Truth about LDM?

[cactusjumper]

Mike,

"The other things you mentioned that they examined about the stone maps have no bearing at all on their authenticity."

While that may be true for you, the archaeologist who do this kind of thing for a living, had another opinion. "No bearing at all" seems like a bit of an overstatement to me. Perhaps you could have worded your disdain for their work better.

I should get that CD off to you Monday.

Since I already know, and trust, your source, maybe you can tell me in private.

Take care,

Joe

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[Oroblanco]

The artistic style and lettering are all wrong for that time period amigo - this ought to be a huge red flag to any treasure hunter. It would be tantamount to finding a copy of the Declaration of Independence done with Arial font. Doesn't that bother you Mike? I am sorry to have to STILL disagree with you on the validity of these stones. I have serious doubts that the folks from Desert Archaeology Inc were looking at COPIES, just consider the question why anyone would bring such a thing to have it validated, unless they were trying to pull a big fraud.

These Peralta Stones have a very "cloudy" origin and a rather checkered history - on the one hand, supposedly a Prof. Dana examined them (for the FBI if memory serves) and according to the recollections of Bob Corbin were "believed to be at least 100 years old" - while on the other hand four experts also examined them and pronounced them to be modern frauds. We can say well they were looking at copies but without proof that this is in fact what happened, I see no reason to dismiss their conclusions. If you or anyone can provide solid proof that what father Polzer AND Desert Archaeology examined were really copies and NOT the originals, I will be happy to reconsider the validity of the Peralta Stones. Thank you in advance,

Good luck and good hunting amigos I hope you find the treasures that you seek.
Oroblanco

 

[rochha]

" The artistic style and lettering are all wrong for that time period amigo- this ought to be a huge red flag to any treasure hunter"

Not if they were made that way purposely.

Rochha

 

[gollum]

Roy,

You are sooooo wrong in what you stated! PLEASE reread my post! I SAID THAT I PERSONALLY POSSESS AUTHENTIC TREASURE MAPS THAT HAVE NUMEROUS SERIOUS MISSPELLINGS AND GRAMMATICAL ERRORS (many are on purpose and some are not). The ones that were done on purpose were done to give an alternate meaning to letters, words, and/or symbols. I believe the same is true for the stone maps.

Your statement regarding "why would someone bring something to have it validated unless it was to pull a big fraud" is ridiculous! People have things validated all the time.

As far as the name of the person who told me about the Mitchell Engraved Copies, I WILL REPEAT MYSELF AGAIN, "He wishes to remain anonymous online! Joe knows the person well and implicitly trusts his word on the subject of the stone maps. Because of the other documentary evidence he has provided me, I implicitly trust his word on this as well.

My friend, you are free to believe anything you wish, but don't try to make me see things your way, when I KNOW you are mistaken. PLEASE reread my previous quote regarding what I believe:

Now, I have two possibilities:

1. They were faked for use in the Reavis Land Grant Fraud, and were all dumped before they could be publicized (even though they would only be about 80 at that time is close enough).

2. They at one time, led to something(s) very valuable. But the fact that ALL the stones were dumped together tells me that whatever they led to is now gone or worthless.

The only value the stone maps have for me is strictly historical in nature. I may be wrong on both counts, but that is where I stand on the subject.

I love ya Roy, but why is it that EVERY time we are on opposite sides, I have to repeat myself over and over? Its exasperating!

Best-Mike

 

[gollum]

HEY CHARLIE!

 

[rochha]

Hey Mike......what's up?

 

[Oroblanco]

Rochha wrote

Not if they were made that way purposely.

Are you serious amigo? Sometimes I can't tell when someone is kidding. If you think about this POSSIBLE "explanation" (which has a serious problem I will get to) you have to wonder WHY such devious purposeful alterations would be done? It makes no sense amigo, at least not to me.

Now for the SERIOUS problem with that idea - for someone working in the mid-1800's to have deliberately created stone inscriptions using a style of lettering AND artwork which did not come into general use much before 1940, and get it to MATCH that future, then-unknown styles of both lettering AND artwork.....would be a near-miracle. HOW did they know to use those particular styles, so far ahead of time, and get it right?

I give up buddy - we can sure agree to disagree, but I will not try using those Peralta Stones to search for treasures, nor will I recommend them to anyone for that purpose. If you do believe in them, and are using them to search or just thinking about it, my NOT trusting in them might well work to YOUR advantage by helping to keep the competition away!

Gollum wrote

Your statement regarding "why would someone bring something to have it validated unless it was to pull a big fraud" is ridiculous! People have things validated all the time.

Mike you have misread OR misunderstood what i wrote again buddy - taken IN CONTEXT I was saying that NO ONE WOULD KNOWINGLY TAKE COPIES TO HAVE THEM VALIDATED unless they were pulling a FRAUD. Sheesh!

