Treasure Signs and Symbols 101

[EE THr]

99% of them were created by surveyors, prospectors, cowboys, homesteaders, explorers, pioneers, hunters, timber cruisers, trappers, soldiers, hikers, hippies, tree thinners, forest service people, pranksters, and on and on.

Springfield---

I have no reason to disagree with anything you just said.

But, while I'm at it, I may as well ask you this: There are some really huge stone monuments which are way too obvious to be natural occurrences. And they are too big to have been erected by boy scouts, or those on your list of casual passerbys.

My question is threefold.

1. Who do you feel made all of these (and there are more than just a few)?
2. When do you think they were made?
3. Why did they put so much work into them?

I have to assume that, since you can't answer, that your opinion is, "They don't exist." Or else you just don't have an opinion. Or maybe your opinion is that different ones were made by different people. Or some other opinion. But, for whatever reason, you are unable to say any of those things.

You made the original comment, therefore the "ball" belongs to you. You can either run with it, or "take your ball and go home," if you feel that the game isn't going your way (and why that would be, I have no idea).

But that's fine with me.

And it tells me all about the nature of your opinions.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[HOOSIERau]

As I tire of the arguing, I went back to posts from years ago. What happened to "stilldign" ??
He seemed to be what most considered wise and I have not seen his posts for quite some time.

 

[Springfield]

...Springfield---

I have no reason to disagree with anything you just said.

But, while I'm at it, I may as well ask you this: There are some really huge stone monuments which are way too obvious to be natural occurrences. And they are too big to have been erected by boy scouts, or those on your list of casual passerbys.

My question is threefold.

1. Who do you feel made all of these (and there are more than just a few)?
2. When do you think they were made?
3. Why did they put so much work into them?

And, for the third or fourth time: show me a picture of one of the monuments you are referring to and I will respond. If you don't know of any, just say so.

 

[Springfield]

....What happened to "stilldign" ??....

Last I heard he was posting under an alter-ego identity. If you figure it out, please let us know.

 

[EE THr]

Springfield---

For cripes sakes, they're all over this fourm! Are you saying you haven't seen any?

 

[Shortstack]

Springfield wrote, quoting me,:
One of our forum members has proven that not ALL stories of rich mines are fake. Who proved this? Whoever he is, he's about 90% correct, IMO.

I will not call his name, but will say that he's a high milage gentleman who lives in Mexico and has found one of the BIG ones. He has made known to us about this, but has not gotten too specific with the location; for obvious reasons.
You have told EE THr to "show you the monuments". Well, if you would review all of the photos posted on Old Dog's thread and rangler's missive, you will see SEVERAL examples of what you seek. Neither EE THr nor I should do your research for you. You have been a member of TNet far long enough to have seen those photos and read the descriptions and understand where several of us get our beliefs..............in this area. Yet, you persist on questioning the evaluations. I believe you are actually wishing that someone would volunteer to take you by the hand and lead you to one of those monuments. One of those folks just might do that, but would definitely need to know you much better before they'd disclose any of their finds. This is one point you should be able to understand. I'm not trying to be a smarta--. Just saying........................
I believe that you are much more experienced in this area than you'd lead folks to think and are looking for other folks to prove up the theories. The real question is ........WHY?

 

[Springfield]

Springfield wrote, quoting me,:
One of our forum members has proven that not ALL stories of rich mines are fake. Who proved this? Whoever he is, he's about 90% correct, IMO.

I will not call his name, but will say that he's a high milage gentleman who lives in Mexico and has found one of the BIG ones. He has made known to us about this, but has not gotten too specific with the location; for obvious reasons.
You have told EE THr to "show you the monuments". Well, if you would review all of the photos posted on Old Dog's thread and rangler's missive, you will see SEVERAL examples of what you seek. Neither EE THr nor I should do your research for you. You have been a member of TNet far long enough to have seen those photos and read the descriptions and understand where several of us get our beliefs..............in this area. Yet, you persist on questioning the evaluations. I believe you are actually wishing that someone would volunteer to take you by the hand and lead you to one of those monuments. One of those folks just might do that, but would definitely need to know you much better before they'd disclose any of their finds. This is one point you should be able to understand. I'm not trying to be a smarta--. Just saying........................
I believe that you are much more experienced in this area than you'd lead folks to think and are looking for other folks to prove up the theories. The real question is ........WHY?

