new read

FRIENDLY, general interest, non LDM discussions with other forum members.
Post Reply
klondike
Part Timer
Posts: 437
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:48 am

new read

Post by klondike »

Calalus Revisited: How Arizona's Riches Rebuilt the Roman Empire Paperback – July 11, 2016
by Myra E. Nichols (Author), John A. Nichols (Contributor)

more to come.

Klondike
oldpueblo70
Greenhorn
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 10:31 am

Re: new read

Post by oldpueblo70 »

This book, along with publications by Yates and Hyde, look very interesting. I'm sure that I'll be purchasing in the near future.

"More to come"? Sounds like a big reveal may be in the near future. I would imagine that once the cat is out of he bag, it would be nearly impossible to control, regardless of any agreements. 8O

What do I know? 8)

oldpueblo
Joe Ribaudo
Expert
Posts: 5453
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm

Re: new read

Post by Joe Ribaudo »

Ben,

Just wondering.......What are Myra Nichols credentials for writing this book? Is she any more qualified than any of us who have spent the time and money to research this topic? I did not see much to engender confidence in her expertise. Out of habit, I purchased the book. :oops:

Thanks,

Joe Ribaudo
Joe Ribaudo
Expert
Posts: 5453
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm

Re: new read

Post by Joe Ribaudo »

Ben,

I received Myra Nichols' book on Wed. It looks like it's well written, but basically a rehash of others work. So far, I haven't seen any of the facts that negate the original theory. The fact that the artifacts were found in Pleistocene era caliche, is a red flag that the caliche was hollowed out, the artifacts placed in the holes and resealed with caliche......mud. :roll: Bad mistake by people who didn't know much about caliche and how long it takes to form at that kind of depth.

Good luck,

Joe
User avatar
Oroblanco
Part Timer
Posts: 418
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 11:31 pm
Location: Black Hills SD
Contact:

Re: new read

Post by Oroblanco »

Good point Joe, as there are no 'likes' on this forum (probably a good thing) had to reply. I do hope that Ben will publish his research at some point, should be a best seller.

I hope all is well with you Joe and Ben.
Oroblanco
"We must find a way, or we will make one." --Hannibal Barca
Joe Ribaudo
Expert
Posts: 5453
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm

Re: new read

Post by Joe Ribaudo »

Hi Roy,

If Ben does finally write a book, I don't see how I can resist buying it. After all, I did buy the Nicholes' book with 0 expectations of finding anything new. However, on page 29 they wrote this:

"This article was 42 inches from the original top surface. The topsoil was a stratum of 17 inches, and below this, the caliche stratification commenced and continues on down. The article was in a caliche layer that, due toleaching, was not very well cemented; however, a fairly well-cemented caliche completely surrounded the article."

Seems to me there could be other explanations for how this artifact was found "completely surrounded" by another type of caliche.

Take care,

Joe
User avatar
Oroblanco
Part Timer
Posts: 418
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 11:31 pm
Location: Black Hills SD
Contact:

Re: new read

Post by Oroblanco »

Joe Ribaudo wrote:Hi Roy,

If Ben does finally write a book, I don't see how I can resist buying it. After all, I did buy the Nicholes' book with 0 expectations of finding anything new. However, on page 29 they wrote this:

"This article was 42 inches from the original top surface. The topsoil was a stratum of 17 inches, and below this, the caliche stratification commenced and continues on down. The article was in a caliche layer that, due toleaching, was not very well cemented; however, a fairly well-cemented caliche completely surrounded the article."

Seems to me there could be other explanations for how this artifact was found "completely surrounded" by another type of caliche.

Take care,

Joe
HMMM that is troubling. I would wonder why the caliche would be disturbed at all, leaching or not. Having dug in a lot of caliche over the years, I don't recall ever seeing any layer that was in any way disturbed by 'leaching' unless it was exposed to the surface, or some other running water source.

I still wonder why none of these theorists have bothered to look in the area where the Toltecs really were, to seek evidence to support a real Calalus, instead of the area near where the 'relics' were found. If they are real antiquities, then the place where Calalus has to be is some place quite close to the homeland of the Toltecs, which as you know never included Arizona or any part of it. Coincidently, some Mediterranean-origin artifacts have indeed been found, well south in Mexico, like the Calixtlahuaca statuary head, which is almost certainly of Roman origins.
[url]/http://econ.ohio-state.edu/jhm/arch/calix.htm[url]

If you don't mind my asking, what would you rate or critique this latest book? Thanks in advance;
Roy
"We must find a way, or we will make one." --Hannibal Barca
Joe Ribaudo
Expert
Posts: 5453
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm

Re: new read

Post by Joe Ribaudo »

Oroblanco wrote:
Joe Ribaudo wrote:Hi Roy,

If Ben does finally write a book, I don't see how I can resist buying it. After all, I did buy the Nicholes' book with 0 expectations of finding anything new. However, on page 29 they wrote this:

"This article was 42 inches from the original top surface. The topsoil was a stratum of 17 inches, and below this, the caliche stratification commenced and continues on down. The article was in a caliche layer that, due toleaching, was not very well cemented; however, a fairly well-cemented caliche completely surrounded the article."

