the blindbowman
Bronze Member
- Nov 21, 2006
- 1,379
- 30
- Thread starter
- #21
so what did exspect ......and you wonder why i react to the out side world the way i do .....
take care ...
take care ...
fiction vs fact
- Thread starter the blindbowman
- Start date
Oroblanco
Gold Member
- Jan 21, 2005
- 7,838
- 9,830
- Detector(s) used
- Tesoro Lobo Supertraq, (95%) Garrett Scorpion (5%)
Greetings Blindbowman,
Blindbowman wrote:
It is not a "fake" set of coordinates, it is decimal degrees as used on many topo map servers and some GPS toys. If you would prefer the traditional here it is:
45 degrees, 34 minutes 13 seconds N
107 decrees, 25 minutes, 28 seconds W
If you would rather not take this "test" (really only out of curiosity, no treasure involved) I will understand.
Blindbowman also wrote:
Not sure what you expected, perhaps I should have explained that the lat-long was in decimal degrees or put in both systems to make it more clear. Sometimes I do wonder about you mi amigo, but in a good way - I hope all is well with you and yours. Take it easy and I hope you have a great day.
Oroblanco
Blindbowman wrote:
It is not a "fake" set of coordinates, it is decimal degrees as used on many topo map servers and some GPS toys. If you would prefer the traditional here it is:
45 degrees, 34 minutes 13 seconds N
107 decrees, 25 minutes, 28 seconds W
If you would rather not take this "test" (really only out of curiosity, no treasure involved) I will understand.
Blindbowman also wrote:
Not sure what you expected, perhaps I should have explained that the lat-long was in decimal degrees or put in both systems to make it more clear. Sometimes I do wonder about you mi amigo, but in a good way - I hope all is well with you and yours. Take it easy and I hope you have a great day.
Oroblanco
the blindbowman
Bronze Member
- Nov 21, 2006
- 1,379
- 30
- Thread starter
- #23
Oroblanco said:
lol then i feel very sorry for your GPS company , i have been trained to 1/100 of a secound and anything less is to radom and considerered being inaccuracy.as you well know are grounds to be writern up in the militery....
and there is no reading that reads there digets that way .they should read,, ( 45 13' 58.97" ) .....in your case you could be missteaken and it could read .8 or .08 ,,and if so ,if some are out there makeing readings that read 45 136.. they dont have a #@!$%#@!ing clue of what a true reading is or how the system really works ...
the standerd reading would look like this 45 13' 58 .8" then it would tell me the person has drop to 10's and dose not wish to use 100's messurements or my not need the level of accuracy for what readings they are working on ...
and if you were talking about Devil's tower or a site in the surounding area the chance to read the site has most likely been lost to the confussion ...
i will just be happy to stop doing these ebay maillings ...they are a big pain in the you know what ! but we need the equipment...
Oroblanco
Gold Member
- Jan 21, 2005
- 7,838
- 9,830
- Detector(s) used
- Tesoro Lobo Supertraq, (95%) Garrett Scorpion (5%)
Greetings Blindbowman,
The site was last stand hill, looking toward Weir point in the Custer battlefield, Montana. (Now known as the Little Bighorn National Battlefield) I did not post the name of the site here as folks would instantly guess what I was trying to find out. Sorry for the confusion.
Actually there IS a treasure associated with that area I forgot about when I last posted, but as it was paper money I would doubt very highly that anything remains of it today.
Oroblanco
The site was last stand hill, looking toward Weir point in the Custer battlefield, Montana. (Now known as the Little Bighorn National Battlefield) I did not post the name of the site here as folks would instantly guess what I was trying to find out. Sorry for the confusion.
Actually there IS a treasure associated with that area I forgot about when I last posted, but as it was paper money I would doubt very highly that anything remains of it today.
Oroblanco
cactusjumper
Gold Member
Fiction vs Fact seems to be the correct place for me to post this message:
I was recently told that I had called or intimated that Clay Worst was a liar. I don't know Mr. Worst personally, but have heard nothing but praise for the character of the man. People/ friends, who do know him very well, have told me he is someone they highly admire. I am left with nothing but positive feelings for a man I have never met.
Anyone who is trying to read into anything I have written, that I have less than the highest regard for Mr. Worst is either an illiterate A$$&*&ole or a moron.
Let me make this perfectly clear for the person who is "leading" people who claim to be my friends to this alleged slander.
I have nothing but respect for Clay Worst. I paid $200 for a pamphlet just to have his signature in my collection. If the person who "led" TG to this offensive post will copy and post it in a reply here, I will be happy to explain how the English language works.......at no charge. If I wrote something in an ambiguous manner I will be happy to apologize to anyone who found it offensive, including Mr. Worst.
Put up or shut up.
Joe Ribaudo
I was recently told that I had called or intimated that Clay Worst was a liar. I don't know Mr. Worst personally, but have heard nothing but praise for the character of the man. People/ friends, who do know him very well, have told me he is someone they highly admire. I am left with nothing but positive feelings for a man I have never met.
Anyone who is trying to read into anything I have written, that I have less than the highest regard for Mr. Worst is either an illiterate A$$&*&ole or a moron.
Let me make this perfectly clear for the person who is "leading" people who claim to be my friends to this alleged slander.