Gollum also wrote

My friend, you are free to believe anything you wish, but don't try to make me see things your way, when I KNOW you are mistaken. PLEASE reread my previous quote regarding what I believe:

I have read your posts and fully understand your conclusions - what I fail to understand is why you would accept a POSSIBLE explanation when nothing is there to prove it, referring here to the statements about Polzer and Desert Arch. examining copies. You are smarter than that, to rely on what might be possible versus a known fact. Please note my reply to Rochha in this same post, if these particular problems had not occurred to you (which I can't believe it has not) then a re-examination will not hurt.

Gollum also wrote

why is it that EVERY time we are on opposite sides, I have to repeat myself over and over? Its exasperating!

I do not ask you to repeat yourself, not sure why you assume that is what is being asked - what I ask for is clarifications. Don't assume that since you have made a statement, no further explanation is required for a thick-skull like me to fully understand your logic and reasoning.

Good luck and good hunting Rochha, Gollum and everyone, I hope you find the treasures that you seek.
Your friend,
Oroblanco

 

[rochha]

Roy,

“Are you serious amigo? “

Yes

“Now for the SERIOUS problem with that idea - for someone working in the mid-1800's to have deliberately created stone inscriptions using a style of lettering AND artwork which did not come into general use much before 1940, and get it to MATCH that future, then-unknown styles of both lettering AND artwork.....would be a near-miracle. HOW did they know to use those particular styles, so far ahead of time, and get it right? “

Who said they knew? Consider this possibility. Maybe they were using a lettering style to suit their own purposes and needs in creating something coded that used lettering.

Rochha

 

[mrs.oroblanco]

I have to snicker here - Mike - because, truth be told, you also have some writings where the author's name is missspelled. (as do I).


I have to say - I know I have done more investigating about the Stones than Mr. O, but, someplace along the line, you don't want him to try to convince you - however, you don't seem to be affording him (or any one else) the same option.

Two - heck 10, people could have the exact same information and still come up with 10 different conclusions.

B

 

[gollum]

Roy,

I have said this same thing a few posts ago! The AM&M Museum did not know they had copies. That was something Mitchell did not tell them when he negotiated his tax deduction deal in 1971 (I think). The person who gave me the information is a VERY trusted source. I will say again, that I firmly believe that two of the stones both Polzer and Des. Arch. examined were copies made in 1971 (or so).

Does it REALLY make no sense to you Roy that someone who was making a set of stone maps that would lead someone to valuable mines/treasures, would make them in such a way so as to disguise their true meaning from anyone but someone who knew how to read them? REALLY? REALLY? REALLY? I honestly can't fathom why you can't! By making a statement like you did, then you are saying that treasure maps are very straightforward and have no hidden meanings? REALLY? I give you more credit trhan that! You must have meant to say something else, and it came out wrong (unless there was a hidden meaning in your statement? HAHAHA).

Best-Mike

 

[mrs.oroblanco]

I'm assuming you saw the story in the Arizona papers about where the "real" stones are now? (back a few months ago)

Of course, they are saying that MOEL "lost the stones" because of the legal mess, plus they have the "either Tumlinson found them or Tumlinson bought them.

They are supposed to be there for 2 years.


B

 

[Oroblanco]

HOLA mi amigo Gollum <Mike> and everyone,

Gollum wrote

I have said this same thing a few posts ago! The AM&M Museum did not know they had copies. That was something Mitchell did not tell them when he negotiated his tax deduction deal in 1971 (I think). The person who gave me the information is a VERY trusted source. I will say again, that I firmly believe that two of the stones both Polzer and Des. Arch. examined were copies made in 1971 (or so).

Does it REALLY make no sense to you Roy that someone who was making a set of stone maps that would lead someone to valuable mines/treasures, would make them in such a way so as to disguise their true meaning from anyone but someone who knew how to read them? REALLY? REALLY? REALLY? I honestly can't fathom why you can't! By making a statement like you did, then you are saying that treasure maps are very straightforward and have no hidden meanings? REALLY? I give you more credit trhan that! You must have meant to say something else, and it came out wrong (unless there was a hidden meaning in your statement? HAHAHA).

Since you are convinced that the above named experts examined TWO fake copies, but TWO of the stones were genuine - did it not occur to you that they would have noticed the differences in the ages of the inscriptions and/or styles? I can't believe that they would not have noticed. It seems you have a very low opinion of Father Polzer, Dr Miksa, Prof Thiel and Dr Adams, and a correspondingly high opinion of Prof Dana and the level of scientific technology available to him, and Bob Corbin.

It appears that you have misinterpreted my meaning amigo. What does not make sense to me is NOT whether it has coded information amigo, but that they would be using a style of lettering AND artwork which was virtually unknown prior to ~1940. Then to think that people working in the 1840's would just by sheer chance have created those inscriptions, and got the lettering style AND artwork to match those which came into use nearly a century later......it just won't float buddy! Sorry but that I cannot believe. I remind you of the Dec. of Ind. example given earlier - you would NOT believe that a man writing it down in 1776 would just "happen" to use a font that got invented 100 years later, it just doesn't happen. <Hahahahahaha! > Come to think of it, if that little problem wouldn't stop folks from accepting such copies of the Declaration, maybe we could start a little cottage industry!
Oroblanco

 

[cactusjumper]

Mike,

The people at the museum believe the Stone Maps are fakes. Always have, and for the same reasons given by the folks in Tucson......not to mention Father Polzer.

