Tree of life, Nolan’s Cross, & ancient cave petroglyphs…

[WestCoastDan]

New member, big fan of the show…
I just happened to watch a show tonight that showed the Fremont petroglyphs in Utah… and I think they may share an interesting coincidence.

There appears to be an ancient carving in Utah that resembles the TOL & Nolan’s Cross.

Related? You decide…

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[TruthbeTold]

Except that Nolan’s cross was assembled very recently.

Nolan was trying to tap into the scam tourist attraction Dan Blankenship started by building his own attraction.

 

[WestCoastDan]

Except that Nolan’s cross was assembled very recently.

Nolan was trying to tap into the scam tourist attraction Dan Blankenship started by building his own attraction.

Compared to the age of the petroglyphs, America "was assembled very recently", and your comment has no relevance to the point that the two locations share a similarity w/ respect to the TOL reference.

 

[SSR]

Except that Nolan’s cross was assembled very recently.

Nolan was trying to tap into the scam tourist attraction Dan Blankenship started by building his own attraction.

It was first suggested in the early 1980s. The suggestion that Nolan "assembled it" does not hold a lot of water since he wasted a lot of time exploring what it could mean (no reason it needs to mean anything). This was confirmed by Robert S. Young who owned lot 5 and knew Nolan well. In his opinion Nolan was actively trying to account for it and to find relationships to other known surveyed features. Significant effort was made to clear trees and survey further along the "stem" in both directions. This suggests that Nolan was "sold" on that being there prior to his noticing of it. He didn't fool himself. The real question is "does it represent anything of special significance?" There does appear to be a clear relationship between the base of the stem of the "cross" and the road which divided the island in 1762. This would suggest that, in the case it was actually a surveyed feature, it's from 1762 at the earliest. The reported distances are a sort of suggestion that implies a plan too. If it was "faked" then there should be a rationale for why the distances compute to regular ratios. That doesn't come out of random invention.

 

[Armchair detective]

What's this I've read about there being an iron stove under one of the stones?

 

[SSR]

What's this I've read about there being an iron stove under one of the stones?

It's a detail like so many others that cannot be substantiated. If is in fact the case then you have enough to know that a large stone was moved to a location after cast stoves became common things (1850s). That would allow you to possibly suggest that any planning in that cross layout was from the searcher era. It's one of the possibilities. If there is a noticeable relationship in the stone positions then you have to assign that arrangement to someone. It would also mean that Nolan was dumb, because he could have deduced the same thing and stopped looking. What was also said is that there was garbage all around one of those stones, and that Nolan moved some of those stones (some have alleged he moved them to conceal their exact position). The Laginas will tell you there is "cement" there that that would coincide with colonial settler sites on that island. If that's the case then ca 1760 makes sense for the placement of the stones. The question still remains as to why anyone would do that. except to mark off regular boundaries.