I have nothing but respect for Clay Worst. I paid $200 for a pamphlet just to have his signature in my collection. If the person who "led" TG to this offensive post will copy and post it in a reply here, I will be happy to explain how the English language works.......at no charge. If I wrote something in an ambiguous manner I will be happy to apologize to anyone who found it offensive, including Mr. Worst.
Put up or shut up.
Joe Ribaudo
the blindbowman
Bronze Member
- Nov 21, 2006
- 1,379
- 30
- Thread starter
- #26
Oro you are right the paper money cache is southeast at about 141-143 degrees ,look for a large tree on the south west slope of a north west by south east redge .. the downward side .. they camp to getout of the wind and hid it near by only to be confounted before it could be recoverd .... something else about 2- or 3 cannons , i know very little about the vent if i had more back ground i could lock on the event better .. most often any contact with any object of a event can help ,....your lon an lat is confussion to me , i cant get a fix on its remote veiwing .. its somewhere near 4 miles to the southeast ....of the battle field it self ...thats why no one has found it yet .. look southeast or give me more to focus on ....air photos of the area 5 miles south back to the battle field it self .. and a few pics of the battle event should help ...as far as the cannons , they dont make sence to me , as far as i knew the battle had no cannons in the event .. i dont know what that is about ....oro if this is a new site you want to look into give me some back ground and i will try to refocus ...for a full veiwing ...any thing to help you ...dude , i get the feeling you want to look for this cache ...the night it happend the wind was comeing out of the northeast . not normal for that area . but never the less, if you wait tell you have the same northeast wind blowing to the southwest you will be able to find the location easyer, its closer to the southern end of the redge line , look for the still air .. a deathly com area , dont freak out when the deer run . you will under stand when you find the right location ....their guide was part indain and he pick the spot for the same reason . its where the deer bed down in those conditions ... he knew it and so do you now.....
as for Clay worst i dont know him ether . and i have never heard cj speak poorly of him .as far as iknow cj only a pickerwood to me ....LOL ...
as far as who clay worst is .. his research speaks for it self . and he should be respecked for who he is .. ..that dose not mean he is a god of treasure hunters .....it means he was will to devote his life to the legend and stayed true to the hunt for 50 years ...
who said that Cj...
as for Clay worst i dont know him ether . and i have never heard cj speak poorly of him .as far as iknow cj only a pickerwood to me ....LOL ...
as far as who clay worst is .. his research speaks for it self . and he should be respecked for who he is .. ..that dose not mean he is a god of treasure hunters .....it means he was will to devote his life to the legend and stayed true to the hunt for 50 years ...
who said that Cj...
the blindbowman
Bronze Member
- Nov 21, 2006
- 1,379
- 30
- Thread starter
- #27
besides if you think i stated any thing about you ,your dreaming , i dont have the time right now to play any bull#@!$%#@! games . and i have no idea if you knew clay or not ,nor do i care at this piont in time ...and if you are trying to confont me you are makeing a big missteak ...but as i stated i just dont have the time right now . get the hell over it and say who said that and we can confront them ...i think you are over reacting but thats only my opioion ...
photos of a snow owl taken in the rain at night , with our new photo sys
photos of a snow owl taken in the rain at night , with our new photo sys
Attachments
W
woodpecker
Guest
nice pics
Cubfan64
Silver Member
- Feb 13, 2006
- 2,986
- 2,789
- Detector(s) used
- Fisher CZ21, Teknetics T2 & Minelab Sovereign GT
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
the blindbowman said:
Whoever CJ is referring to you, I'm sure it's not you BB - CJ doesn't read your posts anymore. Dunno why you felt as though he was attacking you. As far as calling someone out by name on a forum - that's rarely a good idea and I doubt CJ will do that. I think his post was meant to be a message directly to whoever disparaged him - if you weren't the person responsible for it, it's not meant for you.
the blindbowman
Bronze Member
- Nov 21, 2006
- 1,379
- 30
- Thread starter
- #30
Cubfan64 said:
Oroblanco
Gold Member
- Jan 21, 2005
- 7,838
- 9,830
- Detector(s) used
- Tesoro Lobo Supertraq, (95%) Garrett Scorpion (5%)
Re: fiction vs fact (drifting off topic)
Greetings Blindbowman,
Blindbowman wrote:
Let me explain a bit. The cache I mentioned is an old legend I heard about in a bar and later learned had some basis in fact. According to the story, after the Custer fight, two warriors who knew that the paper money used by the soldiers had some value went around the hill and picked up all they could find, then rode away from the battlefield to a site where the paper money was hidden. The site was in a spot where the warrior had to stand on his pony's back to reach the hole (as in a cliff) but he never went back to get it. If the paper money survived over a century in that soil it would be a miracle in itself.
I am not planning to hunt for that cache, as I am fairly well convinced it would be dissolved into the soil by now. My reason for the "test" has to do with a particular question about the battle itself; the latitude/longitude I gave you is correct, there is no fraction of a second to factor in. If you wanted it in that format, it would be:
45 34 ' 13.00" N
107 25' 28.00" W
In giving out the name of the site however, a skeptic could then dismiss anything you might say since that battle is well documented, which was one of the key reasons why I only gave the coordinates first. The use of decimal degrees instead of minutes, second and decimal seconds is fairly common, you will see it more in the future even though really it is not as precise as the old way.
