OP
OP
Roger Rantz
Banned
- Thread starter
- #1,141
Page 56 to see more
Lost dutchman mine possibly found!
- Thread starter Roger Rantz
- Start date
- Status
Page 56 to see more
OP
OP
Roger Rantz
Banned
- Thread starter
- #1,142
But thank you dredge for pointing out i missed a security setting on my Facebook. Kinda wish you would of pm me though. I did go back through and change that setting
OP
OP
Roger Rantz
Banned
- Thread starter
- #1,144
Page 56 dont let them cover this up. You can see them knocking the production scout down on the "new treasure hunting show" thread by chagy
OP
OP
Roger Rantz
Banned
- Thread starter
- #1,145
So freeman would be interested in an interview? He claims he turned the production team down on chagy s thread " new treasure hunting show"
- Jun 1, 2012
- 5,036
- 7,168
- Detector(s) used
- Garrett ADS-7X, Fisher Two Box M-Scope, Mother Lode Locator, Dowsing Model 20 Electroscope, White's TM808, White's TM900, Inground Scanners
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
A production team will not set up on a site that belongs to someone else. If Roger does not own the land? He will have to have a contract with the landowner. They are not going in there and have all of their equipment confiscated and the crew arrested. Just a thought?
OP
OP
Roger Rantz
Banned
- Thread starter
- #1,147
Page 56 to see what they are trying to hide... and the land is owned by the government Franklin, its owned by "the people"
freeman
Sr. Member
- Apr 5, 2003
- 348
- 668
Not claimed. It happened. I can't fathom why a few can't get their mind around a rather simple explanation of what happened during the process where I am openly saying I did not proceed and why.
No, I didn't go to an interview as I pulled the plug before that after learning of the show's format and the limitation being imposed on what could and couldn't be used if it conflicted with another History Channel show. (No matter how many times I say it, it doesn't sink in, but hey this is the guy who thought he was in some 'contest'...)
As I keep informing everyone, the stipulated requirement was there had to be some historical fact behind the story, not just some shaggy dog tale that is now 'we dig here because we read a story that someone else dug here before'. The intent being they wanted to do a real search, not just rehashing the same old same old.
So:
1. Not being able to use information I had received directly from those on the other History Channel show and;
2. Knowing that writing around it as they suggested would have resulted in them trying to make something fit that was then the exact opposite of what they said they wanted to do, eg; "Hey here we are. We can't tell you why, or what or how it's real but just trust us" I withdrew my pitch.
You don't seem to mention the requirement of them wanting stories with some factual basis that was stipulated to me. Maybe by that stage they realised they weren't going to get enough worthwhile content so went to the Grade Z bucket, who the hell knows.
I'm only following this as I'm interested to learn if it actually goes ahead and what they then produce in the end because what you are coming out with is way, way short of what was told to me they were after to produce.
That and what happens when they turn up to the LDM story location and find out how much they have been dudded....
No, I didn't go to an interview as I pulled the plug before that after learning of the show's format and the limitation being imposed on what could and couldn't be used if it conflicted with another History Channel show. (No matter how many times I say it, it doesn't sink in, but hey this is the guy who thought he was in some 'contest'...)
As I keep informing everyone, the stipulated requirement was there had to be some historical fact behind the story, not just some shaggy dog tale that is now 'we dig here because we read a story that someone else dug here before'. The intent being they wanted to do a real search, not just rehashing the same old same old.
So:
1. Not being able to use information I had received directly from those on the other History Channel show and;
2. Knowing that writing around it as they suggested would have resulted in them trying to make something fit that was then the exact opposite of what they said they wanted to do, eg; "Hey here we are. We can't tell you why, or what or how it's real but just trust us" I withdrew my pitch.
You don't seem to mention the requirement of them wanting stories with some factual basis that was stipulated to me. Maybe by that stage they realised they weren't going to get enough worthwhile content so went to the Grade Z bucket, who the hell knows.
I'm only following this as I'm interested to learn if it actually goes ahead and what they then produce in the end because what you are coming out with is way, way short of what was told to me they were after to produce.
That and what happens when they turn up to the LDM story location and find out how much they have been dudded....
Last edited:
OP
OP
Roger Rantz
Banned
- Thread starter
- #1,149
Dagger, bull, horsehead, thumbs up... Top to bottom, some of the stuff they dont want you to see... Go to page 56
- Jun 27, 2012
- 505
- 790
- Detector(s) used
- Garrett pro-something
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
OP
OP
Roger Rantz
Banned
- Thread starter
- #1,151
Page 56. . dont let them hide this
Crow
Silver Member
- Jan 28, 2005
- 3,359
- 9,390
- Detector(s) used
- ONES THAT GO BEEP! :-)
- Primary Interest:
- Other
Gidday Nobodie
Saw that and tactfully hinted at that by page 41 post 604. All the signs are there..... depression, intense interest in a limited number of things, anger, anxiety, or apprehension. aggression, compulsive behaviour, fidgeting, impulsivity, repetitive movements, social isolation, or persistent repetition of words or actions.....
There is no reasoning with some one totally oblivious to of those things.
All the classic signs pointed to where this thread ended up and it did.
Crow
OP
OP
Roger Rantz
Banned
- Thread starter
- #1,154
Again they are trying to hide this page 56... The production team isnt trying to get a film permit for them, they didnt have any facts
OP
OP
Roger Rantz
Banned
- Thread starter
- #1,155
The eagle head is over 4000 ft in size, you can click and see the scale... To see more go to page 56. I have already proven that capt Pauline Weaver and the dutchman were here. These people dont want you to see facts. They still think they can steal it. But they will be arrested if they try
- May 9, 2012
- 22,721
- 72,559
- Primary Interest:
- Other
Have you researched claims on your site? You may be the one being arrested.
It was mined before. Meaning the likely hood of a claim is worth considering.
https://www.hcn.org/articles/pack-animals-bulldozers-1880s-gold-mine-developed-modern-wilderness
OP
OP
Roger Rantz
Banned
- Thread starter
- #1,157
No it wasnt, like i said some of the entrances are still "clayed" up... Go to page 56 to see what they are trying to hide
- May 9, 2012
- 22,721
- 72,559
- Primary Interest:
- Other
No it wasn't what?
Sealed shafts/entrances mean...Sealed shafts/entrances. That has no bearing on if a claim still exists. Or if it was mined prior.
My question was if research has been conducted regarding a potential prior or current claim. And an example of one being contested.On protected land where mining was occurring regardless of it being "protected"....
Had you or I "discovered" that site prior to mining resuming under the prior claim , what would our legal status there be?
deducer
Bronze Member
- Jan 7, 2014
- 2,282
- 4,365
- Primary Interest:
- Other
If that production company was legit, before you even made your pitch, you would have signed a document relinquishing your right to sue them for stealing your pitch or idea, or producing something too similar to your pitch.
If you didn't sign anything, then that company wasn't legit or it was shady.
Either way, there's no way you "withdraw" a pitch. Once it's out there, it's out there, period.
OP
OP
Roger Rantz
Banned
- Thread starter
- #1,160
They are still trying everything in their power to hide just one page... Page 56
- Status
Top Member Reactions
-
1916 -
1055 -
1020 -
999 -
873 -
859 -
800 -
747 -
704 -
588 -
368 -
366 -
365 -
345 -
340 -
339 -
E
333
-
315 -
306 -
303
