LDM, OZ, & CALALUS

[markmar]

For those who are not convinced how the artifacts are accurate , I want to to tell a thought :

If the artifacts were proven as fake , modern and a joke , why are still decorating a Museum ? What value have if are fake ? Who would put a fake thing in his collection ? Personally , I don't .
So , could someone to answer serious to these questions ?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A History of Mining on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska - Grab it through Amazon!

[cactusjumper]

For those who are not convinced how the artifacts are accurate , I want to to tell a thought :

If the artifacts were proven as fake , modern and a joke , why are still decorating a Museum ? What value have if are fake ? Who would put a fake thing in his collection ? Personally , I don't .
So , could someone to answer serious to these questions ?

Marius,

The museum does not claim any belief that the artifacts are authentic to the age that has been attributed to them. They keep them on display because they have a certain amount of draw for some people. They are unable to say with certainty that the artifacts are "modern-day" creations, nor authentic.

As you can see from our long-term discussion of the artifacts, there is still interest in them, much like the Stone Maps. While no one has proof that the Tucson artifacts are a fraud, the preponderance of evidence points to them not being as claimed.

Like everyone else, you will have to give the "evidence" serious research, and come to your own conclusions.

For me, the age of the caliche they were found in is a huge red flag.

Good luck,

Joe

 

[markmar]

Joe

You live in America and you did't see ancient mortar . I know ( I saw it ) an ancient port in Greece , named Anthidon , which is about 2800 years old and was manufactured with mortar bricks . The ancient people who lived there had their homes manufactured with mortar briks too .
So , the instant mortar was known from the ancient time .

If you believe how the caliche was from a very far back in time period , the explanation is simple . When the mortar was made , in about 900 AD , they used materials from the surrounding area . Is possible the debris or the sand which they used , to had samples of prehistoric fossils or something like this . Is not a plausible possibility ?

 

[Somero]

I thought Starman had posted #308. Wonder why its gone?

 

[sgtfda]

Only believers can see it Eric

 

[Somero]

I don't recall partaking any alcohol prior to seeing it posted, must have been my subconscious running amuck again.

 

[somehiker]

Didn't miss much, just more of the same.

 

[lost]

I saw the post. Part of it was asking me to question my source's for posting the artifacts were probably made from melted car batteries. Here to the best of my 75 year old memory is what I remember.

1. A US Government report crossed my path decades ago. I don't know why because the artifacts had nothing to do with my area of analyzes or expertize. Read them with only slight interest as I had no idea what they were and why I had the unclassified report was more on my mind. Figured mistake. But the mention they were made of early modern lead, probably battery lead stuck in my mind. Can't remember if the Government made the test (doubt it) or was just agreeing with who ever did the testing. Diffidently mentioned fraud. Later, maybe months or years I read a more or less detail of what the artifacts were. Way before the internet.

2. At a sit down political dinner in Alexandria VA, probably ten years later, one of the men at my table was a professor at the University of Tennessee. I think he said Archaeologist but not 100%. The discussion at the table was Cherokee Gold mines. When it jumped to the LDM I remembered the Artifacts and ask him what he knew. He only said they were made from early modern lead, found buried in the middle of no where and there were lots of questions about them. Then back to the Cherokee's.

3. Some type of Smithsonian publishing , again about ten years after questioning the Professor, they run something short about the artifacts. Magazine filler, paper, memo or whatever. They also said something about modern made lead. Don't remember if battery was used. But, differently modern lead. No mention of fraud that I remember. If I was more computer literate I could probably find at least one of the reports. The US one is really old and I wouldn't know where to even start.

Plus, I've read plenty of posts on here and other sites claiming the artifacts were made from melted battery lead. So other people have seen the same type of Info I asked about. I don't really care either way. Just wondering how and why the battery lead claim wasn't being considered in Starmans claims. There is my sources Starman. Sorry I even mentioned it.

 

[Not Peralta]

I thought Starman had posted #308. Wonder why its gone?

maybe "OOO" picked him up? np

 

[cactusjumper]

Lost,

The analysis of the lead can be found starting on page 70 of the above book, if you can find a copy. It also lists the folks who did the work. Also in this book you can find the dating of the soil depth where the artifacts were located as........Pleistocene era.
You can take it from there.

