somehiker said:
Hi Roy:
Thanks for your response and I do appreciate your input.
"A legal claim to a mine, or several of them. Taco Bell was not issuing franchises at the time."
I can only ask you to provide an example of a legal claim on stone,similar to the stone maps with removable insert,with which we can compare.Can you cite a case where such evidence was presented as proof of ownership of a mine?
There are a fair number of mining claim dispute cases online, often involving stone markers; I don't have an example with a removable insert (which we could ask, if the example in the Peralta stones is even the original that belongs there) handy. I don't have time to hunt through mining claim case law at the moment either, but a removable insert would be not illogical as a step for the protection of the location of the mine against a chance discovery of the stone tablets, someone finding them and wishing to claimjump would be thus blocked from finding it or them.
Somehiker also wrote
On both of these points we agree."Gibberish" is how I would expect any Justice presiding over the claimant's case to describe most of the markings on the "evidence".I have to doubt that said Justice would accept a "this means this and that means that,your honour" as any kind of legal proof of ownership.
If you know of such a legal precedent,based again on similar circumstance and evidence,provide a link and I will be more than happy to read it.
If you are interested in historical mining claim cases, I suggest some time spent in cases law libraries; however one example I can find in a moment is from the US-Mexico boundary dispute; here is an extract from an online article
Under the terms of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, the commissioners' words gave the maps and views an authority equal to the treaty itself.
In practice, needless to say, matters were a little more complicated. Carl Wheat's account notes: "In effect, the maps were the boundary, and remained so for another generation." But Paula Rebert's judgment seems closer to the truth: "The true boundary was the boundary marked on the ground." In subsequent disputes, what was actually on the ground (including the monuments) had stronger legal claim than the maps. Thus it was that, as the 19th century drew to a close, the need for greater precision about what was on the ground became imperative.
Somehiker also wrote
I do not question your having been in the desert,Roy. <snip> That is why I have so many photos that I am able to share.Many topics are of great interest to the majority of those that read these discussions.Many of those making contributions to these topics do not post photos.Photos are the best way to visualize where or what the poster is talking about.If,on reading the post,I know that I have a photo that will help other readers understand the terrain feature or what the cave or other place of interest looks like,I will generally put it up with some sort of description and comment,based on any experience I have that is related.If the photo is not mine,I will say so unless that fact is obvious.My principle beef with this photo issue,is one of comparison.I have trouble,given my own experience and wish to capture every scene possible as part of that experience,finding credibility amongst those that claim "boots on the ground" expertise and familiarity with the Superstitions.If I sound like Jim Hatt,I suspect that it is because he has come to the same conclusion with regard to many of the folks that appear to be mostly negative towards others who do provide personal photos along with their ideas.
I own only one camera, a Canon T-50 35 mm which I have found to be rugged and reliable; I rarely take photos unless it is a particularly nice landscape view, wildlife, or to use in an article (or book) that I am currently working on. Beth has taken many more and owns more cameras, and we have lost almost all of our photos on two occasions; one due to a home fire and more recently due to water damage even though packed in a watertight container. I don't know why you would expect to see photos of my solution to the stone maps illustrated by markers found in situ, when I have not said that I have the solution nor that I even tried to use the stone maps IN the Superstitions at all. Your request then appears to be rather a sarcastic attempt to belittle myself and what ever experience I might have, when I am not making any claim to be "the expert" on the stone maps nor a Superstition Mountain 'sourdough'. Jim Hatt made very similar remarks not long ago, and that approach does not make any sense to me. Suppose that someone had never even seen the Superstitions, does that mean that they cannot then raise questions about the various theories that are being presented as solutions to them?
However to satisfy you (or Jim Hatt, should he even be following this any further) that both Beth and myself have indeed spent time in the Superstitions, I am going to put some photos on the internet; she managed to extricate about a dozen or so from the mass of photos that are stuck together and they are definitely NOT of any stone maps or markers from the Supers, for the very reason that we have zero faith in any of them due to the fact that SOME are definitely the work of earlier Dutch hunters, the same folks who also destroyed and/or removed a number of REAL markers that were there at one time. The only trick now is to borrow a scanner and decide what web site to put them on, for I am not posting them on T-net where the copyright is assumed to be the property of Treasurenet. It will be a somewhat pointless exercise and I really hate to appear to be 'bragging' when I certainly have not found the LDM, but it will at least show that we have in fact "been there, done that" so am not just pretending.
