Wierd Place For A Glyph Tile

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Golly, now you know what probably happened to my report on the large aquatic snake at Tubares in the Rio Fuerte in the 50's,

Their loss, since it seems they have been killed off and are now almost strictly folklore or reduced to legends;

.Then again, I suppose that if the public was allowed to send in just anything, they would be inundated with worthess mail. What secretaries are for.

Incidentally, in the early days the Rio Fuerte was saturated with caiman, a form of salt water crocodile, that had adapted and worked it''s way up the river. Tooday their is no trace of one, they have been killed off.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[cactusjumper]

My guess is that it was a CYA move.

Although the person who found that glyp is a man of integrity, Smith has no way of knowing that. He also has no way of knowing if it was stolen, or if it was acquired in an act of site destruction, so probably did not want to be seen as endorsing it in any way, shape, or form, by offering interpretation.

Also don't think it was a good idea for someone to have published his email address on a public forum (never mind a TH forum). I could be wrong but I doubt he consented to that.

deducer,

I would not expect someone who may not be familiar with professors in numerous universities to be comfortable with contacting them with questions on their field of expertise. I do it on a fairly regular basis. I have contacted professor Smith a number of times, and found him to be friendly and responsive.

When he is asked a question that seems to have an obvious answer, he is often curt in his reply. In this case, it was about what I expected. Many treasure hunters are fairly comfortable with coming to unwarranted conclusions based on a picture or story from a magazine.

The email address's for professors at ASU, as well as most other universities, are public information. Your first clue should have been [email protected].


Good luck,

Joe Ribaudo

 

[cactusjumper]

Mike,

"I have no idea what this is, and the find is not professionally documented. Sorry, I can’t be of any help to you."

"Typical pablum. No interest in why something that looks amazingly Mayan would be anywhere North of the US/Mexican Border. Especially since an Archy didn't "PROFESSIONALLY" discover it. What a tool!"

Since you didn't show us your question, it's difficult to judge his response. I feel his reply was respectful and to the point. Your response here, on the other hand, is exactly why professionals don't like to give much response to amateurs.

Professor Smith has been kind enough to send me two inscribed first editions of his books. He took the time to respond to a........fan. I have received the same kind of respectful dialog from well known historians authors and professors for many years now. The man is no one's "tool".

It this case, deducer was probably correct. I shouldn't have suggested that getting in touch with Professor Smith might enlighten anyone here on the subject of Mayan "artifacts". What could he possibly teach anyone here on that subject?

One other thing: There are any number of people who could carve an "amazingly Mayan symbol" on a flat rock. If you are interested, I will sell you as many as you would like.

Take care,

Joe

 

[deducer]

You may be right, but the right thing to do would be to have said something like "While I think your friend's find is interesting, due to a lack of information, I don't feel comfortable evaluating it." ............... or something along those lines.

Mike

Yes, you are correct. He should have been more courteous.

Found some information here which should give us more insight into why his response was so curt:

Antiquities and Looting

He may have felt the glyph was "looted out of Mexico" rather than entertain the possibility that the glyph could have been found so far up north.

 

[deducer]

The email address's for professors at ASU, as well as most other universities, are public information. Your first clue should have been [email protected].

Joe,

Yes- his email address is a matter of public information, but provided in such a way that eliminates the address being picked up by spam bots. When you typed his email address on this forum, it automatically became hyperlinked which means it will get picked up by bots collecting email addresses. He'll be receiving junk mail by the dozen, soon.

 

[Springfield]

... He may have felt the glyph was "looted out of Mexico" rather than entertain the possibility that the glyph could have been found so far up north.

Correct. Without seeing the tile and knowing its provenance, other than via an email description and a photo, it would be difficult for him to comment. Over a beer or cup of coffee, with the piece in hand - off the record - you might get a rise.

By the way, what are the circumstances of the find? Without knowing any better, it wouldn't be a stretch to look at that photo and assume the tile is a $10 Mexican tourist geegaw. You oughta see what the kids are selling on the streets of Casas Grandes - very nice 'artifacts'. What else was found with the tile? How was the cave sealed? Any carvings outside or inside the cave?

 

[Oroblanco]

Expert Opinion

Not to make excusesfor professor Smith, but to these academics, this kind of a find/artifact is a regular minefield for them. If they make any pronouncement that it is genuine, they then risk attack by the whole of academia, and should the artifact later be found to have been a fake (there are some good ones in circulation, look at the recent "finds" in Israel for examples) the reputation of said professor is ruined for life. Worse, he/she could lose his position (and income) and finding another job would be much more difficult as no academy wants to hire a discredited professor.