As for Bob Corbin's statements on the Stone Maps, I would suggest that you just take what Helen wrote about them in "The Bible...." as your guide to his feelings.

Take care,

Joe

 

[rochha]

Roy

“ It appears that you have misinterpreted my meaning amigo. What does not make sense to me is NOT whether it has coded information amigo, but that they would be using a style of lettering AND artwork which was virtually unknown prior to ~1940. Then to think that people working in the 1840's would just by sheer chance have created those inscriptions, and got the lettering style AND artwork to match those which came into use nearly a century later......it just won't float buddy! Sorry but that I cannot believe. “

Exactly what style are you referring to? Plain printing? The artwork you refer to are you meaning the priest and horse?

Rochha

 

[lamar]

Dear Rochha;
The list of discrepencies pretaining to the Peralta Stones goes on and on, ad nausium, and they are so self-evident as to preclude the need to re-cover the same ground over and over. I might suggest researching the validity of the stone maps on this and other topics on this forum. It's all been very well covered in the past and my own conclusions on the subject were substantial, yet not all-encompassing. I've also stated that I have no idea what the original purpose of the stone maps were for, but I do know that they were carved something during, or after the 1940s.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Oroblanco]

Rochha wrote

Exactly what style are you referring to? Plain printing? The artwork you refer to are you meaning the priest and horse?

The lettering yes, that style of "plain printing" was NOT in use in the 1840's; the artwork is not limited to the horse and witch, as you already know. As our amigo Lamar has already replied, this has been covered in depth here on T-net in other threads. The El Morro site in New Mexico has a number of stone inscriptions, including genuine Spanish and American, here is one site with some photos - once you see what the "real thing" looks like, then look at the Peralta Stones, that red flag starts waving.

I do not understand why the opinions of four experts should be so readily dismissed by folks who believe in the validity of the Peralta Stones - for even if they had been examining copies of the originals, the styles of the artwork and lettering are a huge problem and if they were "true" copies then those styles would have been duplicated on the copies. Ask yourself this - what if those same experts had said the Peralta Stones ARE genuine, would you still be so quick to dismiss their conclusions?

If you (or anyone) can show me a certified genuine Spanish, Mexican or Anglo stone inscription that is definitely dated to the mid-1800's that has the same style of lettering AND the same style of artwork such as the knife, I would be happy to give the Peralta Stones a second look even though four experts have already stated they are a modern fraud. Thank you in advance,
Oroblanco

 

[Cubfan64]

Oro said:

Ask yourself this - what if those same experts had said the Peralta Stones ARE genuine, would you still be so quick to dismiss their conclusions?

THAT my friend is an EXCELLENT comment and one we treasure hunters should always keep in mind!!! It reminds me of my work in a QC laboratory analyzing production samples. Whenever we got a sample that was "just" out of spec., the engineers would always want us to retest it - sometimes they would do that 3 or 4 times until they got one that "just" made it in spec. at which point they'd stop and call it quality product and ship it. They had no sense whatsoever of "variability" in production lots or in analytical tests.

My argument (which of course never got anywhere) was, if we do that for samples that fall out of spec, how come you don't let us retest a sample that comes "just within" spec.? Instead, of course those samples were immeditely qualified as good product

It all comes down to what you want the data to say

 

[Oroblanco]

Cubfan wrote

It all comes down to what you want the data to say

You have hit the nail on the head again amigo, and some folks have a strong desire for the Peralta Stones to be real. It would be great really, but if they were real, it seems likely that Tumlinson would have found something.
Oroblanco

 

[mrs.oroblanco]

I'm wondering - has anybody ever noticed that the pictures of Travis Marlowe (the ones that appeared in the June 12, 1964 issue), were taken in February of 1964? (February 2, 1964).

I wonder how long good ole Travis was planning the story


B

 

[gollum]

Cubfan wrote

It all comes down to what you want the data to say

You have hit the nail on the head again amigo, and some folks have a strong desire for the Peralta Stones to be real. It would be great really, but if they were real, it seems likely that Tumlinson would have found something.
Oroblanco

Roy,

Why do you think it seems so likely that Tumlinson would have found anything? Is there any evidence that he had any experience or personal knowledge of working with encoded maps? Not that I know of. Imagine that the guy/woman that delivers your mail found the stone maps. Would they know how to deal with them? Not likely.

Also,

For those who wish to debate Jesuit Treasures, I have completed the first part of the thread:

http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,286969.msg2055760.html#msg2055760

I will say this, if there is any insane posts regarding Jesuit Illuminati, New World Orders, Anti_Catholic or Anti-Jesuit Slanders, or Jewish conspiracy nuts, I will make sure all those posts get whacked!

I also am saving the debate about Jesuit Mining Activities for a different thread, so no need to post about it there.

Best-Mike