Seems to me there could be other explanations for how this artifact was found "completely surrounded" by another type of caliche.

Take care,

Joe
HMMM that is troubling. I would wonder why the caliche would be disturbed at all, leaching or not. Having dug in a lot of caliche over the years, I don't recall ever seeing any layer that was in any way disturbed by 'leaching' unless it was exposed to the surface, or some other running water source.

I still wonder why none of these theorists have bothered to look in the area where the Toltecs really were, to seek evidence to support a real Calalus, instead of the area near where the 'relics' were found. If they are real antiquities, then the place where Calalus has to be is some place quite close to the homeland of the Toltecs, which as you know never included Arizona or any part of it. Coincidently, some Mediterranean-origin artifacts have indeed been found, well south in Mexico, like the Calixtlahuaca statuary head, which is almost certainly of Roman origins.
[url]/http://econ.ohio-state.edu/jhm/arch/calix.htm[url]

If you don't mind my asking, what would you rate or critique this latest book? Thanks in advance;
Roy
Hi Roy,

Hope all is well with you folks.

The Nichols' book is pretty complete, with all of the previously written evidence in attendance. I would recommend it to anyone who has not yet spent the time and money to research the subject thoroughly. I don't know that her opinion on the caliche is qualified, but she does present many of the problems along with the pluses.

I do have another question though. What happened to the Native American's knowledge of the wheel? Why did they set aside something that would have beat the travois.....hands down? Surely the people of Calalus used the wheel.

Take care,

Joe
Joe Ribaudo
Expert
Posts: 5453
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm

Re: new read

Post by Joe Ribaudo »

Roy,

Anyone interested in the caliche in Arizona question should read this publication:

http://arizona.openrepository.com/arizo ... 150/196757

Take care,

Joe
User avatar
Oroblanco
Part Timer
Posts: 418
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 11:31 pm
Location: Black Hills SD
Contact:

Re: new read

Post by Oroblanco »

Thanks Joe! I hope all is well with you and you are feeling better every day. Looking forward to seeing you this fall,
Roy
"We must find a way, or we will make one." --Hannibal Barca
User avatar
Oroblanco
Part Timer
Posts: 418
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 11:31 pm
Location: Black Hills SD
Contact:

Re: new read

Post by Oroblanco »

Just would add this bit from that report posted by Joe, which is especially important when talking about the Tucson 'artifacts' quote
A very old and impermeable stratum may be broken up, and re-cemented in a few years. 'The reader is cautioned, therefore, against drawing conclusions that may be too exact.
from Caliche in Arizona, link posted above, page 421

This would indicate that the Tucson relics could very easily have been inserted into holes dug in the caliche, then re-cemented by simply adding water and re-filling the holes with caliche that was dug out of them. This would also explain why they were found in layers of caliche which was FAR too old for the time period they are supposed to originate.

Of course, the whole argument would certainly be injected with life if those whom are supporting the Tucson relics as genuine, and the "library of Oz" were to post some photos of those 'books' supposedly found and recovered from underground caverns in the Superstitions. The fact that no such photos have been forthcoming, does not lend any credence to that story. However hope springs eternal, perhaps we will yet see a book published of these findings that have been posted here over the years.

Oroblanco
"We must find a way, or we will make one." --Hannibal Barca
Joe Ribaudo
Expert
Posts: 5453
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm

Re: new read

Post by Joe Ribaudo »

Oroblanco wrote:Just would add this bit from that report posted by Joe, which is especially important when talking about the Tucson 'artifacts' quote
A very old and impermeable stratum may be broken up, and re-cemented in a few years. 'The reader is cautioned, therefore, against drawing conclusions that may be too exact.
from Caliche in Arizona, link posted above, page 421

This would indicate that the Tucson relics could very easily have been inserted into holes dug in the caliche, then re-cemented by simply adding water and re-filling the holes with caliche that was dug out of them. This would also explain why they were found in layers of caliche which was FAR too old for the time period they are supposed to originate.

Of course, the whole argument would certainly be injected with life if those whom are supporting the Tucson relics as genuine, and the "library of Oz" were to post some photos of those 'books' supposedly found and recovered from underground caverns in the Superstitions. The fact that no such photos have been forthcoming, does not lend any credence to that story. However hope springs eternal, perhaps we will yet see a book published of these findings that have been posted here over the years.

Oroblanco
Roy,

We have been waiting many years now for just such pictures. I would think that a smart guy like Ben would have "produced" some pictures long ago. That would seem very appropriate since, I believe, that was how the Tucson artifacts were created.

I believe the holes were hollowed out for the artifacts, the caliche removed, ground into powder, water was added to make caliche mud, and injected back into the holes and around each artifact. A very clever job with some very amateur artifacts.

Take care,

Joe
Post Reply