The Peralta Stones

[Jim Hatt]

Gollum wrote

Roy,

I know what Jim is trying to say. The test is on one aspect of the Stone Maps. If it shows THAT aspect is over 100 years old, it proves they are at least that old. If the test proves THAT aspect is modern, it has no real bearing on the age of the Stone Maps. I know it is confusing, but once everything comes out, y'all will understand.

You are saying that the test could prove a particular aspect IS modern; Jim wrote;

The only other conclusion that could be reached by this chemical test, would be inconclusive

...so unless I read it wrong, he is saying this particular test, will either prove them over 100 years old, or any other result is quote "inconclusive". You hold that the test can have an alternate result, ie proving an aspect to be modern? Thank you in advance;
Oroblanco

Roy,

I'm sorry if this is coming across as a riddle. It is not intended to be that way.

What Mike said is exactly correct. If the substance tested proves to be modern, then it will have no bearing on the age of the maps themselves. (inconclusive about the age of the maps)

But if it proves to be very old, it should validate the age of the maps as being at LEAST as old as that substance.

Don't jump to any conclusions just yet. It will all make sense to you when you know all the details.

Besides not wanting to predict any decisions of the SMHS and M&M Museum, I am withholding specific information to see if anyone else makes the same observation I did, and comes to the same conclusion. I have no secret information or knowledge that is not available right here in this discussion to everyone else. I just made an observation of something posted in this discussion, that nobody else has focused in on yet.

Jim

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Oroblanco]

Jim Hatt wrote

Roy,

I'm sorry if this is coming across as a riddle. It is not intended to be that way.

What Mike said is exactly correct. If the substance tested proves to be modern, then it will have no bearing on the age of the maps themselves. (inconclusive about the age of the maps)

But if it proves to be very old, it could and should validate the age of the maps.

Don't jump to any conclusions just yet. It will all make sense to you when you know all the details.

I sure don't have any conclusions, but you mentioned that a small sample would have to be damaged or destroyed in order to run this particular test; since we do not know whether the stones are legitimately old or of modern creation, it is possible they are over 100 years old; in this case I would sure vote against running the test. Any test which would cause damage, being done simply to settle an argument amongst treasure hunters is not justified IMHO. There are historic factors to consider.

To try to give an analogy, suppose someone were to un-earth a lead plate in San Francisco bay that had an inscription that said Drake had put it there in his epic voyage; now many would immediately suspect it to be a fake, a modern hoax etc but on the possibility that it is genuine, would it be right to just start chiseling off samples to destroy, just to settle an argument? I am not saying the Peralta stones are on a par with Drake, just trying to show why I don't think they ought to be damaged in any way. Science, and especially archaeology, is making advances in new techniques and technology almost every day; it is quite possible that at some point in the future, a new technology may be invented that will allow 100% accuracy for determining the age of stone engravings, without causing even a tiny bit of damage. Let us be patient in that regard; there are other ways, at least the epigraphy approach, which can give us some fair answers even if imperfect.

Oroblanco

 

[Jim Hatt]

Your comments are all valid Roy.

Still I believe the test will be performed, in spite of the possibility that a visible scar may be left by performing it.
The wheels are already beginning to turn in that direction.

To date, you appear to be the only one who is against having the test performed.

Jim

 

[gollum]

Actually Jim,

I think there are a couple of tests that could be performed that are nondestructive. As far as cost, I think that without some professional or educational backing the proper testing could be expensive.

Mike

 

[Jim Hatt]

Actually Jim,

I think there are a couple of tests that could be performed that are nondestructive. As far as cost, I think that without some professional or educational backing the proper testing could be expensive.

Mike

I am hoping for that mike. It all depends on whether the old substance is buried under a newer substance or not. May have to dig pretty deep to find out. That would be what would make it a destructive test. I believe there is enough "clout" between the SMHS and the M&M Museum (both being non-profit organizations) to get the testing done rather inexpensively. maybe even donated.

These darn maps are The "Shroud of Turin" of the Treasure Hunting community. Even the "Shroud" has "Scars" as the result of testing procedures. (Pieces have been cut out for carbon 14 testing).

Jim

 

[Oroblanco]

Your comments are all valid Roy.

Still I believe the test will be performed, in spite of the possibility that a visible scar may be left by performing it.
The wheels are already beginning to turn in that direction.

To date, you appear to be the only one who is against having the test performed.

Jim

Then you have nothing to worry about, I have no 'pull' with the folks at the museum, nor the actual owners. A test which causes damage on an historic document (which the stone maps may be) or artifact (ditto) is never a good idea IMHO. I would hope that they will keep the damage to an absolute minimum, and focus on some part of the stones which are not too important to the artwork as a whole. Stone is a brittle stuff; once you start chipping, chiseling or even tapping, you can get very unexpected and even disastrous results.

On second thought, I suppose I could launch an email campaign to argue against any sort of destructive testing.....
Oroblanco

 

[Jim Hatt]

Roy,

Like I just told Mike,

"These darn maps are The "Shroud of Turin" of the Treasure Hunting community. Even the "Shroud" has "Scars" as the result of testing procedures. (Pieces have been cut out for carbon 14 testing)."