So it's all about me, is it? Well, here's some news - it's not about me, it's about the 'theories' you guys keep pushing as gospel and the vacuum of credibility that surrounds them. You are correct about one thing - I am experienced in this area. And your WHY question? As I've stated innumerable times: my purpose is to encourage people to be discriminating about what they swallow when it comes to 'treasure hunting'. You really ought to consider the statement you've attributed to the guy in Mexico. By the way, why would this guy be smart enough to recover a 'big one' and stupid enough to tell others about it?

 

[Shortstack]

Springfield wrote:
You really ought to consider the statement you've attributed to the guy in Mexico. By the way, why would this guy be smart enough to recover a 'big one' and stupid enough to tell others about it?

The individual is very intelligent as he's already proven. He posted aerial photos of the spot with marks showing the trail as described by the original "finders and losers" of the mine. The area was rough as hell and NOT for amateurs to go "exploring". For obvious reasons, he was not going to give any specific information about getting into the area.
If you think about it; you know who I'm talking about and know that he is an honest man who is not primed to bullsh-- about such things. He jokes a lot about different subjects, but would NEVER claim to have found a "lost" mine unless he's done it. As for PROOF of his findings, he's already provided enough and is in no obligation to PROVE anything further to you, me, or anyone else. If you don't believe it, fine. But, don't insult anyone else who DO. You are no more important than anyone else and deserve no explanation other than "it's done."
If YOU have found a rich mine or load area, would YOU go shooting off your mouth telling folks where it is and how to reach it? Of course not. How would YOU prove to anyone that you'd found it other than saying you had? Would it pi-- you off if someone challenged you word and told you to prove what you said to THEIR satisfaction?? Why is it SOOOOOO dang important for anyone to prove something to YOU? If you don't believe a story, say so and go on about your business and let everyone else make that same determination for themselves. I don't need or desire anyone to run interference for me on these treasure tales. I am more than capable in deciding for myself...............as I'm sure other folks on the forum are as well.

 

[EE THr]

Springfield---

I would like to add, that the successful THr mentioned by Shortstack, went the "legal" route, with filing all the paperwork, and so forth, which is still in progress. So that does provide a certain amount of credence to his being the original finder, even if the legal rights, through a long process, have not yet been fully granted.

With that, it would be legally useless for someone to try to openly work, or even try to claim, his find. At the same time, there is no need for him to pinpoint the thing, for those who might succumb to temptation.

But then again, he has told about various aspects of the situation, in responses to numerous questions about it, at different times, all over this forum. Can you understand why it's very hard for me to believe that you haven't seen at least some of them? It makes me think that maybe you are "playing" people.

 

[goldguru]

I do get trashed on this forum from two sets of people in general - one is from the intentionally misleading experts who I challenge to prove their claims. These guys are out for recognition and want to protect their standing. The second is from true believers who cannot deal with the possibility that their beliefs are false.

Wow, when you're right - you're right.

Well Saturna..If U would got Out & look around U would Plainly see Many Spanish Markers ON Vancouver Island..But Plz stay In your lil Den & back bench...Thats what U do BEST.
I 'll keep My Pic's to myself...

 

[Springfield]

Springfield---

I would like to add, that the successful THr mentioned by Shortstack, went the "legal" route, with filing all the paperwork, and so forth, which is still in progress. So that does provide a certain amount of credence to his being the original finder, even if the legal rights, through a long process, have not yet been fully granted.

With that, it would be legally useless for someone to try to openly work, or even try to claim, his find. At the same time, there is no need for him to pinpoint the thing, for those who might succumb to temptation.

But then again, he has told about various aspects of the situation, in responses to numerous questions about it, at different times, all over this forum. Can you understand why it's very hard for me to believe that you haven't seen at least some of them? It makes me think that maybe you are "playing" people.

OK, yes, I do know the story. Our friend located some old mines in the barranca country in Sonora. A hard-to-read assay posted seemed to indicate about $1000/ton values for the undefined sample. Good ore, but economically marginal except for a mom/pop operation, assuming ore of this quality could be recovered and concentrated in quantities great enough. There are hundreds of old workings in Mexico that are similar. The Canadian minineral explorers have claimed a number of them, hoping that the old workings indicate economic ore bodies surrounding them. Mexico is very rich in gold and silver.

The point of the story is that these workings are claimed to be a legendary 'lost Jesuit mine' from the old days in Mexico. Some folks agree this is the case, some folks feel the true location of the legendary mine is some miles away. I don't have an opinion one way or the other. Obviously it's an old mine, and I hope for our pal's sake it is what he claims. It might not make him money, but it would be a satisfying find.

I'll repeat a point made earlier - why travel all the way to North America when there are so many paying surface deposits all over Mexico?