The question was what could be seen on the highest point to the SE at the height of the battle, looking from last stand hill. (the highest point is Weir point) Could Custer's men see the arrival of Captain Weir's D troop on Weir point? Could they have seen the arrival of the rest of the regiment there a few minutes later? This little "mystery" has been un-solvable since the battle; if Custer's men could see D troop, it might explain the positions in which the dead troopers were found later, if they could not see the troops on Weir point, the positions don't make much sense. I have been to the battlefield several times and for some people it is easy to see a person on Weir point, for others they cannot see a man at that distance. Anyway thought it would make an interesting "test" for you to try with no treasure involved, however it would be moot at this point.
As for the cannons, not sure what you are picking up on - the Sioux did have two cannons that they presented to the British when they crossed into Canada after the Little Bighorn fight, so as far as I know the only cannons present at the time were NOT hidden but transported into Canada; (they had captured the cannons in the war of 1812, and did not use them) the two mountain howitzers in the Terry column were returned to the fort on Terry's return, so those are not hidden either.
CJ is definitely talking to someone else buddy, not you.
Oroblanco
Greetings Blindbowman,
Blindbowman wrote:
Let me explain a bit. The cache I mentioned is an old legend I heard about in a bar and later learned had some basis in fact. According to the story, after the Custer fight, two warriors who knew that the paper money used by the soldiers had some value went around the hill and picked up all they could find, then rode away from the battlefield to a site where the paper money was hidden. The site was in a spot where the warrior had to stand on his pony's back to reach the hole (as in a cliff) but he never went back to get it. If the paper money survived over a century in that soil it would be a miracle in itself.
I am not planning to hunt for that cache, as I am fairly well convinced it would be dissolved into the soil by now. My reason for the "test" has to do with a particular question about the battle itself; the latitude/longitude I gave you is correct, there is no fraction of a second to factor in. If you wanted it in that format, it would be:
45 34 ' 13.00" N
107 25' 28.00" W
In giving out the name of the site however, a skeptic could then dismiss anything you might say since that battle is well documented, which was one of the key reasons why I only gave the coordinates first. The use of decimal degrees instead of minutes, second and decimal seconds is fairly common, you will see it more in the future even though really it is not as precise as the old way.
The question was what could be seen on the highest point to the SE at the height of the battle, looking from last stand hill. (the highest point is Weir point) Could Custer's men see the arrival of Captain Weir's D troop on Weir point? Could they have seen the arrival of the rest of the regiment there a few minutes later? This little "mystery" has been un-solvable since the battle; if Custer's men could see D troop, it might explain the positions in which the dead troopers were found later, if they could not see the troops on Weir point, the positions don't make much sense. I have been to the battlefield several times and for some people it is easy to see a person on Weir point, for others they cannot see a man at that distance. Anyway thought it would make an interesting "test" for you to try with no treasure involved, however it would be moot at this point.
As for the cannons, not sure what you are picking up on - the Sioux did have two cannons that they presented to the British when they crossed into Canada after the Little Bighorn fight, so as far as I know the only cannons present at the time were NOT hidden but transported into Canada; (they had captured the cannons in the war of 1812, and did not use them) the two mountain howitzers in the Terry column were returned to the fort on Terry's return, so those are not hidden either.
CJ is definitely talking to someone else buddy, not you.
Oroblanco
the blindbowman
Bronze Member
- Nov 21, 2006
- 1,379
- 30
- Thread starter
- #32
so it wont matter at this piont if i reply or not you have already made up your mind and anything i would say would mean nothing at this piont, good luck . as for cj ... he knows what i think of his games ...i have not tryed hide it at all...
i never stated the cannons had anything to do with the battle it self . i saw them whn i was veiwing the monet it self . i have no idea why they show up . but in some way they relate to the money not the battle ...
"then rode away from the battlefield to a site where the paper money was hidden. The site was in a spot where the warrior had to stand on his pony's back to reach the hole (as in a cliff"
if the battle was takeing place as i stated and the the battle it self was moveing northward then to move away from the battle would most likely be in a sourthern dirrection as i stated . and note the hole could have very well been in a tree , if the indain had to stand on his horse and the horse was of normal hight then it is not likely to have been a cliff at all as most cliff lean away as the rise up and if not it would have to be a over hanging cliff at a lower hight ..wich is not often the normal ...the other thing i see , dose not make sence from what you stated . the money i saw was in stacks not lose bills ,it was more like a pay roll then the left over battle feild bills ...some one is not telling what they know ....or the story has been missleding some how ...the location and veiwing i see has no lables and names f the suround mt has no meaning to me at this piont ..look for a over hanging tree branch , it was a full size older tree at the time of the battle . there most like would still be some kind of sign of the tree still left ...
the indains may have been able to see the battle feild but i dont beleive the people on the battle feild could have seen them when they hide the money ...if they hide the money .. i keep seeing something diffrent then what you say happend ...its like a pay roll . and it still is there ...the tree is down laying and the hole is about 10 from the bottom of the trunk ....the tree is trun to the side where the lower branch lays to the southwest and the is almost under the tree at this piont ..there is still sign of it being there ...theother thing that dose not make sence is i see a long barrle hand gun six shotter with the money ...why would they put this with the money . for what reason ...
i guess it dont matter ..latter ....
i never stated the cannons had anything to do with the battle it self . i saw them whn i was veiwing the monet it self . i have no idea why they show up . but in some way they relate to the money not the battle ...
