.

I beg to differ that I did indeed stir up the mess, HERE anyway - I began this thread in order to discuss their validity, didn't wish to start posting negative comments in the other thread which already existed. I certainly didn't begin the debate about the stones (everywhere) it seems logical that even the Tumlinsons must have had some debate among family members.

Your contention that the experts are usually fooled with 'dead languages' is not accurate, Hebrew is not a dead language; (the language on the most recent frauds, the James ossuary and King Solomon’s tablet) styles of writing and the way things are said do change over the centuries (boy friends, ever try to read Beowulf in the original Old English? Ye gads! Those old King James bibles “thee” and “thou” are EASY compared to that Old English!) I don't know of any actual study which compiled the numbers of fakes which fooled the experts, or the genuine inscriptions which were first believed to be frauds (like the Paraiba stone, first thought to be fraudulent but later shown to have been genuine - though there are experts who maintain the position that it is fraudulent if for no other reason than we cannot have had Phoenicians in Brazil) but of the inscriptions I have studied which were frauds, (more than I would care to list here!) a minority are in dead languages. One that comes to mind is the Cardiff Giant, which supposedly was "covered" with Phoenician writing, but on examination ALL of the "writing" was simply gouge marks left by the forger's chisel. Even Phoenician isn't truly a "dead" language, for Maltese is the descendant of Punic and retains many Phoenician words.

Professor Dana had no agenda in the matter. He was not a treasure hunter. He had no interest in the Stone Maps, other than the tests he ran on them.


I have NOT stated any such accusations against professor Dana, I don't know the man, and have never said that he had any "agenda" in examining the stones whatsoever. We don't know what 'tests' he might have done, it is quite possible he simply examined the stones carefully. I have NOT made a statement that professor Dana is utterly in-correct, what I have said (repeatedly) is that since the stones were cleaned before he examined them, it is NOT possible to obtain a date as to when the inscription was done.

Now let me qualify my flippant dismissal of professor Dana's "tests" (or perhaps "examination" would be more correct?) - the fact that the stones were cleaned would not remove tool marks; any attempt to 'date' the stones after having been cleaned is hopeless, without some outside evidence like coins, pottery, organic remains etc. I don't see how you can accept any statement about how old the stones are, AFTER they are cleaned and WITHOUT any outside evidence (coins, pottery etc) that CAN be accurately dated, or at least dated with some degree of confidence. I am repeating myself here but it is NOT possible to get any kind of accurate date estimate from a CLEANED stone. If you think I am fooling about this, look it up; my word means nothing to you anyway so I suggest that you do so, especially if you are leaning toward a position that the stones are genuine but have not concluded (and closed mind to any further debate) as it is important. There are new methods of testing (uranium/thorium test for example, oxygen isotope is another) that were NOT available even a few years ago, so we know that no matter how competent professor Dana was, the tests were not known yet because they had not been invented. There was Carbon-14 testing, which at that time required a relatively large sample of organics to test (modern methods use incredibly tiny amounts - if ANY rootlets or organics remain on the Peralta stones it might be possible to test today using these advanced methods) however since the stones were in fact cleaned before he examined them, it seems unlikely that he was able to run any Carbon-14 tests on them.

I do know that microscopic exams of tool marks is not a part of the education curriculum for most geologists. Dana may have had some training in the field of epigraphy (which is not solely based on the writing styles) we simply don't know.

I believe that any statements made by Father Polzer regarding anything that might have to do with Jesuit Mining interests in Primeria Alta is suspect.

Mike you have repeatedly dismissed the statements of Father Polzer concerning the Peralta stones as if he were making bald-faced lies. You have again implied that Father Polzer had a Jesuit-based bias against the Peralta stones, (which is impossible to prove one way or the other) however I repeat this again - there are NO known, documented, Jesuit operations anywhere in the Superstition mountains, in fact even the date on the Peralta stones (1847) is EIGHTY YEARS after ALL Jesuits had left Spanish possessions in the Americas. There is NO reason for any Jesuit priest to have ANY bias toward (or against) the Peralta stones, as there is not even a tradition of any Jesuit operations or explorations in the Superstitions. Your casting of Father Polzer as a biased, Jesuit priest protecting Jesuit mines in the Superstitions is simply without foundation. If the stones were related to, say (for example) the Tumacacori mountains, and appeared to date to 1767 or thereabouts, we could hold a suspicion about what a Jesuit priest might say about them - however we are talking about stones which purport to be from the Peraltas, date to eighty years AFTER the last Jesuits were GONE from Arizona, and to an area where Jesuits NEVER apparently even penetrated. You may continue to dismiss Father Polzer's opinion that they were modern frauds, but at least stop implying that he is a liar trying to protect some Jesuitic treasure/mines when there are and were NONE in the Superstitions. Certainly not in 1847!

The fact that Polzer may have stated there were no Jesuits mining, may in fact be correct! Most mining work was done by Indios, mestizos and Spaniards; many of the "Jesuit mines" as we call them today were not actually OWNED nor operated by Jesuits, just that these mines were associated with local Jesuit missions nearby. Then too, assuming that SOME mines were owned and operated by Jesuit priests, it is possible that this fact was not transmitted to the leaders of the church; Father Polzer may have known only what is recorded, and if these mines were not recorded in the Jesuits' archives he would not have learned of them. Even the existing silver bars with the name "Kino" on them, may NOT have been from a mine OWNED or operated by Kino, the eminent explorer Father Kino might have simply processed silver brought to his church. So your assumption that he is a liar, based on his saying there were no Jesuit mines (which point the Jesuit church maintains today, BTW, read Conrotto) is being unfair. Your other statement:
A preponderance of the evidence shows that they were at least 100 years old in 1964.
is your opinion, as you weigh the evidence. A preponderance? Hmm.

I just hate liars!

Gee how do you feel about our president? Sorry about that, (attempt at levity) really that belongs in politicks! You know that MANY prospectors and treasure hunters, like fishermen, are known to tell a tall tale or pull a leg now and then – I don’t hate a fellow who is spinning a yarn, so long as he is not hurting anyone with it.

It's not a question as to if you can use them for a map of the area. It's all about the starting point.

I beg to differ, it is all about ENDING points, the spots where the “X” is supposed to be secreted, the fact that many landmarks are identifiable should allow a person who is competent with maps to be able to pick up the trail at any point past the start point, so long as the landmarks can be pinned to your “new” starting point.

It had nothing to do with being bilked.

Hmm, the investors put up money, MOEL dissolved, investors got….? If they did not get all or at least most of their investment back, that fits with the definition of “bilked”. You may say no, but in my opinion, the investors were in fact ‘bilked’ of their investments.

The reason I say this is that many of the miners in the late 1800s and early 1900s found and reopened older Mexican and Spanish Mines out there, and worked them until they played out.

Found and re-opened old Mexican or Spanish mines in the Superstitions? Who and when? Can you document this statement? Something OTHER than the Peralta legends, which are NOT documented prior to 1891. (A side note here but the US Bureau of Mines study of the Superstitions stated there is no evidence of any mining activity in the Superstitions that can be traced before 1872; the old arrastras do not prove the existence of mines close by; read US Bureau of Mines Mineral Land Assessment MLA 136-82; the only mine with recorded gold production other than Jacob Waltz is the Palmer mine, which was discovered about 1890.)

Oroblanco