 

[Springfield]

..... You are no more important than anyone else and deserve no explanation other than "it's done."....

I am more than capable in deciding for myself...............as I'm sure other folks on the forum are as well.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

 

[EE THr]

Springfield---

There is a difference between discussions and politics.

Think about it.

 

[Springfield]

Springfield---

There is a difference between discussions and politics. Think about it.

Well, yeah, sure ... if you say so. OK, let's see - my opinions, admittedly counter to the consensus here in many ways, are nevertheless challenging, clear, specific, well-thought out and offered as opinions only in an effort to persuade readers to be open-minded and test their beliefs in order to either strengthen them or modify them accordingly. My past posts are available to review - judge for yourself.

Your posts - denigrating, vague, dodging, lacking in any specifics and evasive, are seemingly, at least from what you've been posting lately, meant to discredit the opposing viewpoint, encourage readers to 'get with the program' and accept the current dogma. I'd say you're sounding like the politician here.

I really don't want to fight with you guys. Since this is a forum, it seems as if opposing viewpoints ought to be welcomed, not feared. IMO, you're better off honestly examining and hopefully strengthening your ideas rather than trying to scuttle other viewpoints.

 

[EE THr]

I have no reason to disagree with anything you just said.

Your posts - denigrating, vague, dodging, lacking in any specifics and evasive, are seemingly, at least from what you've been posting lately, meant to discredit the opposing viewpoint, encourage readers to 'get with the program' and accept the current dogma.

I haven't encouraged anybody to do anything, or think any certain way. All I did was ask you a few questions to find out what your opinion was. How is that denigrating, and so forth?

When you tried to play some kind of cat and mouse game, rather than simply answer a few questions, then, yes, I did give my opinion about your strange behaviour. What else is there for me to think about it?

But I never slammed you for your opinion on the subject matter. In fact, just see the first quote, above.

But you chose to get all freaky-deaky about the whole thing, rather than answer simple questions. You of course have every right to not answer, and, as I already said, it's fine with me if you don't. I just think it's kind of odd that you originally posted such strong remarks, which is also fine with me, but then you decide to clam up about it. As for myself, I welcome your opinions, but a discussion is a two-way street, you know?

I guess what I'm basically saying is, "how can you state your opinions, if you don't state your opinions?"

 

[Springfield]

.... I guess what I'm basically saying is, "how can you state your opinions, if you don't state your opinions?"

Yeah, whatever, EE. I'm disembarking from the Good Ship Lollipop. Anyone wanting to know my opinions can read my previous posts.

 

[EE THr]

- denigrating, vague, dodging, lacking in any specifics and evasive, are seemingly, at least from what you've been posting lately, meant to discredit the opposing viewpoint....

 

[rangler]

"Lets get on with "Treasure Signs and Symbols : 101" ....... hoosier au"]

Welcome to the forum, H-au! I like your attitude...and to answer your question about still dign...he was really drove off this site and others because it tells the truth about this whole business of treasure signs, and their are many - as I am sure you learned by reading the entire posts here - that do not want this truth revealed on a public forum

greetings and salutations Argonauts,
A while back a newbee posted this pic, it was not looking - for me and others - as anything significant, but - I moved a copy of it to my paint.net [download for free] and was meaning to get to it..well the dark and dreary days of winter are perfect for pondering volumes of forgotten lore, quote the raven,,well you know.[oh and when I went back to his post he had deleted it and the pic,] so unless he contacts me - I am assuming he will not mind if we work on this monument, and eventually show the solution.

here is that photo - as as a little mid-winter pick me up - this is a good exercise in reading on the rocks what others have left....so take a good look...the codemakers who carved this where at the peak of their game. this is subtle but refined. It is well within the rules of the game, albeit minimalistic. It speaks... so take a look, download paint.net, you can enlarge, reverse ect, mark you interpretations, and even type your solutions right on the pic. hint: please dont mark any graffiti or fractals - they don't help-they only hinder. There
are only 5 elements here- that confirm what this is..just 5 - on this one that is all you need.
here we go......

this pic appears to be public domain, it was not copyrighted, of course if the OP contacts me - I will remove it.rangler

 

[CanadianTrout]

ya got me, I'm stumped. Looks painted not carved.

 

[rangler]

CT,
yea that is why others and I , filed this one away at first.
But if you look close, as I did, that white paint is actually white quartz! and it is a vein of
it that was intruding into this piece of bed rock , looks like granite. so the technique was to carve off the quartz just to leave an outline of the gray host rock.
hidden in plain site, a Jesuits delight!
rangler