"then rode away from the battlefield to a site where the paper money was hidden. The site was in a spot where the warrior had to stand on his pony's back to reach the hole (as in a cliff"
if the battle was takeing place as i stated and the the battle it self was moveing northward then to move away from the battle would most likely be in a sourthern dirrection as i stated . and note the hole could have very well been in a tree , if the indain had to stand on his horse and the horse was of normal hight then it is not likely to have been a cliff at all as most cliff lean away as the rise up and if not it would have to be a over hanging cliff at a lower hight ..wich is not often the normal ...the other thing i see , dose not make sence from what you stated . the money i saw was in stacks not lose bills ,it was more like a pay roll then the left over battle feild bills ...some one is not telling what they know ....or the story has been missleding some how ...the location and veiwing i see has no lables and names f the suround mt has no meaning to me at this piont ..look for a over hanging tree branch , it was a full size older tree at the time of the battle . there most like would still be some kind of sign of the tree still left ...
the indains may have been able to see the battle feild but i dont beleive the people on the battle feild could have seen them when they hide the money ...if they hide the money .. i keep seeing something diffrent then what you say happend ...its like a pay roll . and it still is there ...the tree is down laying and the hole is about 10 from the bottom of the trunk ....the tree is trun to the side where the lower branch lays to the southwest and the is almost under the tree at this piont ..there is still sign of it being there ...theother thing that dose not make sence is i see a long barrle hand gun six shotter with the money ...why would they put this with the money . for what reason ...
i guess it dont matter ..latter ....
Oroblanco
Gold Member
- Jan 21, 2005
- 7,838
- 9,830
- Detector(s) used
- Tesoro Lobo Supertraq, (95%) Garrett Scorpion (5%)
Greetings Blindbowman,
Blindbowman wrote:
Now you are putting words in my mouth mi amigo - I never said quite that, what I said was:
Blindbowman wrote:
I was only trying to understand the linkage with seeing cannons to this battle - there were two cannons in the Sioux camp, both small and nearly 100 years old at that time, and later given to the British but not used in the battle. If the cannons are related to the money, it is puzzling... more below.
Blindbowman also wrote:
As far as I know, the story was that it was a cliff, not necessarily a tree, but why not a tree in a canyon, which has cliffs? I don't know why not, either presents the possibility. Your next point really seems odd - money in stacks, not loose bills, which is what would be found if it were single bills that had been collected from a battlefield and likely in poor/bloody shape. A payroll? I have no information on that - as far as the 7th cav goes, they had just been paid immediately prior to the battle, which is why the soldiers had a fair amount of money on them. As for someone not telling what they know, I am not posting every detail of what I have learned here publicly, (that would bore our poor readers to death) however I am not lying when I say that I do not believe that particular treasure (the bills picked off the battlefield) still exists, and would not be bothered to look for it.
Blindbowman also wrote:
Your advice is probably as good as any, for anyone wishing to search for that treasure. I am not headed for Montana anytime soon, but thanks.
Blindbowman also wrote:
Hmm, that is not really what I was asking, you seem to be focused on a treasure tale there. What I was curious about was whether Custer's men could see soldiers on Weir point or not, taking into account that it was a relatively calm day (little wind) with very dry conditions, plenty of dust raised whenever horsemen moved across the land etc. Actually it seems logical that whether they could see soldiers or not, they might well have seen the dust cloud raised by the horsemen coming in the direction they were expected, and presumed to be Reno-Benteen coming. We know of a similar instance, when a dust column was sighted approaching Reno hill, Lt Varnum reported that the men instantly concluded that particular dust column was the approach of the pack train, as it was coming from the direction where they knew the pack train to be, and which it was. It seems doubtful that anyone on last stand hill would be able to see anything being hidden in a tree or cliff wall, off away from the battlefield.
Blindbowman also wrote:
As noted before, you are very focused on this treasure tale, which is not really what I was curious about. However, your mention of a long-barreled six shooter is not so far out - (not sure how "up" you are on antique firearms, I collect them) but the long barreled Colt Single Action Army revolver
was the standard cavalry issue, with each trooper being armed with one and 18 rounds of ammunition for it. They were used by the cavalry in the battle and many were captured and used by the Indians against the remaining troops trapped on Reno hill; Indians were well known for hiding weapons for use in emergency so it would be entirely normal for a captured revolver to be hidden in a 'safe' place, however it would be odd for Indians to hide a captured weapon with a payroll - since they were not known for robbing payrolls. A bandit treasure cache perhaps? I don't know, like I said I was not really asking about any kind of treasure, simply curious about how "good" your abilities are for peering into the past and that one question (visibility from one hill to another on a particular date) seemed a pretty good and tough question for you.
Thank you again and I hope you have a great day.
Oroblanco
Blindbowman wrote:
Now you are putting words in my mouth mi amigo - I never said quite that, what I said was:
so the point was that it would not prove anything to a skeptic reading our posts, not me personally.