I do think he could have been more courteous, but perhaps he was having a bad day, or had just had some close call on an artifact that he thought was genuine and it turned out false. I have run into very much the same thing, and had somewhat better luck in being evasive and vague about where things have been found, but in such cases the professors are usually offended that you have not been honest and forthright about what is known of the item, and will refuse to allow their name or their statements to be used. I think I told you about that incident with a stone plaque or pendant found in Maine, which I did find a professor willing to make a judgement call on it (he stated it was genuine, and either very early Greek or Phoenician, and then asked where it was found) but when he learned that it was found in Maine, wrote a pretty nasty email to me informing me in no uncertain terms that I could not ever use his name in association with that artifact in any way.

There are a few, a VERY few, academics whom are courageous enough to put their career on the line to examine these "OOPARTS" like that apparently Mayan tile. I give these few very high marks for their courage, people like Dr Fell, prof Mark McMenamin, or in other fields equally dangerous to an academic career, professor Jeff Meldrum as examples. Dr Fell is deceased and made a number of mistakes in his interpretations of course, but his work was in a sense ground breaking in even looking at mysterious evidence of ancient travelers, far away from the "accepted" lands where they are expected to be found.

Good luck Mike I hope you are able to find a bona fide Mayan expert to examine the tile and make a statement on it.

BTW Joe you really have a dim view of most treasure hunters don't you? <Cactusjumper wrote>

Many treasure hunters are fairly comfortable with coming to unwarranted conclusions based on a picture or story from a magazine.

While there is no doubt that some treasure hunters DO leap to unwarranted conclusions on some finds (especially treasure symbols/marks) does not the example of our mutual amigo Mike (Gollum) help dispel that impression for you? Mike did not automatically conclude anything, and went to the trouble to seek the opinion(s) of a verified expert in the field. It would be nice if all treasure hunters followed this procedure, but in some cases it is not wise to make a find public information, and how many people would want to be treated brusquely (or curt, as you put it) or worse, for simply asking for a professional opinion? I can see both sides of this coin, and do not know how to make better relations between treasure hunters and academics, some of whom view all treasure hunters as quite literally "the enemy" while little trust exists among treasure hunters for academia.

I will give you a NON-expert opinion Mike; Mayan hieroglyphics are not my specialty and I can not make a judgement whether that tile is ancient as it appears or a modern fake, but I would say that it IS MAYAN, and looks to be a date; if it is genuine as it appears, it is likely that more tiles exist nearby that go with that date. It is a fact that items which almost certainly came from the US (pre-Columbus of course) are found in ancient Mayan sites, and the Mayans like the Aztecs had an active trading network.

I hope you will keep us posted Mike, and almost expect that MORE such finds will be made in that area in the future.

Sorry for the long winded rant.
Roy ~ Oroblanco

 

[cactusjumper]

Roy,

You are reading something entirely different into what I wrote.

[BTW Joe you really have a dim view of most treasure hunters don't you?] <Cactusjumper wrote>

"Many treasure hunters are fairly comfortable with coming to unwarranted conclusions based on a picture or story from a magazine."

I stick by my statement. I have set up an event that, every year, brings together more than a few treasure hunters, most of whom sit in my camp......etc. Over the last ten years I have spent a great deal of time and money making it a success. I grew up with family who were treasure hunters.

I have a "dim view" of many treasure hunters. Don't you?

Take care,

Joe

 

[gollum]

First,

I can confirm that the finder is indeed watching this thread, and may chime in if it suits him.

Joe and Roy,

While I can completely understand Dr Smith not wanting to get involved in evaluating something about which there is no provenance. Also the dangers of him evaluating something that could possibly be either a fake or worse, an artifact stolen from Mexico/Guatemala/Belize, etc. What I can't understand (nor abide) is a flippant answer.

Joe,

You have known me for many years. You have introduced me to a few people in that time. I have never been anything but courteous and polite to them all. While I would have to categorize myself as a treasure hunter, I am not the guy that reads an old copy of TREASURE! Magazine, then runs out and digs up a graveyard. I'd like to think I put in a little more research time than that! HAHAHA Buuuuut, on the whole, I know you are entirely correct about MANY "so called" treasure hunters.

Spring,

If someone is making fake tiles and dumping them deep in in very remote and very hard to get to caves, then you may have a point. ;-)

Mike

 

[deducer]

By the way, what are the circumstances of the find? Without knowing any better, it wouldn't be a stretch to look at that photo and assume the tile is a $10 Mexican tourist geegaw. You oughta see what the kids are selling on the streets of Casas Grandes - very nice 'artifacts'. What else was found with the tile? How was the cave sealed? Any carvings outside or inside the cave?