Somehiker also wrote
I have,in fact posted photos that,on occasion have myself in them,here and on the other sites.I generally prefer not to publicise my mugshot too often though.I might look too much like someone on a post office wall.I usually hike solo as well,and setting up for self portraits is time consuming and I am not usually happy with the results...sides,I have a big head that blocks the light.
I have also posted a number of my own photographs,of objects such as you describe,all taken within the Superstitions and surrounding range.The objects are,of course all fake,and predetermined as such by various expert opinions.The potential of the mine,or mines that I may have also posted photos of is purely a matter of speculation.I am not a miner,nor do I wish to become a miner.I also have no intention of filing any sort of claim for any mine that I may find,or have found in the past.I am happy to merely collect a small grab sample for my growing collection.If I do find one that I believe may match the Dutchman's ore,I will pass it to an interested party for analysis.That hasn't happened as yet.
My request was tongue-in-cheek, not that I demand to see you take a photo of yourself when you are the only person there as that is a minor trick in itself, and in direct response to your request to see photos of the monuments that prove my theory of solution to the stone maps when I have made no such claims. Your theory of the alidade/plane is very interesting, my greatest problem with it is that the stone maps ARE stone, a secondary issue being that the work on them does not resemble known Jesuit maps; however it is an intriguing idea that certainly warrants further research and I am interested in hearing you out. I don't really need to see stacks of gold bars, unless someone is claiming to have found the treasure vaults in which case I would only believe such a claim by seeing such stacks. A mine generally only has ore, so even a small sample of ore must have come from a vein originally, hence there is no need to see a railroad car full of it.
Somehiker also wrote
There are many possibles with regard to the stone maps.My theories are just one more rock on the marker.Yours are another.The challenge to be met is to find the one that has the best fit.Regardless of how many theories that you present,only the fieldwork and subsequent interpretive stages will test those theories.
At this point in time, it will take the discovery of mines and/or treasure vaults to prove any particular theory on the stone maps to be truly valid, almost a 'reverse engineering' type of situation as suggested by another of our members here. A major problem exists in that any treasure vault(s) may well have been found and recovered years or decades ago, and we have no way of ever knowing it; in such a case, it would then be utterly impossible to prove beyond dispute that the stone maps ever were valid and genuine, and not a modern fraud.
Jerry - yes I have some concept of what surveying instruments are, I worked for a year as a surveyor's assistant laying out the Richmond VA "beltway" highway as well as a few private jobs, and learned as much as I could from him. Somehiker's theory is indeed fascinating and worthy of further pursuit, despite whatever objections the skeptics (like me) may raise.
Blindbowman wrote
well if your all so much better at brakeing code & Spanish simbolics then i am .. then whats this mean .....
Who is claiming to be better than everyone else at breaking codes and Spanish symbols? I certainly do not make such a claim, and suggest to you that our discussion and the ideas presented are not a contest of who is the smartest, best code breaker etc but simply a discussion of the various theories. In other words, a friendly interchange, not a verbal combat amigo; and I for one do not know the meaning of your symbol.
Good luck and good hunting to you all, I hope you find the treasures that you seek; and I will certainly post a link to my photos as soon as we can get that done. Be forewarned however, you are not going to see pictures of a treasure hunter who resembles Johnny Depp, Matt Damon or Brad Pitt, for although I have been told that I do closely resemble a shorter, fatter version of a particular movie star, (Gabby Hayes) I don't think my mug is that attractive. On the other hand, women frequently break into peals of laughter at one look of my physique and profile, so that may well indicate that they are instantly smitten by what their eyes take in.
Roy ~ Oroblanco
PS - Just noticed the time, have to sign off but will 'stop by' later this evening if I can.
Can’t we all just get along… he he
