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

[Carl995]

Kellyco does not have a good track record with me as the LRLs that they sold/marketed over the years. Check out Carl's web page. Geotech - Technology for Treasure Hunting
Now instead of selling LRL's they are selling something that is supposed to be like ground penetrating radar? AKA the Walking Stick/Cane? powered by 2 AA batteries? 30 feet depth? IMO I don't think so. I could be wrong as I have not a EE degree, but 44 years of computer repair and electronics back ground. Worked with many EE's during my life and was accepted by them as competent in electronics, but not programing. I could read code but not able to write it for a project.

I read the manual, it seams like a glorified pinpointer, Bluetooth to a cell phone. I just wanted to add it would be nice to have a visual, but I read in a bunch of areas in the manual to push the reset. If your using it in an area of a iron-ore outcrop, it will give blotches all over the screen. So I don't think it would be usable in those type areas.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[wrmickel1]

I use only the Rangertell and recommend it. Yeah, Yeah I know your gonna bring up a lot of nagitive material on it.
But I guess if I was computation and can sell you one for 10 20 thousand I'd post crap to.

But anyway I've found more with this unit then all the detectors I've owned combined, it works. And the largest gold fine in Colorado was found with one.

Its good its cheap and it works.

wrmickel1

 

[Old]

>>>>If the trail stones are recreations, then why bother with the pockmarks on the back of the LTS? Seems to me to be too laborious an endeavor. <<<<



Really Are you truly making a comparison of apples to apples Or a comparison of apples to a replicated persimmon. Not being argumentative. They just don't have that much in common. Same base message, but with a vastly different background and texture. Not even going to get into the pre-Mitchell era.

 

[azdave35]

I use only the Rangertell and recommend it. Yeah, Yeah I know your gonna bring up a lot of nagitive material on it.
But I guess if I was computation and can sell you one for 10 20 thousand I'd post crap to.

But anyway I've found more with this unit then all the detectors I've owned combined, it works. And the largest gold fine in Colorado was found with one.

Its good its cheap and it works.

wrmickel1

if you ever had one of those things apart and knew what was in them...you wouldn't brag about them

 

[wrmickel1]

It's not what's in side, it's what they find. It'll put you in a nugget patch in a stream bed or knock a coin or ring many feet from where your standing. Now I get it there's not much to them but they work real well. I believe the bullion found in Colorado by aTreasure Hunter by the name of Walsh I think, He told me personally he found it with one.

I get what your saying. They used to make a very small 1 dollar gold piece, There small golden dots and I've found them a few times over the years.

But I will stand by my first post. They Work

wrmickel1

 

[wrmickel1]

Dave

I'm gonna hit the Diamond State Park in Arkansas in February or so.
I'll post my finds sometime after, it's rare to find even one. I'll find 3 or more with it before I leave.
Thats how sure I'am with it.

wrmickel1

 

[azdave35]

Dave

I'm gonna hit the Diamond State Park in Arkansas in February or so.
I'll post my finds sometime after, it's rare to find even one. I'll find 3 or more with it before I leave.
Thats how sure I'am with it.

wrmickel1

in the 80's and 90's we bought alot of different lrl's (long range locators)...the thomas electroscope...the electrasearch..omnitron..omni rangemaster..we took all of them apart and figured out what they were...my partner at the time was an electronics guy...we even manufactured and sold one for a while called the omnitron noah....of all the ones we took apart the biggest pile of excrement by far was the ranger tell unit...it was just a box with a scientific calculator on top..the calculator wasn't even hooked up to the box...carl moreland did an expose on it:

[h=2]http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/pages/common/index.pl?page=lrl&file=reports/examiner/index.dat[/h]

 

[coazon de oro]

>>>>If the trail stones are recreations, then why bother with the pockmarks on the back of the LTS? Seems to me to be too laborious an endeavor. <<<<



Really Are you truly making a comparison of apples to apples Or a comparison of apples to a replicated persimmon. Not being argumentative. They just don't have that much in common. Same base message, but with a vastly different background and texture. Not even going to get into the pre-Mitchell era.

View attachment 1501763

Howdy Lynda,

That is the same stone, the museum display just happens to be upside down because it is showing the trail on the other side. They are also captured in differnt light so the shadows make small very differences.

Homar

 

[wrmickel1]

in the 80's and 90's we bought alot of different lrl's (long range locators)...the thomas electroscope...the electrasearch..omnitron..omni rangemaster..we took all of them apart and figured out what they were...my partner at the time was an electronics guy...we even manufactured and sold one for a while called the omnitron noah....of all the ones we took apart the biggest pile of excrement by far was the ranger tell unit...it was just a box with a scientific calculator on top..the calculator wasn't even hooked up to the box...carl moreland did an expose on it:

Geotech - Technology for Treasure Hunting

Uderstand Dave,

But once and a while there's something you just don't understand that works, You just got to go with it.
If it's finding keep useing it. Did you use any of them in the field with success. Not a planted piece, but just go out with them. And which ones worked for you, if any.

wrmickel1

 

[Old]

I knew I was going to catch flack for that. I had a choice of posting the picture as actually taken which is upside down because that's the way its displayed. Or; flip it and be suspect of altering the photo. Chose to post the photo as actually taken and deal with the flip when the issue was raised. I had one ready to go flipped, just waiting. Also includes another photo taken at a different time, different camera, different lighting with the Mitchell era photo sandwiched in the middle.