More details can be found in the original thread on the LDM forum. For some reason most of the details are not available, other than it was found in a cave "that displayed other oddities," including the location of the cave itself. I don't know the details but I do know the person who found it, and his word is beyond reproach. If he says it was found in a cave, it was found in a cave.

This isn't the first time it has been brought up. Mike also had a thread on it in another forum that simply petered out. His initial diagnosis was that it was the 'EB' letter.

Not sure if that initial translation worked out?

 

[Springfield]

... Spring,

If someone is making fake tiles and dumping them deep in in very remote and very hard to get to caves, then you may have a point. ;-)

Mike

Ha ha. Are you saying this cave is in Utah? Ha ha.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

May I aek just how was the letter to the professor written = full wording please if possible

on Jose de La Mancha

 

[Crow]

Hello Gollum.

Don't take that professor comments personal. he would of said the same to anyone he is not familiar with.

I have a yarn to post about an Archive who fell from grace. One slip and other archies will cut your career to pieces and the profession of archeologists is cutthroat and ruthless.

Crow

 

[deducer]

One slip and other archies will cut your career to pieces and the profession of archeologists is cutthroat and ruthless.

Crow

 

[gollum]

Hello Gollum.

Don't take that professor comments personal. he would of said the same to anyone he is not familiar with.

I have a yarn to post about an Archive who fell from grace. One slip and other archies will cut your career to pieces and the profession of archeologists is cutthroat and ruthless.

Crow

Ah you see, but I do take them personally. While not outright hostile, it was certainly flippant. A rude answer when rudeness was not called for. I can personally think of several forms his answer might have taken if he didn't want to have any part of it.

Joe,
I am sure that if I had contacted him asking questions about his books or telling him how much I had enjoyed reading his books, then his answer would likely have taken an entirely different tone. See, those questions feed his ego. They give him a chance to elaborate on what he has written. The true test of a person's character comes when their beliefs are challenged, or are asked to do something for a stranger or for someone that can do their career no benefit.

Take for instance, my initial question to Father O'Malley SJ. It was a bit long, and had no mention of treasure hunting, but I basically asked Father O'Malley if he would be open to "frankly discussing Jesuit History from time to time?" His reply was very courteous, and he has since thenanswered many of my questions more "frankly" than many non Jesuits here on this forum. He spoke honestly bout Jesuit slaveholding, and even told me that he didn't see there being a big problem with Jesuit Mining. A true gentleman, and honest in every discussion I have had with him. A pronounced difference between him and Dr Smith.

Jose de una leche malteada de chocolate,

Hello,

First, please let me apologize for not providing all the specifics of this. I only know what I have been told. A friend was hiking in the mountains in Southern Arizona. He found a cave and went fairly deep inside. In the cave he found what is in the attached picture.

I can tell you that the finder is not making up this story., and didn’t plant this. He said it didn’t look like anybody had been in the cave ever. He said the cave got really steep after this section, and he didn’t feel comfortable descending any further without climbing gear.


It appears to be a small part of a date. I think 3 EB. I was referred to you by XXX XXXXXX who had corresponded with you at some point. Please let me know what you think. Any assistance you could give would be greatly appreciated

Thanks - Mike McChesney

So, even if he didn't want to have anything to do with this, I can think of TONS of replies he could/should have given me. But he didn't. He chose to be dismissive in his answer. That is absolutely fine with me. There are MANY scholars that do just what he does, and I have corresponded over the years with several. Joe recommended him, so I gave him a shot. I had hoped he may have been a new source of knowledge, but I guess not.

........... and don't get me wrong. I am not mad. Just disappointed. I would rather he hadn't answered me at all rather than send what he did.

Mike

 

[cactusjumper]

Mike,

[Hello,

First, please let me apologize for not providing all the specifics of this. I only know what I have been told. A friend was hiking in the mountains in Southern Arizona. He found a cave and went fairly deep inside. In the cave he found what is in the attached picture.

I can tell you that the finder is not making up this story., and didn’t plant this. He said it didn’t look like anybody had been in the cave ever. He said the cave got really steep after this section, and he didn’t feel comfortable descending any further without climbing gear.

It appears to be a small part of a date. I think 3 EB. I was referred to you by XXX XXXXXX who had corresponded with you at some point. Please let me know what you think. Any assistance you could give would be greatly appreciated

Thanks - Mike McChesney]
__________________________

You certainly do have a way with words. No wonder his reply was so curt.

I notice you use Father O'Malley's title when writing about him. Did you start your first email to him with....."Hello"?

It's quite true that when I make a connection with these folks, I am overly respectful. I get results!

You can't name your source, nor where the "artifact" was found, but know the source is telling the truth and didn't plant the object. There have been more than a few manufactured, planted artifacts over the years. No archaeologist worth his paycheck would ever give you more than what Professor Smith did.

