A GUIDE TO VAULT TREASURE HUNTING (Condensed)

[Secret squirl]

Here is a 3 I missed, and found today looking for some of my pics of 3's. Notice it is on a tombstone.
View attachment 1639497

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[cyzak]

sandy1 can you please continue on our explanation of the number 3 and why it is so important.

 

[ancient_ghost2004]

Pics?

oh yea I have pics, however I wont post them on this site. lot of claim jumpers out there, and I don't trust anyone except myself. I'm keeping it that way. guess you will have to take my word on it. I will just add this in case anyone has any doubts about owls and where they look. My owl looks directly at the opening. It's about as obvious as you could ever get, no mistake at all. During one of my trips to the site as I was still doing recon...the owl gave off a distinct shadow behind him, leaving a shadow owl. I believe it only appears at a certain time of the year/day...guess you could say I was standing in the right spot at the right time. the perfect picture if there is ever such a thing

 

[In Deep]

Here is a 3 I took the photo about 15 miles out and cropped it so you could see the three
This is in the North West were its not suppose to be

 

[sandy1]

That three is huge, the biggest I have seen is that shadow three I posted that is also an Eagle its around 50 feet across.

 

[In Deep]

That three is huge, the biggest I have seen is that shadow three I posted that is also an Eagle its around 50 feet across.

This THREE is huge I can see it at least 25 miles out in the right spots.
It mostly shines in the AM by afternoon it fades away. It is there pretty much all year Looks really cool in the winter with snow covered hills.

 

[sandy1]

So we have another three in the North West, I am still waiting to see if somebody will find any 3's back East, I know NM has them and I would bet Utah as well but haven't heard of any from there yet, but plenty of other Spanish markers are in Utah.

 

[A2coins]

easy folks easy

 

[Quinoa]

Who's this guy being depicted? Some shadow/sun Witch doctor looking man /Pharoahish guy with goatee / Phoenician / super hero something or other, has a dark "ruling" scepter and sunlit owl or cat silhouette by his shoulder. Pretty cool though. Looks towards another monument with an owl by it oddly enough. Maybe he isn't looking at all, maybe he just "watches" over, above it all. A lot of weird stuff out there.



I've seen a few others with the large dark rings/areas around the eyes. Haven't figured out who they are/were.

 

[sandy1]

Q, while they did carve tons of little rocks all over like what your showing, markers like that would not be really important as the markers absolutely have to stand out and not have a backdrop of all the same colored rocks all around it, to put it another way, blending in markers are not Important where as markers that stand out are Important.

 

[Quinoa]

You won't find a "lead in" off that panel that I am aware of. It looked more ritual or symbolic "off to the side" to me.

 

[Quinoa]

I know for a fact there is no treasure right beside it, that whole panel was bulldozed for a gravel pit a few years ago. They stopped before the other monument it looks towards. Unless they missed it in the bucket of the dozer. The other monument has things things that line up to spots on the hillside below where there are "out of place" boulders.

 

[cyzak]

Awesome photo Q did you notice that one right away or did it takes some time to figure it out.

 

[Quinoa]

I honestly can't remember, I've been on too many sites in the past several years. But it was off to the side of the main spots I was interested in at the time and taken near a solstice I believe, I'd have to find the original and see when I took it. We were going to buy that hillside, it was for sale. We spent about a month trying to shoot auras on it. The big one we were expecting that we eventually got was down a bit lower just off the property.

Some small auras near the out of place boulders, but couldn't decide what to do with the info at the time and didn't have the extra cash we wanted to take chances with. We actually talked to the land owner briefly ( that owned the hillside plus nearby land) but then got the big one, and decided these things have a way of not working out when there is something big and other people involved you know nothing about. Especially when we had other places to go to that wouldn't involve dealing with someone else.

I have something else picked out for down the road right now anyways. I suppose you never know what I'm up really up to and that's the way it's probably always going to be.

 

[cyzak]

What a shame it got destroyed before it could be fully examined so many times the sites get destroyed for growth.

 

[sandy1]

Something I have been working on and I thought I would share, remember this is a work in progress.

Renaissance period: Rod for Measuring land

During the Renaissance era, bars were used as standards of length when surveying land. These bars often used a unit of measure called a Rod, of length equal to 5.5 yards, 5.0292 metres, 16.5 feet, or ​1⁄320 of a statute mile.

A rod is the same length as a perch or a pole, and was standardized in 1620 by Edmund Gunter with his Gunter's Chain which is the length of 4 rods or 66 feet.

The rod unit was still in use as a common unit of measurement in the mid-19th century in the United States.

Dividing 16.5 feet (a rod length) by 3 = 5.5 Feet which seems to be the basis for many of the Measurements I have found in the field and could very possible be halved to 2.75 feet.

I have seen 49.5 feet which equals 3 Rods.