You have said many times that you don't trust any maps. Why get so protective of them now? What is it (in your opinion) that makes the stone maps any more sacred than the Shroud is?

I don't mind if you start an email campaign against testing the maps, as long as you don't get Beth involved too! (I don't think anybody could keep up with her as far as sending out emails go).

Anyway... Like I said... The "big wheel" is already beginning to turn in favor of having the tests performed.

Jim

 

[cactusjumper]

Roy,

"Stone is a brittle stuff; once you start chipping, chiseling or even tapping, you can get very unexpected and even disastrous results."

Don't believe "stone" is the "substance" that Jim wants to test.

Early pictures of the stones and descriptions of them are the clues as to why such a test would be a waste of time.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Jim Hatt]

Roy,

"Stone is a brittle stuff; once you start chipping, chiseling or even tapping, you can get very unexpected and even disastrous results."

Don't believe "stone" is the "substance" that Jim wants to test.

Early pictures of the stones and descriptions of them are the clues as to why such a test would be a waste of time.

Take care,

Joe

Don't count on that Joe. Those very words could come back and bite you, later on down the line!

Jim

 

[Oroblanco]

Roy,

Like I just told Mike,

"These darn maps are The "Shroud of Turin" of the Treasure Hunting community. Even the "Shroud" has "Scars" as the result of testing procedures. (Pieces have been cut out for carbon 14 testing)."

You have said many times that you don't trust any maps. Why get so protective of them now?
I don't mind if you start an email campaign against testing the maps, as long as you don't get Beth involved too! (I don't think anybody could keep up with her as far as sending out emails go).

Anyway... Like I said... The "big wheel" is already beginning to turn in favor of having the tests performed.

Jim

In answer to your question (I put it in bold above) I still don't trust any treasure maps (not all maps, just treasure maps - though we have found a few errors in Rand McNally too, quite a pain when you are driving across the country) and am not convinced the Peralta Stones are genuinely old; however it is possible that they are genuine and over 100 years old. If it is true, then they would be historic documents and artifacts, as very few similar examples exist. Would you think it a good idea to scratch off just a little of the ink on the Declaration of Independence, to prove to a group of DofI enthusiasts/cranks that the writing dates to 1776? Non-destructive is the way to go with anything historic, or suspected to be historic. Why damage it? Just to satisfy treasure hunters? Sorry if that is not sufficient reason to deface what MIGHT be an historic artifact amigo, but that is just my opinion. Have you not considered the historic value of the Peralta Stones? I find that a wee bit surprising, that you are convinced they are genuine, and are enthusiastic about the idea of destructive testing! Sheesh Jim is nothing sacred?

It sure is odd, that here I am, a person with strong doubts, arguing for the protection and preservation of the very things you believe to be genuine, and you look forward to them being damaged.
Oroblanco

 

[Jim Hatt]

Roy,



I was in the process of editing (finishing a thought and adding a question) to the post you quoted when you replied to it.

Let me present it again in it's edited form.

"These darn maps are The "Shroud of Turin" of the Treasure Hunting community. Even the "Shroud" has "Scars" as the result of testing procedures. (Pieces have been cut out for carbon 14 testing)."

You have said many times that you don't trust any maps. Why get so protective of them now? What is it (in your opinion) that makes the stone maps any more sacred than the Shroud is?

Jim

 

[cactusjumper]

Roy,

"Stone is a brittle stuff; once you start chipping, chiseling or even tapping, you can get very unexpected and even disastrous results."

Don't believe "stone" is the "substance" that Jim wants to test.

Early pictures of the stones and descriptions of them are the clues as to why such a test would be a waste of time.

Take care,

Joe

Don't count on that Joe. Those very words could come back and bite you, later on down the line!

Jim

Jim,

That's always a possibility for anyone who is posting an opinion. I believe that would include you. What's the reasoning behind not revealing what you want tested? It's pretty obvious what that would have to be, but why attempt to make it a mystery? Is there a book in the works?

Take care,

Joe

 

[Oroblanco]

Jim Hatt wrote

You have said many times that you don't trust any maps. Why get so protective of them now? What is it (in your opinion) that makes the stone maps any more sacred that the Shroud is?

I would insert the term "treasure" to "maps" for I don't have problems with maps in general, only treasure maps. I didn't say that the Peralta Stones are more sacred than the Shroud of Turin, in fact what I said was that destructive testing on any historic document or artifact is a bad idea. It is not like there are six Shrouds of Turin or nine sets of Peralta Stones, they are SINGULAR, unique objects. Being unique, to damage it in any way is senseless IMHO. We are not the last humans whom will ever trod the Earth amigo, so just because we may be impatient to have a final answer is no excuse to be damaging singular, unique historical objects and documents.