There is a different depth in subject and no all the pock marks are not the same or in the same number. Of course they are close. They are supposed to be. BTW, I disregard the gouges from handling. Even though there is a different tilt in each photo you can line up items to either side, if they overlay, items in the middle should fall inline. They don't. But this is a subject where there is never going to be total harmony. Don't trust me, do your own experiments. You just have to judge for yourself.

 

[wrmickel1]

Old,

That side doesn't matter, What's on the other side does.

wrmickel1

 

[Old]

>>>That side doesn't matter, What's on the other side does.<<<

Been there, done that, with the other side. Obvious inconsistences there too. That's posted in this thread about 18 months back.

This was in reply to Arthur questioning this side. Same issues, just different sides.

 

[markmar]

Lynda

The stone in display at SMS is the same with that from Mitchell era . The only difference is how in the pic with the stone from Mitchell era , the light is over the stone , and in the Museum the light is under the stone ( taken maybe with a flash light ) . Also the stones angles are different .
I post the Museum stone ( Don 1 ) modified by me and the Mitchell era stone , to see the similarities .

 

[Old]

I'm just not convinced. Its totally cool for many to believe them the exact rock. Your opinion is as good as mine. I'm a layman at this. Some of you may be experts. I'll cool with that.

To me; Everything about this screams different rock. Regardless of lighting, ratios should remain the same. Top width to bottom width ratio should be the same. Especially when you have two different cameras, two different exposures, made at different times of the same subject. It isn't. Museum rock is very nearly square. Slightly converging but hardly noticeable. Mitchell rock isn't, side lines are converging at a rather sharp angle.

Then compare the depth of the carving. It should be the same or very similar. Depth is the area where lighting can be a real factor. I just don't see the possibility of this much difference even considering the lighting from different directions in two different exposures. Especially on the left side. Fair too much difference for my taste. Almost <g> gives credence to Mick's power washing discussion. Just kidding.

Ratio's between pocks should be the same. They are not. They are good but not exact in every detail. Angle of lettering from a fixed center line should be the same. Isn't. Again, close but not exact.

But this is much like a discussion of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Matters little in the grander scheme of things. As Mick says, its the message that counts, regardless of medium.

 

[markmar]

It's cool to believe are different .If are different , then the one is a perfect copy of the other one .
Why to make a so detailed copy if he wanted to keep hidden the original ? A mold copy is more possible than the version how Travis had carved the trail map alone .

 

[azdave35]

Uderstand Dave,

But once and a while there's something you just don't understand that works, You just got to go with it.
If it's finding keep useing it. Did you use any of them in the field with success. Not a planted piece, but just go out with them. And which ones worked for you, if any.

wrmickel1

mick..i found an 1882 silver dollar and a silver spoon with the electroscope....i used to hunt with a guy and all he used was a bent coat hanger that he used as a dowsing rod...he hit on the same targets as my high dollar gadget did

 

[azdave35]

mick..i found an 1882 silver dollar and a silver spoon with the electroscope....i used to hunt with a guy and all he used was a bent coat hanger that he used as a dowsing rod...he hit on the same targets as my high dollar gadget did

actually the electroscope worked (kinda sorta)..thomas just never knew how to adjust the settings on it...the basis of his idea was to apply voltage to the antennas...you adjust the voltage up or down for different metals...

 

[wrmickel1]

It's cool to believe are different .If are different , then the one is a perfect copy of the other one .
Why to make a so detailed copy if he wanted to keep hidden the original ? A mold copy is more possible than the version how Travis had carved the trail map alone .

Markmar

The differences are on the other side, Don has no meaning in solving them.

Wrmickel1

 

[deducer]

I knew I was going to catch flack for that. I had a choice of posting the picture as actually taken which is upside down because that's the way its displayed. Or; flip it and be suspect of altering the photo. Chose to post the photo as actually taken and deal with the flip when the issue was raised. I had one ready to go flipped, just waiting. Also includes another photo taken at a different time, different camera, different lighting with the Mitchell era photo sandwiched in the middle.

There is a different depth in subject and no all the pock marks are not the same or in the same number. Of course they are close. They are supposed to be. BTW, I disregard the gouges from handling. Even though there is a different tilt in each photo you can line up items to either side, if they overlay, items in the middle should fall inline. They don't. But this is a subject where there is never going to be total harmony. Don't trust me, do your own experiments. You just have to judge for yourself.

View attachment 1501825

Relax Lynda; nobody is out to get you, or accuse you of altering anything. We are having an interesting discussion, and I know you have lots to offer here.

Even if we assume Travis "recreated" both TS, the question still remains, as Marius points out- why? Why would he painstakingly recreate each pockmark, each gash, each this or that?

 

[wrmickel1]

Because Travis didn't, Your looking at a Mitchell pic, What you need is a pick of Travis's Stones, But the only one you'll find is The bumper Pic. So all you really can compare is the Trail Map not the backs of them. There's a lot of difference between the trail maps. What you should be comparing is The bumper pic with the 73 pic,s in the Treasure Magazine or AZ Highways or whatever it's is. There would be a much smaller time gap between the two pic's. Like only what 26 years

wrmickel1