Blindbowman wrote:
I was only trying to understand the linkage with seeing cannons to this battle - there were two cannons in the Sioux camp, both small and nearly 100 years old at that time, and later given to the British but not used in the battle. If the cannons are related to the money, it is puzzling... more below.
Blindbowman also wrote:
As far as I know, the story was that it was a cliff, not necessarily a tree, but why not a tree in a canyon, which has cliffs? I don't know why not, either presents the possibility. Your next point really seems odd - money in stacks, not loose bills, which is what would be found if it were single bills that had been collected from a battlefield and likely in poor/bloody shape. A payroll? I have no information on that - as far as the 7th cav goes, they had just been paid immediately prior to the battle, which is why the soldiers had a fair amount of money on them. As for someone not telling what they know, I am not posting every detail of what I have learned here publicly, (that would bore our poor readers to death) however I am not lying when I say that I do not believe that particular treasure (the bills picked off the battlefield) still exists, and would not be bothered to look for it.
Blindbowman also wrote:
Your advice is probably as good as any, for anyone wishing to search for that treasure. I am not headed for Montana anytime soon, but thanks.
Blindbowman also wrote:
Hmm, that is not really what I was asking, you seem to be focused on a treasure tale there. What I was curious about was whether Custer's men could see soldiers on Weir point or not, taking into account that it was a relatively calm day (little wind) with very dry conditions, plenty of dust raised whenever horsemen moved across the land etc. Actually it seems logical that whether they could see soldiers or not, they might well have seen the dust cloud raised by the horsemen coming in the direction they were expected, and presumed to be Reno-Benteen coming. We know of a similar instance, when a dust column was sighted approaching Reno hill, Lt Varnum reported that the men instantly concluded that particular dust column was the approach of the pack train, as it was coming from the direction where they knew the pack train to be, and which it was. It seems doubtful that anyone on last stand hill would be able to see anything being hidden in a tree or cliff wall, off away from the battlefield.
Blindbowman also wrote:
As noted before, you are very focused on this treasure tale, which is not really what I was curious about. However, your mention of a long-barreled six shooter is not so far out - (not sure how "up" you are on antique firearms, I collect them) but the long barreled Colt Single Action Army revolver
Thank you again and I hope you have a great day.
Oroblanco
the blindbowman
Bronze Member
- Nov 21, 2006
- 1,379
- 30
- Thread starter
- #34
thats not a tough question at all the fact is that is not what i see . do we know if the indains knew what they knew about the dust column , my piont being indains are not blind ... if they knew the soldiers related to this effect they may have used that to trick them in to beleiveing no one was coming ....,was is it they . " watch and learn ..."
i total you i know very little about this battle and with little to focus on make it hard to focus on one object or event . the connons could be from one event and the tree from another the payroll could be the same pay roll or another . but i see it in stacks about 1" thick ...., i would say it not more then $3-4000 worth but there is little way to know other then the judgement of the event vs a sound guess in line with what i see ...i can not trust anything you are saying because of the idea of it being a test .. and that is waste of my skills and its good that i focused on this much ...something about what you ask dose not make sence to me .. i dont know what it is but i feel you have not been forth comeing . or have tryed to missled me , that dose not help in any way ...
once we feel we are being missled or fear of being tricked it is almost impossable to get a clear reading . read some about remote veiwing and you well get a better idea of how it works and why ..
i call them long barriels and i perfer the signal six overmost fire arms ..i have owned one before thats why i stated that it looks vry close to my old gun ...mine was a black power navy six with a 10" barriel ...
just a focusing guess on my part ..doing a reading is a matter of how good the input and the out come reflects the input ...so it dose not shock me i gt very little of your goal .. but thats why i dont waste my time very often playing these misleding games and thats why the miltery found out they had no place in remote veiwing ...they develope into a mistrust and that is hard to over come . but baby feed the real person with the skill and they can see beyond what is known very easy ...
there are many diffrent types of this gift and some are better then others to each person ...
i have very little time right now , i have a lot of work going on and i have very little time to focus on my work let alone being tested and the out come of your test proves very little ..
so i well leave you to your opioion and get on with what i was doing ... good luck Oro ...
i total you i know very little about this battle and with little to focus on make it hard to focus on one object or event . the connons could be from one event and the tree from another the payroll could be the same pay roll or another . but i see it in stacks about 1" thick ...., i would say it not more then $3-4000 worth but there is little way to know other then the judgement of the event vs a sound guess in line with what i see ...i can not trust anything you are saying because of the idea of it being a test .. and that is waste of my skills and its good that i focused on this much ...something about what you ask dose not make sence to me .. i dont know what it is but i feel you have not been forth comeing . or have tryed to missled me , that dose not help in any way ...
once we feel we are being missled or fear of being tricked it is almost impossable to get a clear reading . read some about remote veiwing and you well get a better idea of how it works and why ..
i call them long barriels and i perfer the signal six overmost fire arms ..i have owned one before thats why i stated that it looks vry close to my old gun ...mine was a black power navy six with a 10" barriel ...
just a focusing guess on my part ..doing a reading is a matter of how good the input and the out come reflects the input ...so it dose not shock me i gt very little of your goal .. but thats why i dont waste my time very often playing these misleding games and thats why the miltery found out they had no place in remote veiwing ...they develope into a mistrust and that is hard to over come . but baby feed the real person with the skill and they can see beyond what is known very easy ...
there are many diffrent types of this gift and some are better then others to each person ...
i have very little time right now , i have a lot of work going on and i have very little time to focus on my work let alone being tested and the out come of your test proves very little ..
so i well leave you to your opioion and get on with what i was doing ... good luck Oro ...