If I were 100% convinced they are modern creations, I would have much less objection to destructive testing - even so, it is possible that they may be viewed as "works of art" done by an artist, who may well be deceased now. We do not know the facts of the origin, therefore all possibilities remain open; in this case, destructive testing is not justified, unless it were to come up with a cure for cancer or some very beneficial result. The only results possible, you have already delineated; this certainly appears to be testing just to satisfy US treasure hunters and just isn't enough reason to be damaging them. Others will follow us in the future, and chances are they will have much better tools and techniques than we have today; the stones are not dissolving away into dust, therefore the logical and best plan is to preserve them as is for future generations to find the answers in a totally NON-destructive way.

Just for the record, I think the damage done to the Shroud of Turin was highly irresponsible and thoughtless at the least, & criminal in a way. Whether that is a real burial shroud or a medeival forgery, it is unique, rare and a sort of a work of art. It may have been created by Leonardo da Vinci - so just how many da Vinci works do we have today? Enough that we can just start snipping and clipping away parts of them? Sorry amigo if we disagree on this, but perhaps you can provide some other, greater purpose for having damage done to the Peralta Stones than to settle the argument of treasure hunters?
Oroblanco

 

[Jim Hatt]

What's the reasoning behind not revealing what you want tested?

I believe I have already stated (a couple of times what my reason is for not disclosing that right now) I believe the SMHS will make all the details known when the time comes, and that time will be at their choosing.

What's the reasoning behind not revealing what you want tested? It's pretty obvious what that would have to be,

Yes Joe, it is very obvious if one is observant enough. I am surprised you haven't figured it out yourself yet.

Of course... After it is known to everyone, you will be saying "I knew it all the time"

Tell us before it happens Joe. What is so obvious to you about what substance I have proposed to be tested?

Jim

P.S. I have had a book in the works for the last 15 years. That is no secret. My booklet about the stone maps is just one chapter from it. But this testing has nothing to do with that. Although it could end up being included as a chapter of it's own.

 

[cactusjumper]

Jim,

[Yes Joe, it is very obvious if one is observant enough. I am surprised you haven't figured it out yourself yet.

Of course... After it is known to everyone, you will be saying "I knew it all the time"]

Don't know why you would think I don't know, but I'm already saying I know. Don't need to wait for your big reveal. As we have both said......."it is very obvious". In fact, there may even be a picture around here.......somewhere.

My guess would be that your chapter on this subject will be very short. On that point, I could be wrong.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Jim Hatt]

Sorry amigo if we disagree on this, but perhaps you can provide some other, greater purpose for having damage done to the Peralta Stones than to settle the argument of treasure hunters?
Oroblanco

We can disagree without anyone having to apologize Roy.

If the test I have proposed is done. It will be done for the purpose of attempting to determine the age of the maps. I don't believe the SMHS or the M&M Museum has any interest one way or the other, in solving any arguments between Treasure hunters.

I have requested that the test be performed. The decision about whether or not to do it, is way above my pay grade. I am sure that any risk of scaring the stones, will be considered and weighed against the value of what could be learned from the tests.

Jim

 

[Jim Hatt]

Don't know why you would think I don't know, but I'm already saying I know. Don't need to wait for your big reveal.
Joe

Errrrr Ahhhh Joe,

Excuse me, but... You forgot to tell us what it is that you know?
I have only told a few people about it, but none of them were sworn to absolute secrecy.
I know you know people at the SMHS, and enough time has passed that the word should be getting around by now.
If it has made it's way back to you, what is keeping you from spilling the details, and telling everyone exactly why you think the test "would be a waste of time"?

Jim

 

[Cubfan64]

Seems to be alot of "assuming" going on here and you know what they say about that right?

Until the facts of what is being tested and how are made known publicly, I don't think it makes much sense to argue their "worthiness" or not or even for that matter what kind of destructive test may be required.

Destructive could always be something as small as microns in size from a part of the stones that aren't even noticeably visible.

I'm content to wait to find out the specifics of how this may be accomplished before passing any judgement. The only words of advice I can give as an analyst of a sort myself is to make the testing as absolutely unbiased as humanly possible and make sure the results are statistically significant.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Bk: have been gone for a few days. Just what is this proposed test, and what is it supposed to back up or show?

I also missed where the "8" in CA8ALLO is discussed?

Another factor that bothers me is that the curves are all too smoothly, and consistently executed to be done freehand with a chisel. hmm

For what its worth, I have never seen that type of script until the 1800's

Most of the additives just leave me with a feeling of later graffiti, or an attempt to simple confuse factors. I sincerely doubt that the orig. author would add them to help decipher the data, on the contrary, data would be eliminated to increase the confusion.

Don Jose La Mancha

 

[goldbugpr]

I have enjoyed the thread about the Stone Maps for years and I have learned a few thing because of some posts but I have to tell you that given all the available info on them the only proof that could be gained from them is DO THEY WORK AS A MAP. It is not a puzzle its a map so if you want to prove them you must find and follow the trail. I learned that you will never be able to change a guys theory about the Stone Maps so I don't bother to present one. Why don't the forum members join me at the Photo Session on June 27 @8AM it will cost you $40 bucks but it will be well worth it to see them in the sun light.