Not sure I have ever started an email to him is such a cavalier manner. If you're happy with the results, by all means, don't change a thing in the future.

Take care,

Joe

 

[deducer]

You certainly do have a way with words. No wonder his reply was so curt.

I notice you use Father O'Malley's title when writing about him. Did you start your first email to him with....."Hello"?

It's quite true that when I make a connection with these folks, I am overly respectful. I get results!

You can't name your source, nor where the "artifact" was found, but know the source is telling the truth and didn't plant the object. There have been more than a few manufactured, planted artifacts over the years. No archaeologist worth his paycheck would ever give you more than what Professor Smith did.

Not sure I have ever started an email to him is such a cavalier manner. If you're happy with the results, by all means, don't change a thing in the future.

Take care,

Joe

Really Joe, why the need to be so contemptuous of what Mike did?

Since you maintain that you know best, let's try it your way, and see if we get better results.

 

[gollum]

Mike,

[Hello,

First, please let me apologize for not providing all the specifics of this. I only know what I have been told. A friend was hiking in the mountains in Southern Arizona. He found a cave and went fairly deep inside. In the cave he found what is in the attached picture.

I can tell you that the finder is not making up this story., and didn’t plant this. He said it didn’t look like anybody had been in the cave ever. He said the cave got really steep after this section, and he didn’t feel comfortable descending any further without climbing gear.

It appears to be a small part of a date. I think 3 EB. I was referred to you by XXX XXXXXX who had corresponded with you at some point. Please let me know what you think. Any assistance you could give would be greatly appreciated

Thanks - Mike McChesney]
__________________________

You certainly do have a way with words. No wonder his reply was so curt.

I notice you use Father O'Malley's title when writing about him. Did you start your first email to him with....."Hello"?

It's quite true that when I make a connection with these folks, I am overly respectful. I get results!

You can't name your source, nor where the "artifact" was found, but know the source is telling the truth and didn't plant the object. There have been more than a few manufactured, planted artifacts over the years. No archaeologist worth his paycheck would ever give you more than what Professor Smith did.

Not sure I have ever started an email to him is such a cavalier manner. If you're happy with the results, by all means, don't change a thing in the future.

Take care,

Joe

Joe,

I don't see how you arrive at using the word "cavalier" from Hello, and the phrase "No wonder his reply was so curt" based on my phrasing. Did you notice the intro "First, let me apologize for not providing all the specifics of this. I only know what I have been told."

Anyway, my phrasing and the word Hello, in no way rates a curt answer. Your thinking so says more about you than him. It matters not whether he thinks I could be a fraud, thief, trickster, or CAVALIER. If I had received that same email, and I didn't want to get involved for whatever reason, I might have replied "Thank you for your photograph, and while it looks interesting, since there is no provenance or anything published about the find, I have to say that I cannot say any more than it looks interesting. I hope you can understand."

Simple, courteous, and to the point. All I would have at the least expected. Like I said, if you think my question warranted his answer, then that says more about you than me.

Deducer,

Haven't you realized yet? Joe knows best about everything (Jesuit Treasure, Jesuit Mining, courtesy in correspondence). HAHAHA Just teasing Joe.

Since I wasn't pining for an autograph, Joe immediately thinks I was discourteous. I could have begun the email in any number of ways, but NONE of them (except maybe "Hey Dude, What duz this pic look like to you?") rate the answer I got. I don't care about autographs on books, I only care about the information that's in them.

Best - Mike

 

[cactusjumper]

Really Joe, why the need to be so contemptuous of what Mike did?

Since you maintain that you know best, let's try it your way, and see if we get better results.

deducer,

I almost always get a positive reply. It may not be the best, but I am happy with the results......so far. Professor Smith has given his opinion, so I would not insult him by repeating the question, in any manner.

I consider Mike a friend. It just seems natural for us to rag on each other now and again. You on the other hand, are an acquaintance and as such, any contemptuous comments should be considered as from the heart.

Take care,

Joe

 

[gollum]

deducer,

I almost always get a positive reply. It may not be the best, but I am happy with the results......so far. Professor Smith has given his opinion, so I would not insult him by repeating the question, in any manner.

I consider Mike a friend. It just seems natural for us to rag on each other now and again. You on the other hand, are an acquaintance and as such, any contemptuous comments should be considered as from the heart.

Take care,

Joe

Deducer,

Joe is correct here. While it is difficult to FEEL the intentions of an email, since Joe and I go back a ways, I always give him the benefit of the doubt, and assume his intention is to put a burr under my saddle rather than insult me. Since I started doing that, I have found that to be correct. HAHAHA

Best - Mike