Cubfan64
Silver Member
- Feb 13, 2006
- 2,986
- 2,789
- Detector(s) used
- Fisher CZ21, Teknetics T2 & Minelab Sovereign GT
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
BB - First of all, you were the one who offerred to be "tested" so to speak, so I guess I don't understand your comments about this being a waste and not having the time to deal with it. Secondly, I doubt very very much whether Oro is trying to do anything to "trick" you - his posts have always been extremely respectful and forthright towards you and I believe he simply took you up on your offer in order to try to answer some question about the battle from a historical standpoint that he always wondered about.
Continued luck in your endeavors.
Continued luck in your endeavors.
the blindbowman
Bronze Member
- Nov 21, 2006
- 1,379
- 30
- Thread starter
- #36
it would not matter at this piont i have little chance to remote veiw at this piont .. it dosent matter to me . as i stated i have very insight in to the battle he wanted to know about and dont have to time to focus on it right now . i have my hands full at this pio in time with 15 peice of equipment in the mail at one time .. so latter and good luck to both of you . if anything i am learning what it takes to out fit a expedition from start to finish ...lol ... it did not mean that the way it came out and there are limets to remote veiwing ... but who cares i have better things to do at this piont ....
its cool i just dont have the time to play right now .....latter
its cool i just dont have the time to play right now .....latter
Oroblanco
Gold Member
- Jan 21, 2005
- 7,838
- 9,830
- Detector(s) used
- Tesoro Lobo Supertraq, (95%) Garrett Scorpion (5%)
Re: fiction vs fact (LONG reply, extra coffee-beer alert)
Greetings Blindbowman, Cubfan64 and everyone,
Blindbowman wrote:
Well it is not really difficult to look up in the Indian accounts as to what they could see and when, that is historical record. What we do not have is any account from the soldiers' point of view. None of Custer's immediate command survived the battle to tell. (There is the possibility of a single survivor, a man whose horse ran away with him and off the field, but in his case this occurred with the first exchange of fire so his version includes only the very beginning of the fight. It is in a pretty interesting book titled Sole Survivor, a good read.) My interests include military history and the battle of the Little Bighorn is one of the great mysteries of history - just what happened with Custer's men. If his men could see soldiers coming from the SE at Weir point, it does help explain why all five companies were found dead in the places where they were, if they could not see troopers coming then their strange positions remain a mystery. We do have the accounts of Cavalry men who were with Captain Weir and Major Reno that went to Weir point, such as Lieutenant Edgerly's letters and Cpt Weir letter to Mrs Custer, and from their view point it seems that they could see Custer's men on the hill fighting for their lives surrounded by thousands of Indians. However simply because they could see Custer's men, (and Reno claimed he saw nothing) does not mean that vice-versa is also true. This single factor has puzzled me for many years and even going to the battlefield did not settle the matter, so when you offered to let us "test you like a lab rat" it struck me that perhaps you could use your abilities to almost literally "remote view" history and find out the truth. I am not really curious about what the Indians were able to see, as we can look that up and it would not explain the positions of Custer's men even if we know what the Indians could see.
Blindbowman also wrote:
It seems that you are very focused on this treasure, for some reason it is affecting your view. I cannot guess whether it is 100% accurate or way off, as I don't know of any treasure quite like that for that area. It very well could be correct, I have no way of knowing. It is however unrelated to my question. I guess I should add here, for our readers, that even if there IS a treasure of some kind hidden in the Custer battlefield, it is ILLEGAL to do any digging, metal detecting, or to remove anything so unless your treasure is far off the national battlefield any information on it is of no use to a treasure hunter. So please forget about the treasure details, which could get someone in trouble with the Park service rangers? Even if it is FAR off the battlefield, that could place in within the boundaries of one of two Indian reservations, and again it would be illegal to remove from there without tribal permission. That is not what I am trying to find out anyway.
Blindbowman also wrote:
You cannot trust anything I am saying? Why? It is not a pass or fail test - how on Earth would I be able to know if what you might tell me is correct or wrong? Cubfan is correct, I am not trying to fool you or trip you into making some kind of error so I could then make fun of what you said, this was just a question that has no answer in our history books because no one lived to tell. I cannot perform remote viewing, I can try to visualize the past but that is just visualizing, not actually "seeing" the past. There is no one who knows the truth living, in fact there was no one living who knew the truth by June 26th 1876 - so there is no reason for you to think that what I have said is not trustworthy. In fact ALL of what I have said concerning this battle can be checked in history books for that matter. This was not a "trick" test, just a straight question about history, a question that no one knows the answer to, the only possible way of knowing would be via remote viewing or to have a time machine to travel there. I don't know just what strikes you as not making sense, as for not being forthcoming, yes there is a great deal about the battle that I have not posted as it is of no consequence to the question - I posted all I know about the only treasure report that I know of which is related to the battle of the Little Bighorn, and that particular treasure is of a type that would rot very quickly - paper money in the ground unprotected by anything. Besides, it would be illegal to try to remove it if within the park boundaries. So let us forget about treasure there please?