Good luck,

Joe Ribaudo

 

[Somero]

Joe

You live in America and you did't see ancient mortar . I know ( I saw it ) an ancient port in Greece , named Anthidon , which is about 2800 years old and was manufactured with mortar bricks . The ancient people who lived there had their homes manufactured with mortar briks too .
So , the instant mortar was known from the ancient time .

If you believe how the caliche was from a very far back in time period , the explanation is simple . When the mortar was made , in about 900 AD , they used materials from the surrounding area . Is possible the debris or the sand which they used , to had samples of prehistoric fossils or something like this . Is not a plausible possibility ?

Starman claims the artifacts were "dumped in a marshy area" so any contamination from "man made mortar" would be highly unlikely.

 

[markmar]

Starman claims the artifacts were "dumped in a marshy area" so any contamination from "man made mortar" would be highly unlikely.

If the artifacts were just dumped in a marshy area or at the margin of prior trenches , I believe how the artifacts should been more deeper in the ground and all together because the lead is very weighty and the caliche takes many years to formed . Every time when rained , the artifacts should immersed more deeper . And for sure the lead Celtic cross , which is the most heavily , would not been in a upright position .

 

[cactusjumper]

If the artifacts were just dumped in a marshy area or at the margin of prior trenches , I believe how the artifacts should been more deeper in the ground and all together because the lead is very weighty and the caliche takes many years to formed . Every time when rained , the artifacts should immersed more deeper . And for sure the lead Celtic cross , which is the most heavily , would not been in a upright position .

Marius,

If you are going to support this story, you need to look a little more deeply into the actual facts.

Good luck,

Joe

 

[markmar]

Marius,

If you are going to support this story, you need to look a little more deeply into the actual facts.

Good luck,

Joe

Joe

I don't support this story . I wrote only my opinion if the artifacts were dumped in a marshy area .

 

[cactusjumper]

The Dinosaur on the Tucson Artifacts - JasonColavito.com

Here's a little more on the artifacts.

Joe

 

[somehiker]

Reading down the comments you will find "Starmans" contribution......

"b.davis
04/28/2013 11:27am

Mr. Colavito,

I just came across your article today and wanted to say how much I enjoyed your efforts. Having said that if anyone is interested in understanding the artifacts a good starting point is Thomas Bent`s work, "The Tucson Artifacts".

The descendents of Calalus still walk among you today. That is the truth.

Actually a far more entertaining issue to research is why they came to America?"

 

[cactusjumper]

Wayne,

Ben Davis is a very convincing proponent of Calalus and the Tucson artifacts. I called him a number of years ago and we probably talked for 15-20 minutes. He's well spoken and highly intelligent.

The story, as it's been told, seems very improbable. As Roy and I have mentioned many times, for the cities and people to have populated the areas claimed for the years indicated, and leave no trace of their existence is, IMHO, not possible.

You, as someone who has respect and familiarity with archaeology know, the numbers of people along with multiple cities, had to leave an avalanche of evidence behind.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Gentlemen please post by our rules and stop the bickering and insults...

 

[Hal Croves]

For those who are not convinced how the artifacts are accurate , I want to to tell a thought :

If the artifacts were proven as fake , modern and a joke , why are still decorating a Museum ? What value have if are fake ? Who would put a fake thing in his collection ? Personally , I don't .
So , could someone to answer serious to these questions ?

markmar,

I thought that you might appreciate reading the following. If you can, I suggest that you access and read the complete work before investing any more of your time in the Tucson Artifacts or, those who perpetuate the story.

 

[markmar]

Hal

I am not obsessed with the Tucson artifacts and I have told only my opinion . For sure are odd and hard to decrypt , and for sure some wanted to use them like a piece from the roots of their specific religion .
I believe the artifacts are part of the Central America ( and south US ) history but for now don't exist many proofs to state this . I believe and I hope how one day this story will be cleared up and the people will see them to the Museum like what they really are .