They also used 1/2 of a Rod as well which is 8.25 feet, I have seen 41.25 feet which is 2.5 Rods as well as 82.5 feet which equals 5 Rods.

This would also explain why I have ran into so many measurments that 33 inches divided into evenly, because 33 inches is 2.75 feet.

However this would change the numbers considerably, for instance:

82.5 feet is what I had always considered 30 varas because 82.5 feet divided by 2.75 feet or (33 inches) equals 30 (what I thought of as Varas)

But if we look at 82.5 feet measured by the Rod at 16.5 feet per rod we get 5 Rods.
Or we divide (82.5 feet) with 1/3 of a rod (5.5 feet) and we get 15 Rods. And so on.

(The measurements above are very precise in the field)

What is important here is that the only Renaissance era (ancient) Land Measuring Device I could find that aligns with the modern day American Measurements (using our same exact inch) are the Rod and Gunter Chain however they divided them up in ways that we don't use today. As far as I know Absolutely no other measuring device was invented that could be as close to our American measurements before the 1800s and the invention of the engineers chain which could measure down to one foot per link.

 

[weekender]

Something I have been working on and I thought I would share, remember this is work in progress.

Middle Ages Rod for Measuring land

In the Middle Ages, bars were used as standards of length when surveying land. These bars often used a unit of measure called a Rod, of length equal to 5.5 yards, 5.0292 metres, 16.5 feet, or ​1⁄320 of a statute mile.

A rod is the same length as a perch or a pole, and was standardized in 1620 by Edmund Gunter with his Gunter's Chain which is the length of 4 rods or 66 feet.

The rod unit was still in use as a common unit of measurement in the mid-19th century in the United States.

Dividing 16.5 feet (a rod length) by 3 = 5.5 Feet which seems to be the basis for many of the Measurements I have found in the field and could very possible be halved to 2.75 feet.

I have seen 49.5 feet which equals 3 Rods.

They also used 1/2 of a Rod as well which is 8.25 feet, I have seen 41.25 feet which is 2.5 Rods as well as 82.5 feet which equals 5 Rods.

This would also explain why I have ran into so many measurments that 33 inches divided into evenly, because 33 inches is 2.75 feet.

However this would change the numbers considerably, for instance:

82.5 feet is what I had always considered 30 varas because 82.5 feet divided by 2.75 feet or (33 inches) equals 30 (what I thought of as Varas)

But if we look at 82.5 feet measured by the Rod at 16.5 feet per rod we get 5 Rods.
Or we divide (82.5 feet) with 1/3 of a rod (5.5 feet) and we get 15 Rods. And so on.

(The measurements above are very precise)

What is important here is that the only middle ages Land Measuring Device I could find that aligns with the modern day American Measurements (uses our same exact inch) are the Rod and Gunter Chain however they divided them up in ways that we don't use today. As far as I know Absolutely no other measuring device was invented that could be as close to our American measurements before the 1800s and the invention of the engineers chain which could measure down to one foot per link.

Thanks for sharing!
-Weekender

 

[sandy1]

I thought I would also throw in how and when these measurements came about for minds that want to know.

In case your wondering why and when the rod became exactly 16.5 feet here is the answer:

The basic concept of the mile originated in Roman times. The Romans used a unit of distance called the mille passum, which literally translated into "a thousand paces." Since each pace was considered to be five Roman feet—which were a bit shorter than our modern feet—the mile ended up being 5,000 Roman feet, or roughly 4,850 of our modern feet.

If the mile originated with 5,000 Roman feet, how did we end up with a mile that is 5,280 feet? Blame the furlong. The furlong wasn't always just an arcane unit of measure that horseracing fans gabbed about; it once had significance as the length of the furrow a team of oxen could plow in a day. In 1592, Parliament set about determining the length of the mile and decided that each one should be made up of eight furlongs. Since a furlong was 660 feet, we ended up with a 5,280-foot mile.

So when we break the Mile down by 8 furlongs of 660 feet each or 1/8 of a mile we get: the acre. Remember that a furlong was considered to be the length of a furrow a team of oxen could plow in one day without resting. An acre—which gets its name from an Old English word meaning "open field" and over time, the old Saxon inhabitants of England established that this area (an acre) was equivalent to a long, thin strip of land one furlong in length or 1 chain x 10 chains—an old unit of length equivalent to 66 feet wide x 660 feet long. That's how we ended up with an acre that's equivalent to 43,560 square feet, and a chain of 66 feet which when broken down becomes the rod of 16.5 feet or 1/4 of a chain.

 

[cyzak]

Excellent info sandy1 I will definitely log that in to my notes for use out in the field I know that took some research to get this information.

 

[elh]

Thanks Sandy, your last two posts are now in my ledger and helping with one of my older sites that I laid down for more info.
An '' ORYX '' (animal ), carved on one of my sites is simply giving distance. Some things take longer to figure and I know you have been through some thick stuff..