Blindbowman also wrote:
Well I am sorry that you got some impression that this was some kind of a "trick" test set up to fool you, as it was nothing of the kind. Perhaps you have run into trick questions too often. No trick, just a question that only a remote viewer has any chance of finding the answer to. I have read about Remote Viewing, and do have a BASIC idea of how it works, however this does not make me capable of doing it.
Blindbowman also wrote:
The fact that you say you saw a long-barreled six gun (like the Colt Single Action Army) actually helps support that you are seeing into the correct period, as that is what the Cavalry was armed with so would be the correct type of pistol to see. If you had said it was an automatic pistol, I would think that your reading is off the mark in the time period.
Blindbowman also wrote:
Well Blindbowman I tried to give you the best guess as to the time of day, and the best information I have available as for the site to be looking from and what direction to look; that is the best I can do unless I go and stand on the hill and give you an exact azimuth off a compass, however it is virtually a direct SE anyway so being within a minute of arc would not matter. Sorry for taking up so much of your time with the 'test' and yes the outcome of my 'test' proves nothing, just that it would answer that question which has bothered me for many years.
Blindbowman also wrote:
I understand - if you should have time in the future and would not mind trying it again, I would still be interested in what you might be able to see - but keep in mind the question is whether Custer's men could see Captain Weir's men on Weir point, that single issue has never been answered and cannot be answered in the "usual" ways as no one lived to tell. There is no "right" or "wrong" answer to it either. Anyway thanks for the effort, sorry for the misunderstandings.
Actually I am a bit surprised that a person who is able to "remote view" the past would not have been peering into such mysteries as Custer's last stand, the Alamo, or Thermopylae, questions for which we cannot find answers in our history books. Perhaps the allure of seeking treasure outweighs finding the truth of history? The way that 'stack of bills' with a handgun and somehow related cannons seemed to overpower any impressions of the battle sure would seem to indicate that treasure stories definitely can affect a view via remote viewing - this could be important, if the ability were being studied.
Oroblanco
Greetings Blindbowman, Cubfan64 and everyone,
Blindbowman wrote:
Well it is not really difficult to look up in the Indian accounts as to what they could see and when, that is historical record. What we do not have is any account from the soldiers' point of view. None of Custer's immediate command survived the battle to tell. (There is the possibility of a single survivor, a man whose horse ran away with him and off the field, but in his case this occurred with the first exchange of fire so his version includes only the very beginning of the fight. It is in a pretty interesting book titled Sole Survivor, a good read.) My interests include military history and the battle of the Little Bighorn is one of the great mysteries of history - just what happened with Custer's men. If his men could see soldiers coming from the SE at Weir point, it does help explain why all five companies were found dead in the places where they were, if they could not see troopers coming then their strange positions remain a mystery. We do have the accounts of Cavalry men who were with Captain Weir and Major Reno that went to Weir point, such as Lieutenant Edgerly's letters and Cpt Weir letter to Mrs Custer, and from their view point it seems that they could see Custer's men on the hill fighting for their lives surrounded by thousands of Indians. However simply because they could see Custer's men, (and Reno claimed he saw nothing) does not mean that vice-versa is also true. This single factor has puzzled me for many years and even going to the battlefield did not settle the matter, so when you offered to let us "test you like a lab rat" it struck me that perhaps you could use your abilities to almost literally "remote view" history and find out the truth. I am not really curious about what the Indians were able to see, as we can look that up and it would not explain the positions of Custer's men even if we know what the Indians could see.
Blindbowman also wrote:
It seems that you are very focused on this treasure, for some reason it is affecting your view. I cannot guess whether it is 100% accurate or way off, as I don't know of any treasure quite like that for that area. It very well could be correct, I have no way of knowing. It is however unrelated to my question. I guess I should add here, for our readers, that even if there IS a treasure of some kind hidden in the Custer battlefield, it is ILLEGAL to do any digging, metal detecting, or to remove anything so unless your treasure is far off the national battlefield any information on it is of no use to a treasure hunter. So please forget about the treasure details, which could get someone in trouble with the Park service rangers? Even if it is FAR off the battlefield, that could place in within the boundaries of one of two Indian reservations, and again it would be illegal to remove from there without tribal permission. That is not what I am trying to find out anyway.
Blindbowman also wrote:
You cannot trust anything I am saying? Why? It is not a pass or fail test - how on Earth would I be able to know if what you might tell me is correct or wrong? Cubfan is correct, I am not trying to fool you or trip you into making some kind of error so I could then make fun of what you said, this was just a question that has no answer in our history books because no one lived to tell. I cannot perform remote viewing, I can try to visualize the past but that is just visualizing, not actually "seeing" the past. There is no one who knows the truth living, in fact there was no one living who knew the truth by June 26th 1876 - so there is no reason for you to think that what I have said is not trustworthy. In fact ALL of what I have said concerning this battle can be checked in history books for that matter. This was not a "trick" test, just a straight question about history, a question that no one knows the answer to, the only possible way of knowing would be via remote viewing or to have a time machine to travel there. I don't know just what strikes you as not making sense, as for not being forthcoming, yes there is a great deal about the battle that I have not posted as it is of no consequence to the question - I posted all I know about the only treasure report that I know of which is related to the battle of the Little Bighorn, and that particular treasure is of a type that would rot very quickly - paper money in the ground unprotected by anything. Besides, it would be illegal to try to remove it if within the park boundaries. So let us forget about treasure there please?
Blindbowman also wrote:
Well I am sorry that you got some impression that this was some kind of a "trick" test set up to fool you, as it was nothing of the kind. Perhaps you have run into trick questions too often. No trick, just a question that only a remote viewer has any chance of finding the answer to. I have read about Remote Viewing, and do have a BASIC idea of how it works, however this does not make me capable of doing it.
Blindbowman also wrote:
The fact that you say you saw a long-barreled six gun (like the Colt Single Action Army) actually helps support that you are seeing into the correct period, as that is what the Cavalry was armed with so would be the correct type of pistol to see. If you had said it was an automatic pistol, I would think that your reading is off the mark in the time period.
Blindbowman also wrote:
Well Blindbowman I tried to give you the best guess as to the time of day, and the best information I have available as for the site to be looking from and what direction to look; that is the best I can do unless I go and stand on the hill and give you an exact azimuth off a compass, however it is virtually a direct SE anyway so being within a minute of arc would not matter. Sorry for taking up so much of your time with the 'test' and yes the outcome of my 'test' proves nothing, just that it would answer that question which has bothered me for many years.
Blindbowman also wrote:
I understand - if you should have time in the future and would not mind trying it again, I would still be interested in what you might be able to see - but keep in mind the question is whether Custer's men could see Captain Weir's men on Weir point, that single issue has never been answered and cannot be answered in the "usual" ways as no one lived to tell. There is no "right" or "wrong" answer to it either. Anyway thanks for the effort, sorry for the misunderstandings.
Actually I am a bit surprised that a person who is able to "remote view" the past would not have been peering into such mysteries as Custer's last stand, the Alamo, or Thermopylae, questions for which we cannot find answers in our history books. Perhaps the allure of seeking treasure outweighs finding the truth of history? The way that 'stack of bills' with a handgun and somehow related cannons seemed to overpower any impressions of the battle sure would seem to indicate that treasure stories definitely can affect a view via remote viewing - this could be important, if the ability were being studied.
Oroblanco
cactusjumper
Gold Member
Oro,
I am surprised that someone who can "remote view" and has the powers that bowman has claimed, is unable to see into the heart of Oro......no pun intended.
For a better understanding of what took place at the Little Bighorn, I would suggest that anyone interested in that history, purchase a copy of "The Mystery Of E Troop" by, Gregory Michno. For a better insight into the two main players in that battle, "Crazy Horse And Custer: The Parallel lives Of Two American Warriors"
by, Stephen E. Ambrose is a revelation.
Another book I really liked, was "Little Big Horn" by, Robert Nightengale.
Take care,
Joe
I am surprised that someone who can "remote view" and has the powers that bowman has claimed, is unable to see into the heart of Oro......no pun intended.
For a better understanding of what took place at the Little Bighorn, I would suggest that anyone interested in that history, purchase a copy of "The Mystery Of E Troop" by, Gregory Michno. For a better insight into the two main players in that battle, "Crazy Horse And Custer: The Parallel lives Of Two American Warriors"
by, Stephen E. Ambrose is a revelation.
Another book I really liked, was "Little Big Horn" by, Robert Nightengale.
Take care,
Joe
Attachments
Oroblanco, I recommend this book (if you haven't seen it already.)
Archaeology, History, and Custer's Last Battle: The Little Big Horn Reexamined
by Richard A. Fox
IMO the best book I've found about what actually happened on the LBH. (The author tracked individual shells casing using firearms forensics to chart the course of the battle.)
(Remember, the library is your friend....
Archaeology, History, and Custer's Last Battle: The Little Big Horn Reexamined
by Richard A. Fox
IMO the best book I've found about what actually happened on the LBH. (The author tracked individual shells casing using firearms forensics to chart the course of the battle.)
(Remember, the library is your friend....
Oroblanco
Gold Member
- Jan 21, 2005
- 7,838
- 9,830
- Detector(s) used
- Tesoro Lobo Supertraq, (95%) Garrett Scorpion (5%)
Thanks for the recommendations mi amigos Cactusjumper and Zephyr! Yes I DO love libraries too, for people like me with limited budgets they are a godsend. Forensic studies of the battlefield have been problematic as a good deal of the remaining artifacts have been removed by so many visitors, which affects their findings in an adverse way - coloring their data, by a lack of artifacts. The History Channel had a "Histories' Mysteries" episode in which they went over the field with metal detectors, and they failed to take into account the several archaeological studies already done which removed fired shells, the number of shells taken by visitors to the field, and those not found - and came up with the conclusion there was NO last stand! Anyway they sound like very interesting books, thank you I will hunt them up!
Oroblanco
Oroblanco
Top Member Reactions
-
2298 -
1106 -
1030 -
907 -
853 -
761 -
761 -
742 -
607 -
507 -
490 -
477 -
445 -
420 -
403 -
403 -
O
401
-
394 -
379 -
379
